John Chiles Released

[Atomic]

7 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

I'd argue that none of them have shown anything at all really - Mayo had the decent game against Calgary when we got **** kicked. But aside from that? Nothing at all. There's a reason that they all keep coming in and out of the lineup, none of them have really played good enough to deserve a spot. The good news is, once all of our guys are healthy we won't have to play any of them. 

Actually his best game was definitely against Hamilton when he went 7 for 84 and a TD.

07-01	2	CGY	5	78	0	15.6	30
07-21	5	CGY	2	29	0	14.5	18
08-03	7	HAM	7	84	1	12.0	25
08-12	8	TOR	3	17	0	5.7	8

Four games.... I need to see more.  Just because he doesn't come screaming out of the gate like Derel Walker doesn't mean he is "useless".

[do or die]

Mayo also had a good game against the TigerCats.....

[Noeller]

they've all taken turns showing something...even if it's only a play here and a play there. They're rookies and it's been a lot of transition in offensive personnel this year. 

[Blueandgold]

I did forget about the good game Mayo had against the Ticats, given our dominance it is difficult to remember everything good that happened .

Hey, I would like nothing more than for one of these guys to prove themselves as a consistent contributor but it hasn't happened yet. There's no arguing that recruiting receivers has been one of Walters weak spots, and I personally don't believe any of these guys have shown very much to make me believe otherwise yet. That being said, I would love to be proven wrong.

Edited August 25, 2016 by Blueandgold

[Fatty Liver]

Just now, Blueandgold said:

I did forget about the good game Mayo had against the Ticats, given our dominance it is difficult to remember everything good that happened .

Hey, I would like nothing more than for one of these guys to prove themselves as a consistent contributor but it hasn't happened yet. There's no arguing that recruiting receivers has been one of Walters weak spots, and I personally don't believe any of these guys have shown very much to make me believe otherwise yet. That being said, I would love to be proven wrong.

Your mistake was using the word "useless".  They're all good prospects.

[do or die]

"prospects" is the key word here.....

[Blueandgold]

4 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Your mistake was using the word "useless".  They're all good prospects.

Using the word ''useless''for all of them aside from Adams was a tad harsh I agree, but I'm not sure I'd use the term ''good prospects'' either. 

[wbbfan]

Id bring him in if cheap. At worst hes a vet guy with experience that can push the young guys. 

[17to85]

26 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

Using the word ''useless''for all of them aside from Adams was a tad harsh I agree, but I'm not sure I'd use the term ''good prospects'' either. 

How often do you think Rookies do more than the odd good game here or there or even a few catches here and there? Seriously you expect guys to come in and be Geroy Simon or something? Even Geroy Simon wasn't Geroy Simon in his rookie season.

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, Noeller said:

the thing is, they've all taken turns showing flashes this year.....it's almost like it's they're rookies or something.

We cannot wait too much longer for one of them to separate himself from the pack. If the Bombers are to make some noise in the playoffs, we need all cylinders firing.

[wbbfan]

4 minutes ago, tracker said:

We cannot wait too much longer for one of them to separate himself from the pack. If the Bombers are to make some noise in the playoffs, we need all cylinders firing.

we have denmark, then smith and dressler getting healthy. We also have harris who has been heavily under used as a pass catcher in the last few weeks. We havent played half the season yet. We havent seen the nfl cut down day and pr expansion yet. Plenty of time. 

[Noeller]

25 minutes ago, tracker said:

We cannot wait too much longer for one of them to separate himself from the pack. If the Bombers are to make some noise in the playoffs, we need all cylinders firing.

our cylinders are on the shelf right now. Smith, Dressler, Denmark, Kohlert.......and then you only need one of the new guys, and you're set. You're making way too big a deal out of rookies not playing like vets yet.

[17to85]

21 minutes ago, Noeller said:

our cylinders are on the shelf right now. Smith, Dressler, Denmark, Kohlert.......and then you only need one of the new guys, and you're set. You're making way too big a deal out of rookies not playing like vets yet.

if our receivers don't resemble having Milt, Gordon, Bruce, Simon and Edwards out there all at once we riot!

[Noeller]

with AJ3 on the practice roster because he's not good enough to crack that.......anything less is a joke!!

Edited August 25, 2016 by Noeller

[bearpants]

19 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

if our receivers don't resemble having Milt, Gordon, Bruce, Simon and Edwards out there all at once we riot!

Were these 4 all on the team at the same time?? DBs must have loved playing the Bombers in the early 2000s!

[17to85]

Just now, bearpants said:

Were these 4 all on the team at the same time?? DBs must have loved playing the Bombers in the early 2000s!

No Bruce came in after Simon had gone to the NFL

[wbbfan]

Just now, 17to85 said:

No Bruce came in after Simon had gone to the NFL

wasnt it taman had to choose between paying gordon and simon, we paid gordon and simon went to bc?

2 minutes ago, bearpants said:

Were these 4 all on the team at the same time?? DBs must have loved playing the Bombers in the early 2000s!

no but we had Milt, simon, gordon, and aj3. Then milt, gordon, bruce, and blink. Crazy days. Ill take the first wr group over any other group in cfl history.

[bearpants]

6 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

wasnt it taman had to choose between paying gordon and simon, we paid gordon and simon went to bc?

no but we had Milt, simon, gordon, and aj3. Then milt, gordon, bruce, and blink. Crazy days. Ill take the first wr group over any other group in cfl history.

yeah that's the 4-pack I was thinking of... couldn't remember if it was Bruce or Johnson III...

[wbbfan]

Just now, bearpants said:

yeah that's the 4-pack I was thinking of... couldn't remember if it was Bruce or Johnson III...

yeah aj3 had a great year. Like 700 yards receiving, a monster on returns. Funny enough robert gordon was our top pass catcher that year. Khari loved him as a possesion guy underneath the amazing deep threats, and thinly spread Db.

[MyDogHasScheifeles]

Did I hear "deep threat"?

I heard somewhere that one of the fastest men in the CFL is available.

[GCn20]

Chiles was cut because he sucked this year so far. Yea...he had the 3 TDs...none were over 8 yards though. Other than that a very pedestrian 40 yard average per game as the number 2 receiver. Pass....

[Old Bomber Fan]

Believe it was said earlier but in my opinion Dressler, Smith, Denmark, Kohert, and Mayo would be a good receiving core. There is enough speed, used properly to stretch a defense and you have some very dependable receivers in this mix. I'm one who does not believe you need a 6'5" receiver if you have dependable quick shorter guys. Personally I don't like Davis or Adams, they drop too many for the one or two they do catch. I would rather have a Denmark who can catch and does catch anything thrown his way that is remotely catchable. I think back to the old days when our receivers were no big but quick. Big issue in receiving to me is the ability of the QB to get the ball "near" the receiver so he can catch it. You don't need to be a tall guy to catch a very catchable ball simply the ability to catch and perhaps more important get to that spot where the ball will be thrown. Our "short" guys all seem to be able to do this very well. End result we don't need Chiles

[Noeller]

6 minutes ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

Believe it was said earlier but in my opinion Dressler, Smith, Denmark, Kohert, and Mayo would be a good receiving core. There is enough speed, used properly to stretch a defense and you have some very dependable receivers in this mix. I'm one who does not believe you need a 6'5" receiver if you have dependable quick shorter guys. Personally I don't like Davis or Adams, they drop too many for the one or two they do catch. I would rather have a Denmark who can catch and does catch anything thrown his way that is remotely catchable. I think back to the old days when our receivers were no big but quick. Big issue in receiving to me is the ability of the QB to get the ball "near" the receiver so he can catch it. You don't need to be a tall guy to catch a very catchable ball simply the ability to catch and perhaps more important get to that spot where the ball will be thrown. Our "short" guys all seem to be able to do this very well. End result we don't need Chiles

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but the difference between now and then, is that the DBs are way bigger now than they used to be. You've got guys like Pat Watkins that are monsters and are going to dominate a smaller Rec. You really need at least one big guy that can go up and win a jump ball...

[tacklewasher]

6 minutes ago, Old Bomber Fan said:

I'm one who does not believe you need a 6'5" receiver if you have dependable quick shorter guys.

I'd still like to see a mix. I like our receiving core but would like if we had 1 or 2 tall guys.

[Fatty Liver]

1 minute ago, Noeller said:

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but the difference between now and then, is that the DBs are way bigger now than they used to be. You've got guys like Pat Watkins that are monsters and are going to dominate a smaller Rec. You really need at least one big guy that can go up and win a jump ball...

Other than Watkins I don't see these tall DB's establishing themselves around the league, most are still "average" height.  Jones has an obsession with height over experience and we can see how well that is working for him.

Plus Adams repeatedly torched Watkins in the last EE match.