Injury Report

[Brandon]

I think this decision is much easier with a guy like Harris who can easily replace Thorpe as a physical short yardage receiver that can grind a few extra yards.

[Noeller]

2 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I think this decision is much easier with a guy like Harris who can easily replace Thorpe as a physical short yardage receiver that can grind a few extra yards.

In my head, Denmark slides into that spot and is the "safety valve" receiver......but we certainly do have options...

[Fatty Liver]

11 hours ago, AKAChip said:

Explain to me what your idea of a logical solution would be. Seems like a team that is winning should be immune from criticism.

If Flanders could return kickoffs,  punts or backup all receiver positions better than Lankford, he would have been in there doing it right out of TC.  I'm all for keeping Flanders in the game for the extra dimension he adds but the switch out of Dressler with Thorpe is a far easier solution.  Thorpe is a rookie with a promising future but his performance in Mtl. was less than stellar, it's not going to damage him or the offence to have him step back and learn the game from Dressler.

I don't know where people get the idea that Lankford is a bad receiver, he plays the wide-out and runs deep patterns which are not targeted frequently in LaPo's playbook.  Does it make Lankford a bad receiver if Nichols only gambles with the deep ball 2-3 times a game?

[O2L]

We have the best starting field position in the league + the most field goals + the most wins + give up the second-most points. Those four things are very clearly co-related. Lankford stays in. Playing down his importance when we're winning some games by the skin of our teeth on field goals is just silly. 

[Atomic]

2 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

If Flanders could return kickoffs,  punts or backup all receiver positions better than Lankford, he would have been in there doing it right out of TC.  I'm all for keeping Flanders in the game for the extra dimension he adds but the switch out of Dressler with Thorpe is a far easier solution.  Thorpe is a rookie with a promising future but his performance in Mtl. was less than stellar, it's not going to damage him or the offence to have him step back and learn the game from Dressler.

I don't know where people get the idea that Lankford is a bad receiver, he plays the wide-out and runs deep patterns which are not targeted frequently in LaPo's playbook.  Does it make Lankford a bad receiver if Nichols only gambles with the deep ball 2-3 times a game?

Whatever the reason is, the production has to be better.  Last 3 games he has had 2 catches for 40 yards, 0 catches, and 1 catch for 5 yards.  He is being targeted... but less than 60% are resulting in catches... worst among Bomber receivers.  It's been clear that Nichols and Lankford aren't quite on the same page.  Whether that's on Lankford or Nichols, I can't say, but Nichols is hitting his other receivers at a 65%+ rate.

Meanwhile we potentially remove a guy in Thorpe who had 5+ catches in each of his first 5 games before an off-game against Montreal.  Many of which were key second down conversions and late-game drive extending plays.

Dressler and Darvin Adams are both good deep threats.  We don't need Lankford in the lineup with Dressler back, we need a good possession guy who can grind out YAC.  Pulling out Thorpe for a guy who regularly makes only 0-2 catches per game is going to be a mistake.

[bearpants]

25 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:

I may not be interpreting  you correctly but to me inserting Dressler back into the lineup is not a tough decision. Yes, who comes out is, but there is no way you don't dress Dressler. Arguably the best player on our team when healthy.  

who comes out is the tough decision... that's what he's saying... putting a healthy Dressler back in the line up - especially against sask - is the easiest decisions the coaches will make all year!

Edited August 31, 2017 by bearpants

[SPuDS]

Just now, Atomic said:

Whatever the reason is, the production has to be better.  Last 3 games he has had 2 catches for 40 yards, 0 catches, and 1 catch for 5 yards.  He is being targeted... but less than 60% are resulting in catches... worst among Bomber receivers.  It's been clear that Nichols and Lankford aren't quite on the same page.  Whether that's on Lankford or Nichols, I can't say, but Nichols is hitting his other receivers at a 65%+ rate.

Meanwhile we potentially remove a guy in Thorpe who had 5+ catches in each of his first 5 games before an off-game against Montreal.  Many of which were key second down conversions and late-game drive extending plays.

Dressler and Darvin Adams are both good deep threats.  We don't need Lankford in the lineup with Dressler back, we need a good possession guy who can grind out YAC.  Pulling out Thorpe for a guy who regularly makes only 0-2 catches per game is going to be a mistake.

and risk a higher chance for fumbles or less yards on kick off returns and the potential for that deep ball home run threat?? 

 

nope.  can't agree with you on this.  Lankford is arguably the best kick return man in the league.  hes faster then dressler and adams AND having him on the field means another weapon that sask's DC has to game plan for, opening up stuff for Dressler and Adams.. 

 

 

[JuranBoldenRules]

28 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

If Flanders could return kickoffs,  punts or backup all receiver positions better than Lankford, he would have been in there doing it right out of TC.  I'm all for keeping Flanders in the game for the extra dimension he adds but the switch out of Dressler with Thorpe is a far easier solution.  Thorpe is a rookie with a promising future but his performance in Mtl. was less than stellar, it's not going to damage him or the offence to have him step back and learn the game from Dressler.

I don't know where people get the idea that Lankford is a bad receiver, he plays the wide-out and runs deep patterns which are not targeted frequently in LaPo's playbook.  Does it make Lankford a bad receiver if Nichols only gambles with the deep ball 2-3 times a game?

It makes Lankford less useful because we need guys who can produce first downs not one big play in half a season.  Very similar to the McDuffie situation last year that limited our offence except that McDuffie brought more value as a returner.  Our average start off kickoffs is below league average despite Lankford's personal average which tells you we are being kicked deep because he isn't viewed as a threat.

And Lankford has mostly played slot when he gets in on offence.  Watch the games.  The only receiver Nichols is off-target with is Lankford.  Given that accuracy is not an issue on the other 95% of his throws to the same spots on the field (talking 10-19 yard and 0-9 yard throws) that seems like a route issue to me, a receiver problem.

Thorpe is a weapon on offence.  Lankford has one plus attribute in straight line speed and is limited otherwise.  His kickoff returns don't outweigh that.

Offence is all about being multiple and having guys that are versatile in what they can do because if it's not there defending is very easy.

[Tehedra]

We will see how it goes but I agree; for all the talk about Lankfords averages we still seem to always be starting in the same range as if we just took the ball.  Maybe it is the blocking for him or maybe other teams aren't concerned about him spotting the whole and getting out on them.  Perhaps Lankford proves JBR and myself wrong though this weekend and helps destroy the Riders.  

I'm not saying I think Lankford is a bad player; after all I would rather not remove any players right now.  It's just if I had to choose between Thorpe/Lankford I choose Lankford because Thorpe did make some good hard YAC for first downs in a couple games at times that we really needed those first downs.  I also believe we could have Dressler or someone else do those returns that Lankford was doing or we could just take the ball at the 35 most of the time as it seems we were typically only getting to the 30 - 35 anyways.  

 

[shadybob]

McDuffie also had us up near the top of the league in terms of kick returning last year, maybe its not so much who we put back there, its more the guys we put in front of them

Edited August 31, 2017 by shadybob

[AKAChip]

10 hours ago, Goalie said:

Isnt he leading the league in average returns tho? I mean the guy doesn't suck as much as you like to think. Special teams is pretty darn important. 

He's third out of guys who have returned at least 15 kickoffs and his yards are purely a volume stat. He's a fine kickoff returner but he is not special and it is literally all he does remotely well. He is not a good receiver. We saw that in Saskatchewan and we see that here. Thorpe has proven more as a receiver in 5 games than Lankford has in his career. In my mind why weaken our receiving core so that Lankford can keep kick returning when we don't even know if Thorpe or Flanders would be a downgrade. We know that as a receiver Lankford is a downgrade on Thorpe and slot receiver is infinitely more important than kick returner. Especially when the return man is not a game breaker. 

[Fatty Liver]

Looks like Thorpe might be heading to the PR.

 

https://www.cfl.ca/transactions/

 

Active

WPG ADD FROM INJURED INT Weston DRESSLER (WR)    North Dakota ? Removed from 6-game injured list
WPG DEL  INT Tyrone THORPE (WR)    Virginia


Non Active

WPG ADD  NAT Kahlen BRANNING (DB)    Regina
WPG ADD  INT Tyrone THORPE (WR)    Virginia
WPG REM UNS  NAT Brett BLASZKO (WR)    Calgary
WPG REM UNS  INT Gary CHAMBERS (WR)    Arizona State
 

[M.O.A.B.]

5 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Looks like Thorpe might be heading to the PR.

 

https://www.cfl.ca/transactions/

 

Active

WPG ADD FROM INJURED INT Weston DRESSLER (WR)    North Dakota ? Removed from 6-game injured list
WPG DEL  INT Tyrone THORPE (WR)    Virginia


Non Active

WPG ADD  NAT Kahlen BRANNING (DB)    Regina
WPG ADD  INT Tyrone THORPE (WR)    Virginia
WPG REM UNS  NAT Brett BLASZKO (WR)    Calgary
WPG REM UNS  INT Gary CHAMBERS (WR)    Arizona State
 

yup

[Atomic]

48 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

and risk a higher chance for fumbles or less yards on kick off returns and the potential for that deep ball home run threat?? 

nope.  can't agree with you on this.  Lankford is arguably the best kick return man in the league.  hes faster then dressler and adams AND having him on the field means another weapon that sask's DC has to game plan for, opening up stuff for Dressler and Adams.. 

He has caught one deep ball all season, I don't think opposing DC's are all that worried about him.  I'll take the heavily-involved first-down machine over the deep-threat decoy all day.

And Lankford is not the best kick returner in the league... I simply can't agree with that.

[Rod Black]

I like the rookie Thorpe. If the coaching staff with a 7 win 2 loss season want to take him out, I'm ok with that. 

[AKAChip]

8 minutes ago, Rod Black said:

I like the rookie Thorpe. If the coaching staff with a 7 win 2 loss season want to take him out, I'm ok with that. 

I have a small issue with this line of thinking. I get winning gives the coaching staff some leeway but we've seen this exact staff make terrible roster decisions before and we don't have to just accept them as the right move. 

[Atomic]

1 minute ago, AKAChip said:

I have a small issue with this line of thinking. I get winning gives the coaching staff some leeway but we've seen this exact staff make terrible roster decisions before and we don't have to just accept them as the right move. 

Even the best coaches make mistakes.  i'm not saying this particular move is necessarily a mistake but it's always fair game to question professional GMs and coaches.  8 of the teams don't win the Grey Cup every year so 8 teams with professional GMs and coaches are making more mistakes than the guys who won the Cup.

[bearpants]

21 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Even the best coaches make mistakes.  i'm not saying this particular move is necessarily a mistake but it's always fair game to question professional GMs and coaches.  8 of the teams don't win the Grey Cup every year so 8 teams with professional GMs and coaches are making more mistakes than the guys who won the Cup.

If we all just trusted the coaches decisions at face value (which I mostly do)... what would be the point of even having a discussion board?! 

Edited August 31, 2017 by bearpants
the grammar was bugging me

[JCon]

Who touches the ball more, Lankford or Thorpe?

Lankford. So I think he should stay in.

[SPuDS]

58 minutes ago, Atomic said:

He has caught one deep ball all season, I don't think opposing DC's are all that worried about him.  I'll take the heavily-involved first-down machine over the deep-threat decoy all day.

And Lankford is not the best kick returner in the league... I simply can't agree with that.

his stats dictate otherwise.   we have the best return game in the league currently.  that is at least partially his doing, no?   And like others have mentioned, Lapo's offense (or Nichol's dislike of tossing the long ball) are why his touches are so low, not due to his inability to play the receiver spot.  Hes a burner, a great decoy to open up the stuff underneath and crutial to our excellent starting field position.. 

[JCon]

51 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Even the best coaches make mistakes.  i'm not saying this particular move is necessarily a mistake but it's always fair game to question professional GMs and coaches.  8 of the teams don't win the Grey Cup every year so 8 teams with professional GMs and coaches are making more mistakes than the guys who won the Cup.

 

1 minute ago, SPuDS said:

his stats dictate otherwise.   we have the best return game in the league currently.  that is at least partially his doing, no?   And like others have mentioned, Lapo's offense (or Nichol's dislike of tossing the long ball) are why his touches are so low, not due to his inability to play the receiver spot.  Hes a burner, a great decoy to open up the stuff underneath and crutial to our excellent starting field position.. 

I'm not prepared to say Lankford is the best returner in the game; however, his returns, with the special teams blocking, is producing the best results.

Football is about cohesion. The return team is doing well together and I don't believe they should be changing the pieces right now.

[SPuDS]

16 minutes ago, JCon said:

 

I'm not prepared to say Lankford is the best returner in the game; however, his returns, with the special teams blocking, is producing the best results.

Football is about cohesion. The return team is doing well together and I don't believe they should be changing the pieces right now.

and I do agree to this, somewhat.   He still has to hit the high gear and find the opening to get those yards and he is doing it pretty regularly. 

 

messing with that by hoping Thorpe or Flanders can duplicate it, would be folly imo as well.

[Doublezero]

Utilizing Lankford and Dressler might have something to do with the opponent being Sask.

Dressler has been a monster for us vs Sask and Lankford, motivated, returned a punt 70 yards for a TD against his old team in Regina during the pre-season - called back on a penalty.

I hope Thorpe is back in for the Banjo Bowl however - and not sure Lankford will be, or even should be, returning punts this time around vs Riders.

[Atomic]

30 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

his stats dictate otherwise.   we have the best return game in the league currently.  that is at least partially his doing, no?   And like others have mentioned, Lapo's offense (or Nichol's dislike of tossing the long ball) are why his touches are so low, not due to his inability to play the receiver spot.  Hes a burner, a great decoy to open up the stuff underneath and crutial to our excellent starting field position.. 

Well.  The Bombers are tied for second in terms of kickoff return average and Lankford is third among guys with 15 or more returns.  So I have a hard time saying he's the best, statistically.  And when I watch him return I'm not so sure he's the best either.  He does well... But not the best.  I think moving the offence consistently is more important than the 2-5 yards per return we may or may not lose by substituting someone else for Lankford on kick returns.

[Rod Black]

1 hour ago, AKAChip said:

I have a small issue with this line of thinking. I get winning gives the coaching staff some leeway but we've seen this exact staff make terrible roster decisions before and we don't have to just accept them as the right move. 

We all make mistakes. If the coaches want to put Dressler in, keep Thorpe in and remove Lankford, I'm equally fine with that. It's their call. My role is to cheer, complain and mostly, buy Bomber merch.