Bombers Add 3 To PR

[Goalie]

FWIW and not sure it was mentioned but Straughan did sign a 2018 futures contract with the Bombers so he will be at camp next year. 

[wbbfan]

14 minutes ago, Goalie said:

FWIW and not sure it was mentioned but Straughan did sign a 2018 futures contract with the Bombers so he will be at camp next year. 

Wasnt MBT on that same deal? I think a futures is like a team option. (not sure) so that if we want him back and dont find any one we like more we can have him back. 

[Tracker]

3 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Neither. President of the TJ Thorpe Fan Club.

You mentioned the Eskimos, though. And how they can sign a player who's impactful right away. What player would that be, LaDarius Perkins?

CJ Gable.

[blue_gold_84]

1 hour ago, tracker said:

CJ Gable.

So, a proven veteran player the Eskimos traded for... You're comparing him to a PR signing who hasn't even played a snap in the CFL...?

Apples and oranges much?

[Tracker]

11 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

So, a proven veteran player the Eskimos traded for... You're comparing him to a PR signing who hasn't even played a snap in the CFL...?

Apples and oranges much?

You are missing the point. A running back's role is pretty simple compared to receivers-take the ball and follow the blocking. There have been many examples where a rookie running back has stepped in on short notice and contributed.  The loss of Flanders has hampered the team, and we can't replace him?

[blue_gold_84]

12 minutes ago, tracker said:

You are missing the point. A running back's role is pretty simple compared to receivers-take the ball and follow the blocking. There have been many examples where a rookie running back has stepped in on short notice and contributed.  The loss of Flanders has hampered the team, and we can't replace him?

Using Gable to make that "point" doesn't make any sense. And of course the loss of a key player hampers the team. It hampers any team.

Flanders' particular role on the offense was pretty complex, BTW. It wasn't just "take the ball and follow the blocking." That's probably why he's been tough to replace. Normande obviously doesn't fit that role and Bauman likely won't see playing time this season. What FA tailbacks are out there worth looking at right now?

[JuranBoldenRules]

12 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Wasnt MBT on that same deal? I think a futures is like a team option. (not sure) so that if we want him back and dont find any one we like more we can have him back. 

Never heard of a futures contract in the CFL.  Probably more like an open-ended verbal agreement with no guarantee to either side...”we’d like to have you in training camp next year” “ok, sounds good.”

Like Tori Gurley’s 2017 contract.

[GCn20]

3 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Never heard of a futures contract in the CFL.  Probably more like an open-ended verbal agreement with no guarantee to either side...”we’d like to have you in training camp next year” “ok, sounds good.”

Like Tori Gurley’s 2017 contract.

Yea. There are no futures contracts in the CFL.

[GCn20]

11 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Using Gable to make that "point" doesn't make any sense. And of course the loss of a key player hampers the team. It hampers any team.

Flanders' particular role on the offense was pretty complex, BTW. It wasn't just "take the ball and follow the blocking." That's probably why he's been tough to replace. Normande obviously doesn't fit that role and Bauman likely won't see playing time this season. What FA tailbacks are out there worth looking at right now?

The only FA tailback that might intrigue me right now is Shakir Bell.

[SPuDS]

15 hours ago, tracker said:

Anyone else curious as to why the Esks can pick up a running back and have him contribute immediately, but even though the Bombers and Harris are suffering from the absence of Flanders, our shiny new and promising RB cannot?

who, Gable?  the guy thats been in the cfl for eons?

 

over a raw rookie whos never seen the CFL field? Gee... wonder why Gable could start asap and our guy needs some time to get acclimated..

[SPuDS]

59 minutes ago, tracker said:

You are missing the point. A running back's role is pretty simple compared to receivers-take the ball and follow the blocking. There have been many examples where a rookie running back has stepped in on short notice and contributed.  The loss of Flanders has hampered the team, and we can't replace him?

lolol @ "pretty simple" 

RB's have to be able to pick up blitzes, know which gaps to take, when to leak out, when to stay in blocking and also while in bomber blue, are involved on the STs...

 

but ya, your right.. pretty simple.. just plug and play.

 

smh.  

[17to85]

38 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

lolol @ "pretty simple" 

RB's have to be able to pick up blitzes, know which gaps to take, when to leak out, when to stay in blocking and also while in bomber blue, are involved on the STs...

 

but ya, your right.. pretty simple.. just plug and play.

 

smh.  

as far as positions on a team go it's probably the easiest one for a guy to pick up. 

[Booch]

NAH...I would say wide side WR then Defensive end and or defensive Tackle be the easiest to step right in at. Running back not so much..especially with the extra guy coming on a rush to deal with and benchmarks on the field to orientate yourself....if you've never played both games you would be shocked how a player uses has-marks...sidelines etc to do things and effect how they react and a lot of times it's done without thinking, just body/mind conditioning.

Puttting a really green RB in there is a good way to get your QB killed

[SPuDS]

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

as far as positions on a team go it's probably the easiest one for a guy to pick up. 

not in comparison to a RB who was just on an active roster versus a guy who just landed on our PR (and probably into canada for cryin' out loud) last week. thats the issue I have with the previous comment that EDM can just toss in a new RB and we can't.

[BomberBall]

Not to mention Flanders lined up in the slot a fair bit, so it's not 'simply' RB duties the new guy would have to know, to replace Flanders.

[Tracker]

Flanders was/is a good versatile back, but he certainly is not irreplaceable.  Bauman's highlight reel seems to show some darned good skills. He would have to have learned how to pick up a blitz, pick holes and catch, otherwise what would have made the Bombers bring him in?

[SPuDS]

20 minutes ago, tracker said:

Flanders was/is a good versatile back, but he certainly is not irreplaceable.  Bauman's highlight reel seems to show some darned good skills. He would have to have learned how to pick up a blitz, pick holes and catch, otherwise what would have made the Bombers bring him in?

this isn't Madden.  You can't just take a guy, throw him in and assume hes going to be able to perform.  guy not only needs a few weeks to get up to speed BUT deserves it, imo.  Hes probably never even stepped foot on a CFL field before for crying out loud.

[blue_gold_84]

2 hours ago, tracker said:

Flanders was/is a good versatile back, but he certainly is not irreplaceable.  Bauman's highlight reel seems to show some darned good skills. He would have to have learned how to pick up a blitz, pick holes and catch, otherwise what would have made the Bombers bring him in?

Potential. A chance to take a look at him in within the CFL's parameters and determine what he brings to the table: skill set, football intelligence, attitude, etc. That doesn't mean just activating him and throwing him to the wolves, though.

If anything, the earliest I'd expect to see him would be pre-season 2018.

[blueingreenland]

6 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Never heard of a futures contract in the CFL.  Probably more like an open-ended verbal agreement with no guarantee to either side...”we’d like to have you in training camp next year” “ok, sounds good.”

By futures contract they just mean he has signed a contract for 2018. Most contracts are signed in the off-season, this one was just signed a little early. I'm looking forward to what Straughan can show next training camp.

[wbbfan]

7 hours ago, gcn11 said:

The only FA tailback that might intrigue me right now is Shakir Bell.

Yeah not really any cfl fa that is a big improvement imo. Could be some one cut from an nfl camp that would be a good stop gap back up. But I like our depth when healthy.

Is anthony coombs a pending FA? Getting him and nic demski would be huge in the off season.  NI starters and rotational  guys are what we need mostly now. And that isnt some thing we are likely to score in a huge splash, or mid season. 

[johnzo]

6 hours ago, Booch said:

Puttting a really green RB in there is a good way to get your QB killed

Yeah, I remember Buck Pierce totally getting pancaked a few times while Bloi-Dei Dorzon looked on.

When I've been watching games lately, I've been looking away from Nichols at the snap and watching Harris.  Several times a game, he'll save Nichols' ass with a split-second leap into a blitzer's  gap.  Or he'll line up on one side of the formation and when  the free man comes from the other side, he'll throw himself across the formation just in time to chip the blitzer away.  If he were a half-step slower, Nichols would be road pizza.  Harris is just  as important when he's not getting the ball as when he is getting the ball. 

Edited October 25, 2017 by johnzo

[JuranBoldenRules]

1 hour ago, blueingreenland said:

By futures contract they just mean he has signed a contract for 2018. Most contracts are signed in the off-season, this one was just signed a little early. I'm looking forward to what Straughan can show next training camp.

You can’t have guys “signed” and not have them on your roster.

[mbrg]

7 hours ago, tracker said:

Flanders was/is a good versatile back, but he certainly is not irreplaceable.  Bauman's highlight reel seems to show some darned good skills. He would have to have learned how to pick up a blitz, pick holes and catch, otherwise what would have made the Bombers bring him in?

Sorry for just barging in here, but...While the Bombers could stick another guy in and run a 2-back set, that's still a long ways from replacing Flanders.  The Bombers weren't having success because Flanders gave them the ability to run the ball up the gut, they were having success because teams couldn't defend against 2 players with that variety of skills.  Which one is running the ball and which one is receiver on this play?  Is one lead blocking for the other?  Are they both leaking out to catch the ball?  Not only are both fantastic running backs, both are deadly as receivers.

And then, even taking the talent of Flanders out of the equation, he's been on this team for almost 2 full seasons now.  He knows the playbook front to back.  They have plays and packages designed for him.   He's able to play as a receiver because he knows most of the calls and routes for that position.

The expectation that putting another RB on the field is all we have to do to recreate the Flanders/Harris experience is unfair to any poor kid who gets that placed on his shoulders, and to Flanders for ignoring all the time he will have spent with his nose in the playbook over the last 16 months to be able to replace a slot receiver.

[Tracker]

3 hours ago, mbrg said:

Sorry for just barging in here, but...While the Bombers could stick another guy in and run a 2-back set, that's still a long ways from replacing Flanders.  The Bombers weren't having success because Flanders gave them the ability to run the ball up the gut, they were having success because teams couldn't defend against 2 players with that variety of skills.  Which one is running the ball and which one is receiver on this play?  Is one lead blocking for the other?  Are they both leaking out to catch the ball?  Not only are both fantastic running backs, both are deadly as receivers.

And then, even taking the talent of Flanders out of the equation, he's been on this team for almost 2 full seasons now.  He knows the playbook front to back.  They have plays and packages designed for him.   He's able to play as a receiver because he knows most of the calls and routes for that position.

The expectation that putting another RB on the field is all we have to do to recreate the Flanders/Harris experience is unfair to any poor kid who gets that placed on his shoulders, and to Flanders for ignoring all the time he will have spent with his nose in the playbook over the last 16 months to be able to replace a slot receiver.

No question that  Bauman would not be as effective as Flanders or a permanent replacement, but one would think he would be more effective than trying to replace Flanders with another receiver who is nearly as green.

[wbbfan]

3 hours ago, johnzo said:

Yeah, I remember Buck Pierce totally getting pancaked a few times while Bloi-Dei Dorzon looked on.

When I've been watching games lately, I've been looking away from Nichols at the snap and watching Harris.  Several times a game, he'll save Nichols' ass with a split-second leap into a blitzer's  gap.  Or he'll line up on one side of the formation and when  the free man comes from the other side, he'll throw himself across the formation just in time to chip the blitzer away.  If he were a half-step slower, Nichols would be road pizza.  Harris is just  as important when he's not getting the ball as when he is getting the ball. 

To be fair, I remember buck getting rekt while his inept OL looked on. As well him getting rocked many times when he should have slid. 

Rb is probably the most plug and play position. Not many RBs at all are gonna stone wall a rush end or lber clean on a blitz 1v1. The huge majority are varying levels of speed bumps.  Many wrs fall into that classification when it comes to blocking as well. More and more we see a WR chip block from a trips bunch type formations.