The Collapse

[JuranBoldenRules]

Rice isn’t a tackle.  He could maybe fill in at guard.

[Booch]

I like couture and Spooner better...heck even actually Speller

[Ripper]

26 minutes ago, Booch said:

he did in BC for almost a full year.....then got hurt...As well as in Sask for about half a yr ...but he was really big and was pretty ineffective so they dumped him...and signed with us

He played well for us and I really liked him, but he was about 20 lbs over weight at the time.  We moved on to Coleman who has been good for us. Hardrick has been very good for you, so it worked out for both parties.  I think you guys are missing him now. He is a big team spirit guy out there.

[Floyd]

12 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Rice isn’t a tackle.  He could maybe fill in at guard.

TE isn't too far off...  I read he had trimmed down to 300lbs...

Not signing him anyway, ha... so I guess it doesn't really matter

[SPuDS]

7 hours ago, Booch said:

Landon Rice is of no help...30 yr old who has never really started anywhere...we'd be better off with Neuf at tackle and Couture at guard if we wanted to go that silly route

Emphasis on "silly"

[JuranBoldenRules]

5 hours ago, Floyd said:

TE isn't too far off...  I read he had trimmed down to 300lbs...

Not signing him anyway, ha... so I guess it doesn't really matter

TE is basically never isolated in pass protection against a rush end.  Tackles are almost every down.  Huge difference.  

[Floyd]

36 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

TE is basically never isolated in pass protection against a rush end.  Tackles are almost every down.  Huge difference.  

I'll believe you...  just sure looked like Rice was on the outside in Jones' sets but I also didn't watch every Hammie game...

If he's trimmed down to 300 range, he's built for RT...  I'd be fine with him on the outside - this just feels like every other time we crap on a player until he signs here ha

I just don't see where Safety is an 'easy' position in Richie Halls' D... a 4 NI OL slots Leggett in at S

I was a supporter of 3 NI REC earlier in the year but now it looks like Nichols needs real help...

Other option could be rotating Loffler at WIL and Thomas at DT through the game as your 7th NI - that might make the most sense

[Floyd]

47 minutes ago, SPuDS said:

Emphasis on "silly"

Ah, a classic SpuDs chip shot... don't ever change, my friend.

[JuranBoldenRules]

11 minutes ago, Floyd said:

I'll believe you...  just sure looked like Rice was on the outside in Jones' sets but I also didn't watch every Hammie game...

If he's trimmed down to 300 range, he's built for RT...  I'd be fine with him on the outside - this just feels like every other time we crap on a player until he signs here ha

 

Ya he's on the outside, but you're widening the gap on teams that line their ends up on outside shade of the last guy on the line or putting a guy on his outside shoulder for teams that leave their ends outside shade on the tackle.  Either way you're basically double teaming that end and having 3-4 blockers (depending on the centre call) on a side of a formation where a defense isn't going to rush more than 3.  The whole point of that offense was having usually 7 blockers on 4-5 rushers.

[rebusrankin]

Why would people think a guy who didn't start for one team and was dealt and then cut by a second team, that is a national would be a good fit at tackle? Nationals in the CFL that can start and play OT are like gold, they don't end up as the 6th OL or cut mid season.

[JuranBoldenRules]

7 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Why would people think a guy who didn't start for one team and was dealt and then cut by a second team, that is a national would be a good fit at tackle? Nationals in the CFL that can start and play OT are like gold, they don't end up as the 6th OL or cut mid season.

Plus if the logic is a guy who plays tight end can play tackle, why wouldn't we just use Couture?

[SPuDS]

52 minutes ago, Floyd said:

Ah, a classic SpuDs chip shot... don't ever change, my friend.

Dont plan on it.. and thanks.. I think. 

 

It really is a silly idea tho tbh.  our oline is performing pretty well... so we should mess with it, just because?

 

 

[Booch]

SO SILLY HAHAHA

[Bigblue204]

11 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

Why would people think a guy who didn't start for one team and was dealt and then cut by a second team, that is a national would be a good fit at tackle? Nationals in the CFL that can start and play OT are like gold, they don't end up as the 6th OL or cut mid season.

In last few weeks. Common sense hasnt been welcome here.

[blue_gold_84]

On offense, I'd say O-line is the least of the team's problems right now.

[Ripper]

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

On offense, I'd say O-line is the least of the team's problems right now.

6 sacks against in last 2 games since Hardrick went down says otherwise.  I guess another way to look at it is Nichols struggling could have lead to some sacks, or was a result of the pressure

[blue_gold_84]

4 minutes ago, Ripper said:

6 sacks against in last 2 games since Hardrick went down says otherwise.  I guess another way to look at it is Nichols struggling could have lead to some sacks, or was a result of the pressure

I shouldn't have point out the obvious here: Hardrick went down late in the game vs. OTT (6:44 remaining in the 4th quarter). He's only missed one game. Correlation does imply causation in this case. So, it doesn't say otherwise and there is only one way to look at it. Nichols getting sacked is due to is own issues making reads and not getting rid of the ball. He's getting time in the pocket but doing nothing with it.

The loss of Dressler is arguably more significant; the passing game stinks without him. As I said, the O-line should be the least of the team's concern as far as the offense goes.

[Booch]

Oline is a minor issue in the sacks..its the qb not getting the ball off..and bring highly immobile now.

Most in league other than in sask still consider this the best oline..sacks allowed doesnt mean a line is poor

In sask u guys cant have a qb stand in pocket at all other than dumping off a hitch or screen or trying the RPO thing..which teams will adapt to in no time..then what?

Your qb will get creamed..or start showing his form of the last 3 years and any more chance of wins will dry up

There is a reason u cant attack vertically or rarely..and its cause you cant because oline cant sustain blocks

 

[Tracker]

4 hours ago, Booch said:

Oline is a minor issue in the sacks..its the qb not getting the ball off..and bring highly immobile now.

Most in league other than in sask still consider this the best oline..sacks allowed doesn't mean a line is poor

In sask u guys cant have a qb stand in pocket at all other than dumping off a hitch or screen or trying the RPO thing..which teams will adapt to in no time..then what?

Your qb will get creamed..or start showing his form of the last 3 years and any more chance of wins will dry up

There is a reason u cant attack vertically or rarely..and its cause you cant because oline cant sustain blocks

 

I hope that the refs call the holding both ways consistently. Sask O-line cannot compete with out a lot of grabbing.