Jump to content

Bombers Off-Season Transactions

Noeller

By Noeller
in Blue Bomber Discussion

 Share

Recommended Posts

Noeller Grand Master

Noeller

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hmmm I must have missed that quote. Last I'd seen was that they didn't know yet hoe much they'd have for the QB position at the time of Glenn's release because they didn't know how much Nichols would cost.... 

  • Replies 2.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Atomic
Atomic

Matt Nichols is still the starter but Mike O'Shea has stated he is "on thin ice" due to having a child recently.  MOS believe players should be totally focused on football. Clarence Denmark was b

bigg jay
bigg jay

Allow me to re-phrase my earlier post for the pedantic newcomer... The Winnipeg Bombers have now signed all of their 2017 draft picks with the exception of Geoff Gray.  Gray is currently under co

Mike
Mike

Never understood the fascination with sitting here bemoaning the what if's of a draft class, especially when we've had the success we've had. We're averaging a starter a year from the draft and we're

bearpants Veteran

bearpants

Posted
Posted
On 1/21/2017 at 9:57 AM, TBURGESS said:

Hurl, Harris and Keeping can go. Probably only looking to keep 1 of Denmark, Gurley and McDuffie (My choice to keep). The rest should be offered 'Right Priced' contracts.

I'd have to agree with you on all fronts... but I hope they bring in an experienced Canadian O-lineman... and I'd be ok if that was Keeping...

mbrg Newbie

mbrg

Posted
Posted
On 1/21/2017 at 2:35 PM, Jesse said:

Walters mentioned this in a recent interview regarding Glenn as well.

They offered him a contract that fit with what they could afford to pay for a back up QB, but he asked to be released to see if other teams were slotting for more in that spot. It could still happen that Glenn doesn't find more money on the open market and we resign him.

I have a suspicion that money was only part of reason both sides put a pin in it for now.  Rather the Bombers didn't want to make any claims they might not keep regarding Glenn's spot on the depth chart.  Everyone is assuming Glenn would be the back up but there have been signs for a while that this team is looking for Davis to take a step forward.  Even last year Glenn sat in the #3 spot long after the "learning the playbook" justification had any merit left.  Davis was the first QB that got signed this offseason.  I'm not going to read anything more into that than the obvious - there is no doubt that the Bombers want Davis here.

So maybe the conversation went like this: The Bombers told Glenn they want him but he might be 3rd on the depth chart and he might have to take a very incentive laden contract as a result; Glenn said cool beans Kyle but I'm 745 years old and this could be my last contract and I don't wanna go out like that, you get me homeslice?; Walters says yo Kevs, there is only love in my heart for you, no disrespect at all, just always wanna be keepin it 100 with you, ya dig?; and Kevin digs so they hug it out and promise to keep digits at the ready both knowing that the next time they see each other it will be from opposite sides* of the field.

 

 

*Unless Glenn signs with an eastern team of course, cause those stadiums were drawn up on the back of an IHOP place mat.

WBBFanWest Rising Star

WBBFanWest

Posted
Posted

I tend to agree that by signing Davis first, they gave a pretty clear signal as to their thoughts moving forward.  You don't sign a Kevin Glenn to be your 3rd stringer.  You sign someone you want to develop for that slot.  It looks like Davis will be the #2 moving forward.  Personally, I'm not too concerned moving forward because we know what Glenn brings to the table and given his age, I'm not convinced that we'd be any better with him at the helm over Davis should Nichols go down, and yes, I realize that we haven't seen much of Davis.

 

Jesse Grand Master

Jesse

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, mbrg said:

I have a suspicion that money was only part of reason both sides put a pin in it for now.  Rather the Bombers didn't want to make any claims they might not keep regarding Glenn's spot on the depth chart.  Everyone is assuming Glenn would be the back up but there have been signs for a while that this team is looking for Davis to take a step forward.  Even last year Glenn sat in the #3 spot long after the "learning the playbook" justification had any merit left.  Davis was the first QB that got signed this offseason.  I'm not going to read anything more into that than the obvious - there is no doubt that the Bombers want Davis here.

So maybe the conversation went like this: The Bombers told Glenn they want him but he might be 3rd on the depth chart and he might have to take a very incentive laden contract as a result; Glenn said cool beans Kyle but I'm 745 years old and this could be my last contract and I don't wanna go out like that, you get me homeslice?; Walters says yo Kevs, there is only love in my heart for you, no disrespect at all, just always wanna be keepin it 100 with you, ya dig?; and Kevin digs so they hug it out and promise to keep digits at the ready both knowing that the next time they see each other it will be from opposite sides* of the field.

 

 

*Unless Glenn signs with an eastern team of course, cause those stadiums were drawn up on the back of an IHOP place mat.

Brilliant.

Noeller Grand Master

Noeller

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ed Tait @EdTaitWFC

The #Bombers add 3: WR Ryan Lankford, DBs Keith Lewis, Jeremy Harris. Lankford: 8 GP w Sask last yr. Lewis was on Wpg PR; Harris was w B.C.

Judd Newbie

Judd

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Noeller said:

Ed Tait @EdTaitWFC

The #Bombers add 3: WR Ryan Lankford, DBs Keith Lewis, Jeremy Harris. Lankford: 8 GP w Sask last yr. Lewis was on Wpg PR; Harris was w B.C.

Lewis is 6'1 and Harris 6'2, we're really starting to see a shift in taller db's lately.
Does anyone have any comments on Lankford and how he looked last year, I honestly don't remember seeing him at all.

Mike Grand Master

Mike

Posted
Posted

Somewhat underwhelmed but on the bright side, if we were going to recycle DBs from two teams right now, BC and Winnipeg are at the top of the list (with Calgary, as well) for recruiting those spots.

Lankford, however ... why bother is my immediate opinion.

Floyd Collaborator

Floyd

Posted
Posted

So just to be clear... Denmark gets 8 TDs and 700 yards in 11 games...

But we sign Stafford because of his 'chemistry' with Nichols (700 yards and 9 TDS in 18 games) and then a hack like Lankford...

 

Brandon Grand Master

Brandon

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Judd said:

Wow that thread does not inspire any confidence for this signing.

 

I also read a thread on that site that said Durant is crap,  Nichols is crap,  Andrew Harris is crap,  Medlock is crap ,  Leggett is crap etc....

 

I would be zero stock on any reports from riderfans threads.

Lankford is most likely TCF and if he sticks then good for us.  

Noeller Grand Master

Noeller

Posted
  • Author
Posted
29 minutes ago, Floyd said:

So just to be clear... Denmark gets 8 TDs and 700 yards in 11 games...

But we sign Stafford because of his 'chemistry' with Nichols (700 yards and 9 TDS in 18 games) and then a hack like Lankford...

 

Denmark = 31

Stafford = 26

JCon Grand Master

JCon

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Floyd said:

So just to be clear... Denmark gets 8 TDs and 700 yards in 11 games...

But we sign Stafford because of his 'chemistry' with Nichols (700 yards and 9 TDS in 18 games) and then a hack like Lankford...

 

Nichols only played with Stafford for 8 games... So?

Floyd Collaborator

Floyd

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, JCon said:

Nichols only played with Stafford for 8 games... So?

So his biggest game was without Nichols.

And Nichols/Stafford best game was against the bombers...

wbbfan Grand Master

wbbfan

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Floyd said:

So just to be clear... Denmark gets 8 TDs and 700 yards in 11 games...

But we sign Stafford because of his 'chemistry' with Nichols (700 yards and 9 TDS in 18 games) and then a hack like Lankford...

 

Stafford i bet came dirt cheap. Lankford smells like TCF. Course im still hoping denmark is back for tc. 

2 hours ago, Noeller said:

Denmark = 31

Stafford = 26

age, cost etc. Though i think stafford more pushes out gurley, not denmark. Or i sure hope thats the case. 

Fatty Liver Grand Master

Fatty Liver

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Floyd said:

So just to be clear... Denmark gets 8 TDs and 700 yards in 11 games...

But we sign Stafford because of his 'chemistry' with Nichols (700 yards and 9 TDS in 18 games) and then a hack like Lankford...

 

They let Mayo walk and pick up Lankford???  If they MUST pick up Rider fodder wait for Holley or Collins to spring loose.

Mr Dee Newbie

Mr Dee

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

Don't get the Langford signing. Can't our scouts find their own TCF?

Let's not forget, the scouts have all kinds of input on players already in the league. Langford would fall into this category. They believe he's worth a look-see. A look-see doesn't cost much and some of the learning curve has already been dealt worth.

And that's just fine with me.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

×
×
  • Create New...