2023/2024 Blue Bombers Off-Season Thread (BRADY’S BACK! DALTON’S BACK!)

[GCn20]

7 hours ago, Mike said:

Sure, I’ll put together a mock when it makes sense. Since I know I’m who you’re asking about.

Remember the mock drafts I shot down last year? And how I told you it was a bad draft year? I do. But in case you don’t …

https://3downnation.com/2023/03/09/john-hodges-2023-cfl-mock-draft-1-0/

First overall pick went 16, nailed it. Our first pick at 8 went 20th, nailed it. 10 and 11 (as OL, nonetheless) went 48th and 57th and their situations didn’t change at all. I’m not criticizing his mock draft because he’s a bit off. I criticize it because it’s never even close, because he has no clue.

I like reading Dunk's mock, but Hodges has been completely out to lunch every year he has made one. Like really bad. I'm not going to pretend I could put one together that is better because I really don't know any of these guys but I will at least have the courtesy to not do so knowing that. Hodge may want to do the same.

[JCon]

8 hours ago, Mike said:

Sure, I’ll put together a mock when it makes sense. Since I know I’m who you’re asking about.

Remember the mock drafts I shot down last year? And how I told you it was a bad draft year? I do. But in case you don’t …

https://3downnation.com/2023/03/09/john-hodges-2023-cfl-mock-draft-1-0/

First overall pick went 16, nailed it. Our first pick at 8 went 20th, nailed it. 10 and 11 (as OL, nonetheless) went 48th and 57th and their situations didn’t change at all. I’m not criticizing his mock draft because he’s a bit off. I criticize it because it’s never even close, because he has no clue.

Receipts!

[wbbfan]

14 hours ago, Goalie said:

That ol run should really start with sask. 

 

12 hours ago, Goalie said:

I’ll start 

 

with the 1st overall pick the elks select LB Joel Dublanko. Why? Because he’s a projected 1st game starter and Esks need players who can play now not just in 2 years. 

I’m not sure about Ottawa. Maybe they go ol. I think gio goes to ssk though. He should any way. I’d love to get that guy here. Even if he gets a udfa deal. 

[bigg jay]

12 hours ago, Goalie said:

I’ll start 

 

with the 1st overall pick the elks select LB Joel Dublanko. Why? Because he’s a projected 1st game starter and Esks need players who can play now not just in 2 years. 

The L's went LB with the 2nd overall pick last year (Michael Brodrique) and he played all 18 games for them last year.  If they feel he's ready to step up this year, they may not need Dublanko.  It's also Chris Jones so logic doesn't always apply and it's anybody's guess what he'll do.

[GCn20]

19 hours ago, M.Silverback said:

Not sure I get the vitriol towards 3downnation and John Hodge. We all love the CFL. TSN and Sportsnet barely cover any off season news. Even in season, while broadcasting games, TSN is pretty light on content other than game summary articles. 3downnation has been around since 2015 and overall does a better job than anywhere else with CFL news. cfl.ca is good, and Ed Tait writes some really interesting content on bluebombers.com. But 3downnation is really my first stop to get any CFL content that I'm interested in - signings, draft profiles, USports stuff, CFL players in the NFL ... I like what they do. And I am in no way affiliated or compensated by the 3downnation corporation 😃

Nobody has hate towards 3DN, but if you are going to add opinion to your site make it informed opinion. I think their news reporting for the CFL is very good. Their opinion pieces are terrible. If 3DN is reading this, WE are your viewership. It's not so much vitriol or hate towards them it's readership simply giving it's opinion. They disabled their comment section so when feedback happens anywhere 3DN should appreciate it. 

[M.Silverback]

10 hours ago, Mike said:

Sure, I’ll put together a mock when it makes sense. Since I know I’m who you’re asking about.

Remember the mock drafts I shot down last year? And how I told you it was a bad draft year? I do. But in case you don’t …

https://3downnation.com/2023/03/09/john-hodges-2023-cfl-mock-draft-1-0/

First overall pick went 16, nailed it. Our first pick at 8 went 20th, nailed it. 10 and 11 (as OL, nonetheless) went 48th and 57th and their situations didn’t change at all. I’m not criticizing his mock draft because he’s a bit off. I criticize it because it’s never even close, because he has no clue.

I'm going to sound like I'm a John Hodge burner account on this forum (I'm not), but the CFL draft is by far the toughest to predict in terms of order, who gets picked. So many factors, but the biggest being the best players aren't ever picked high because of NFL interest. So, you're guessing on how GM's will choose the best "available" player, and then factoring in positions that actually matter in the CFL for ratio. This isn't the NFL, NBA, NHL where a casual fan can probably get 50% accuracy on the first round. I like CFL mock drafts (3downnation and cfl.ca) just to get to know potential players. I know RSEQ players pretty well because I watch every game for one school, but clueless as to anyone else. So if your criteria is you only like mock drafts for their accurate selection order predictions , no debate on CFL draft predictions.

Edited March 14 by M.Silverback

[bigg jay]

24 minutes ago, M.Silverback said:

I'm going to sound like I'm a John Hodge burner account on this forum (I'm not), but the CFL draft is by far the toughest to predict in terms of order, who gets picked. So many factors, but the biggest being the best players aren't ever picked high because of NFL interest. So, you're guessing on how GM's will choose the best "available" player, and then factoring in positions that actually matter in the CFL for ratio. This isn't the NFL, NBA, NHL where a casual fan can probably get 50% accuracy on the first round. I like CFL mock drafts (3downnation and cfl.ca) just to get to know potential players. I know RSEQ players pretty well because I watch every game for one school, but clueless as to anyone else. So if your criteria is you only like mock drafts for their accurate selection order predictions , no debate on CFL draft predictions.

For me it's not so much the accuracy but the logic behind the picks. 

For example, you can't convince me that the Bombers will go with 2 FB's in their 1st 3 picks of a fairly deep draft because of a "glaring need" at that position (according to Hodge).  That's where he (and their site in general) falls way short.  When you look at how the Bombers use a FB, what makes that a glaring need?  Mike Miller, over the course of 4 seasons with us had 8 catches (10 targets), and 3 carries.   Is that the kind of production you'd want to use a higher draft pick to replace?  I get there's more to the FB role than the odd carry or catch but that's easily replaceable without using draft capitol.

[GCn20]

43 minutes ago, bigg jay said:

For me it's not so much the accuracy but the logic behind the picks. 

For example, you can't convince me that the Bombers will go with 2 FB's in their 1st 3 picks of a fairly deep draft because of a "glaring need" at that position (according to Hodge).  That's where he (and their site in general) falls way short.  When you look at how the Bombers use a FB, what makes that a glaring need?  Mike Miller, over the course of 4 seasons with us had 8 catches (10 targets), and 3 carries.   Is that the kind of production you'd want to use a higher draft pick to replace?  I get there's more to the FB role than the odd carry or catch but that's easily replaceable without using draft capitol.

The ONLY thing we require out of a FB is to be able to come into the game once a drive or so and be a blocker. Our FBs don't get touches, nor should they more than just a few times a season. We could convert literally half a dozen guys to that position right now, why on earth would we draft in the first parts of the draft doing that. Even if I could get past the obvious that FB is not a priority, say somehow the Bombers felt the need to add a FB....they wouldn't draft 2 of them in the first 3 rounds. That, all by itself, defies all logic.

1 hour ago, M.Silverback said:

I'm going to sound like I'm a John Hodge burner account on this forum (I'm not), but the CFL draft is by far the toughest to predict in terms of order, who gets picked. So many factors, but the biggest being the best players aren't ever picked high because of NFL interest. So, you're guessing on how GM's will choose the best "available" player, and then factoring in positions that actually matter in the CFL for ratio. This isn't the NFL, NBA, NHL where a casual fan can probably get 50% accuracy on the first round. I like CFL mock drafts (3downnation and cfl.ca) just to get to know potential players. I know RSEQ players pretty well because I watch every game for one school, but clueless as to anyone else. So if your criteria is you only like mock drafts for their accurate selection order predictions , no debate on CFL draft predictions.

Some mocks are closer to the mark than others. Hodges aren't even in the realm of reality normally nor does his reasoning for making those picks make a lick of sense. Their are degrees of being wrong and no one is going to get more than a few picks right. However, Hodge's picks are so grossly incorrect that it borders on bizarre sometimes.

Edited March 14 by GCn20

[camper_2]

12 hours ago, Mike said:

Sure, I’ll put together a mock when it makes sense. Since I know I’m who you’re asking about.

Remember the mock drafts I shot down last year? And how I told you it was a bad draft year? I do. But in case you don’t …

https://3downnation.com/2023/03/09/john-hodges-2023-cfl-mock-draft-1-0/

First overall pick went 16, nailed it. Our first pick at 8 went 20th, nailed it. 10 and 11 (as OL, nonetheless) went 48th and 57th and their situations didn’t change at all. I’m not criticizing his mock draft because he’s a bit off. I criticize it because it’s never even close, because he has no clue.

Again, your only looking at your point of view, which you should and can. But, from my point I look at the prospects listed, not where they will fall in draft order, but who they are and how they would be of value to the Bombers position wise, player wise or a "fit".  As I mentioned yesterday, over the past years I do start looking at prospects in Nov including time leading up to the draft (who are they, what are their strengths or weakness, their numbers, etc).

There is no one, who is going to get it bang on, from #1 to #72 and I'm not looking for that either. As far as your comments which I read, I will pat you on the back, well done!!

As far as yesterday's mock, I don't agree with some of Hodge's suggestions for the Bombers and leave it at that. And if you ask the question, do I have a mock for the Bombers, I say, yes (starting with position need and then player choices for those needs). But very much different to what you saw yesterday on 3 Down.

In closing, I do see value in what Hodge's and others provide in their mocks, it means something to me. To you perhaps not so much, besides those that side with you. I also believe there are others, besides me who like these mocks. Maybe there is a split here, right down the middle. 

[GCn20]

17 minutes ago, camper_2 said:

Again, your only looking at your point of view, which you should and can. But, from my point I look at the prospects listed, not where they will fall in draft order, but who they are and how they would be of value to the Bombers position wise, player wise or a "fit".  As I mentioned yesterday, over the past years I do start looking at prospects in Nov including time leading up to the draft (who are they, what are their strengths or weakness, their numbers, etc).

There is no one, who is going to get it bang on, from #1 to #72 and I'm not looking for that either. As far as your comments which I read, I will pat you on the back, well done!!

As far as yesterday's mock, I don't agree with some of Hodge's suggestions for the Bombers and leave it at that. And if you ask the question, do I have a mock for the Bombers, I say, yes (starting with position need and then player choices for those needs). But very much different to what you saw yesterday on 3 Down.

In closing, I do see value in what Hodge's and others provide in their mocks, it means something to me. To you perhaps not so much, besides those that side with you. I also believe there are others, besides me who like these mocks. Maybe there is a split here, right down the middle. 

I like many, many people's mock drafts. Dunk, Ferguson, Forde all give some really good mocks when they do them. What I don't want in a mock is poorly reasoned picks such as what Hodge is known for and therefore I, personally, don't see a lot of value in them. We have published lists of the top prospects, they are available to all in abundance. Now tell me a well reasoned argument for where they may end up and I won't hold it against any mock drafter when they get it wrong. Throw darts at names and back it up with very poorly thought out logic and you've wasted my time. I would suggest that is how most people who follow mock drafts feel.

Edited March 14 by GCn20

[Noeller]

regarding "there's no info anywhere about the combine!"........ there's stuff out there if you look. This just popped up in my feed...
 

 

[blue85gold]

Or basically anything on the main page here: https://www.cfl.ca/

[Noeller]

 

[JohnnyAbonny]

For our league, I prefer the “5-10 players to look at” type of articles to mock drafts most of the time. 
 

I’d only read mocks from media like Dunk, or the CFP guys who actually follow USports. 

[SpeedFlex27]

21 hours ago, Goalie said:

I don’t really know who those guys are either but let’s not pretend like putting together a mock draft is rocket science here. MBB should do one cuz we all have the google machine and can look these ppl up. The issue with these mocks is atleast make it make sense. Why didn’t sask go ol in rd 1? Why did Edmonton go receiver If Dublanko is perceived as being a year 1 starting LB. Why is Winnipeg wasting a 2nd pick on a FB when he’s prob available in round 5. 

I'd like to see Jim Barker do a mock draft. At least he knows the players & could probably do a very good job but it's TSN so it'll never happen. Instead we have Hodge.

[rebusrankin]

I didn't see the rationale in Hodge having us take 1 let alone 2 full backs. I also thought based on his mock, why take a fb when you could take Theo Benedet instead since we essentially have a bonus 2nd rounder.

[wbbfan]

1 hour ago, JohnnyAbonny said:

For our league, I prefer the “5-10 players to look at” type of articles to mock drafts most of the time. 
 

I’d only read mocks from media like Dunk, or the CFP guys who actually follow USports. 

Agreed. Also the top players by position and dark horses / sleepers post. 
 

1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I'd like to see Jim Barker do a mock draft. At least he knows the players & could probably do a very good job but it's TSN so it'll never happen. Instead we have Hodge.

I think it’d be fun to have a bunch of media types do their own mock draft. Say barker picks for Toronto, farhan for bc etc. wouldnt be much out side of entertainment but I think it would be fun for 3ish rounds. 

[Pepper_Brooks]

John Hodge has an intellect as sharp as mashed potatoes, the wit of a damp sponge, and the charm of a startled hedgehog

I appreciate 3DN for its insights into the CFL within an increasingly limited media landscape, but John's contributions lack the polish and professional tone of a legitimate sports journalist. His writing makes my own overly verbose internet forum musings look like Tolstoy.

[Pete]

10 minutes ago, Pepper_Brooks said:

John Hodge has an intellect as sharp as mashed potatoes, the wit of a damp sponge, and the charm of a startled hedgehog

I appreciate 3DN for its insights into the CFL within an increasingly limited media landscape, but John's contributions lack the polish and professional tone of a legitimate sports journalist. His writing makes my own overly verbose internet forum musings look like Tolstoy.

At least Hodge seems to put the work in, he seems to be on top of a lot of Bomber related news, I don't always agree with his takes, and this mock draft is an example but the negative view is out of line

Although when he collaborates with Abbot its not pretty

Edited March 15 by Pete

[SpeedFlex27]

19 hours ago, wbbfan said:

Agreed. Also the top players by position and dark horses / sleepers post. 
 

I think it’d be fun to have a bunch of media types do their own mock draft. Say barker picks for Toronto, farhan for bc etc. wouldnt be much out side of entertainment but I think it would be fun for 3ish rounds. 

Yeah, Michael Ball doing the Riders. Shits & giggles. Lol. The Little Gnome got fired. Ha, ha. 

[Noeller]

 

[camper_2]

20 hours ago, Pete said:

At least Hodge seems to put the work in, he seems to be on top of a lot of Bomber related news, I don't always agree with his takes, and this mock draft is an example but the negative view is out of line

Although when he collaborates with Abbot its not pretty

Totally agree with you Pete...

I limit my visits and comments on this site as there are a few in here who wish to control the board with their views, roll their eyes at others and feel their feedback only matters. What collection of individuals. 

[SpeedFlex27]

14 minutes ago, camper_2 said:

Totally agree with you Pete...

I limit my visits and comments on this site as there are a few in here who wish to control the board with their views, roll their eyes at others and feel their feedback only matters. What collection of individuals. 

And yet... Here you are. Gracing us with your presence, Your Lordship. 

 

[Pepper_Brooks]

8 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

And yet... Here you are. Gracing us with your presence, Your Lordship. 

 

[camper_2]

40 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

And yet... Here you are. Gracing us with your presence, Your Lordship. 

 

Must of hit a nerve, insults & name calling. It is what it is!!!!