Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, Booch said:

Wilson would do fine at SAM...and that trio would let HALL allow BA to play the BA role of circa 2019...2021

People forgot...or don't realize Wilson was an elite track guy...he can cover just fine...he runs a 4.5 to mid 4.6 forty ...plenty quick enough especially when a lethal tackler

It’s not like he could under perform our Sam play this year either. Kyrie at Sam can only make us better. 
 You don’t see many real 4-3 alignments, it’s more 4-2 with 2 ILBs than a wil mac in terms of alignment. But in terms of role we frequently use a mlber on a linemen and a lber on a gap or two. 
 A bigger guy like sankey at taking biggies reps eating blocks and allowing biggie to rove, and scrape to the ball would be fantastic. We’ve seen a lot this year and last when kyrie has been hurt that the 2nd backer makes bad decisions and takes bad angles. Biggie is better at scraping. 
 

I wouldn’t want to give sankey crazy money though. He isn’t a play maker like JSK or a versatile guy like kyrie. He’s a limited use between the tackles guy. 

Posted (edited)

Wilson at SAM would be a gift from Hall to opposing OCs. He's a great/maybe the best WIL in the game. Don't move him from there. 

I believe Wilson can cover....but if the idea to is to bring Sankey in and move Biggy to WIL....people are suggesting Sankey is better than one of those two....and he's not. 

Sankey can stay out of WPG. Overhyped, likely over priced and completely useless in our D.

Edited by Bigblue204
Posted
15 hours ago, Bigblue204 said:

Wilson at SAM would be a gift from Hall to opposing OCs. He's a great/maybe the best WIL in the game. Don't move him from there. 

I believe Wilson can cover....but if the idea to is to bring Sankey in and move Biggy to WIL....people are suggesting Sankey is better than one of those two....and he's not. 

Sankey can stay out of WPG. Overhyped, likely over priced and completely useless in our D.

I agree. I think Sankey is the most over rated MLB in the past several years. Great tackler but has areas of great weakness that no one wants to talk about.

Posted
10 minutes ago, Noeller said:

 

 

I would dearly love to see the logic behind thinking it will improve offense.... having that goal post as a way to pick a db is probably a bigger factor in touchdowns than anything. 

In short, **** gappers are dumb.

Like seriously add 20 yards to every field goal try? So we don't see field goals from anything past the 30 yard line? What a God damned stupid idea. 

You know what hampers offense in the cfl? **** quarterbacks. 

Posted (edited)

Thinking this through, every FG would be over 20 yards and, likely, over 30. If you're at 15 yard line, why not try to get a first down? If you turn it over, at least it's super deep and around 70-80 yards away from the opposite FG zone. 

You would have dead zone between the 25 yards lines. That's a lot of area. 

It would be a punt fest! Call your Globals!

Edited by JCon
Posted
2 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Anyone who wants to remove kicking from the sport of football should just stick to watching hockey.

I’d rather see more gambles on 3rd down from mid field and deeper, and for 2 point converts. That’s just good football to watch. 
 

2 hours ago, Noeller said:

 

 

DT is 100% right. Especially with the quality of punting we have in the league right now. 
 

Maybe incentivizing long fgs while punishing shorter ones would work. Though I don’t think people want to see 4pt fgs. Make a fg 55 or longer and you keep the ball scrimmaging from your 10, even that seems really off the wall. 
 Make all field goals from inside the 35 be kicked from the 35? Also strange. 
I don’t know that any major changes are a good move for the cfl. 

Posted
24 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

I’d rather see more gambles on 3rd down from mid field and deeper, and for 2 point converts. That’s just good football to watch. 
 

DT is 100% right. Especially with the quality of punting we have in the league right now. 
 

Maybe incentivizing long fgs while punishing shorter ones would work. Though I don’t think people want to see 4pt fgs. Make a fg 55 or longer and you keep the ball scrimmaging from your 10, even that seems really off the wall. 
 Make all field goals from inside the 35 be kicked from the 35? Also strange. 
I don’t know that any major changes are a good move for the cfl. 

If there's anything the CFL needs, it's more unnecessarily complex rules!! Barely have any as it is.

Posted

as I was also saying earlier....I don't...and fans shouldn't put too much weight into the PFF ratings and see it as gospel....and has to be true......it's nowhere near where a player would rank based on how steams and their staff grade things after a game....in my opinion its a joke TBH

Posted

PFF grades have always been a farce.

They don't know the play or the assignment .. they only dole out grades based on what they *think* the play is or what they *think* the outcome should have been.   Yet I'm sure both the CFL, media and fans are going to put far more stock into these things than what they merit.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Booch said:

as I was also saying earlier....I don't...and fans shouldn't put too much weight into the PFF ratings and see it as gospel....and has to be true......it's nowhere near where a player would rank based on how steams and their staff grade things after a game....in my opinion its a joke TBH

TBH - Evans played really well in those two games.

The knock on Evans was never that he couldn't perform at a high level... it's that when a defense manages to frustrate him he goes from being top-tier to being absolute garbage.

When he's in the groove Evans is one of the best QB's in the league IMO

Posted
10 minutes ago, Booch said:

as I was also saying earlier....I don't...and fans shouldn't put too much weight into the PFF ratings and see it as gospel....and has to be true......it's nowhere near where a player would rank based on how steams and their staff grade things after a game....in my opinion its a joke TBH

Which QB is going to show up tonight? Dane Evans or Dave Evans? 😆 Is this the new Hank vs Frank Burris debate?

Posted
1 minute ago, BomberfanMKS said:

TBH - Evans played really well in those two games.

The knock on Evans was never that he couldn't perform at a high level... it's that when a defense manages to frustrate him he goes from being top-tier to being absolute garbage.

When he's in the groove Evans is one of the best QB's in the league IMO

I Dont Know Michael Fassbender GIF

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
×
×
  • Create New...