GCn20 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Just now, Booch said: for better part of 3 yrs now? Yea....we know damn well that Hardrick was playing on half a leg last season, Neufeld as well. Also, last year just like last year we would have been ripe for the plucking off the PR if we didn't protect guys. 1 minute ago, Booch said: pretty sure we the only team that does this....i sure 1 out of 9 HC's isnt the lone genius....i would lean to thinking that he the lone....u fill in the blank so looking at that tripe...basically the insertion of Biggie was the exile of Woods...correct? Not sure how you come to that conclusion? Biggie was one roster transaction, Woods another. If they wanted to dress Woods and Biggie they could have done so.
Mike Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 2 minutes ago, GCn20 said: Not sure how you come to that conclusion? Biggie was one roster transaction, Woods another. If they wanted to dress Woods and Biggie they could have done so. How could you literally come to any other conclusion lol
Booch Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 2 minutes ago, GCn20 said: Yea....we know damn well that Hardrick was playing on half a leg last season, Neufeld as well. Also, last year just like last year we would have been ripe for the plucking off the PR if we didn't protect guys. Not sure how you come to that conclusion? Biggie was one roster transaction, Woods another. If they wanted to dress Woods and Biggie they could have done so. was an import for import swap....100 percent....no other import was added....no other was removed.... Just now, Mike said: How could you literally come to any other conclusion lol there is now way to conclude otherwise....jeepers JohnnyAbonny 1
17to85 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 2 minutes ago, GCn20 said: Also, last year just like last year we would have been ripe for the plucking off the PR if we didn't protect guys. And yet we just dumped gray like yesterday's news in the offseason... so what were they protecting last season? wbbfan and BigBlueFanatic 2
Mike Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Just now, 17to85 said: And yet we just dumped gray like yesterday's news in the offseason... so what were they protecting last season? an ego Stickem and wbbfan 2
Booch Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Just now, 17to85 said: And yet we just dumped gray like yesterday's news in the offseason... so what were they protecting last season? and guys rarely get plucked....plus also have to agree and want to leave....its not just a we take him and thats that..for most part teams are also pretty respectful of the PR...thats just a defend Osh and his poor traits response 1 minute ago, Mike said: an ego a soapbox wbbfan 1
GCn20 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 (edited) 54 minutes ago, Mike said: How could you literally come to any other conclusion lol Because I have built rosters before I guess. If they wanted both on they would have both on. It isn't hard to do. Biggie coming on was only part of the equation on Woods. The other part of the equation is that they decided to keep all the IMPs on the roster before him as well. One guy coming on, equates to one guy going off, who that turns out to be is the guy on the roster deemed most expendable. Didn't have to be Woods, but it was. Edited June 12 by GCn20
17to85 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Just now, GCn20 said: Because I have built rosters before I guess. If they wanted both on they would have both on. It isn't hard to do. Ok.... but as is it's a direct exchange. Bighill comes on an important has to come off... and this is it. No other interpretation possible.
GCn20 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 (edited) 3 minutes ago, 17to85 said: Ok.... but as is it's a direct exchange. Bighill comes on an important has to come off... and this is it. No other interpretation possible. Yes, but who that import is has nothing to do with Bighill. It is therefore not a direct exchange really. It is one guy coming on, one guy going off and the coaches picking one of 25 imports to sit. I guess I'm splitting hairs but Bighill on does not automatically equate to Woods sitting. That was a coaching decision based on roster need/want throughout the lineup. I am sure the coaches discussed a few guys potentially coming off before landing on Woods. By that reasoning you could say Player X staying on is why Woods is off, or Player Z. Edited June 12 by GCn20
Booch Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 1 minute ago, GCn20 said: Yes, but who that import is has nothing to do with Bighill. It is therefore not a direct exchange really. It is one guy coming on, one guy going off and the coaches picking one of 25 imports to sit. its one for one...plain and simple....could have took off the extra DB who may not even see a rep...the extra linebacker who also...may only see ST reps....or Woods..who would have seen a ton....impactful ones at that...and was part of the strongest part of our team last game....so it was a poor decision ....but typical
GCn20 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Booch said: and guys rarely get plucked....plus also have to agree and want to leave....its not just a we take him and thats that..for most part teams are also pretty respectful of the PR...thats just a defend Osh and his poor traits response a soapbox Sorry, tried to get on a soapbox but I was told you and Mike have it rented out until at least Friday. 2 minutes ago, Booch said: its one for one...plain and simple....could have took off the extra DB who may not even see a rep...the extra linebacker who also...may only see ST reps....or Woods..who would have seen a ton....impactful ones at that...and was part of the strongest part of our team last game....so it was a poor decision ....but typical Not arguing the roster build, just the statement that Bighill on = Woods off. Not true. All the IMPS on the DC being on is why Woods is off. Semantics, I know, but my argument actually backs up your point. Edited June 12 by GCn20
Mike Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 1 minute ago, GCn20 said: Sorry, tried to get on a soapbox but I was told you and Mike have it rented out until at least Friday. Look around
GCn20 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 1 minute ago, Mike said: Look around Why did you leave one kicking around somewhere?
Mike Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 2 minutes ago, GCn20 said: Why did you leave one kicking around somewhere? No, what I meant was look around - this isn’t a “Booch and I” thing anymore. JohnnyAbonny 1
Booch Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Just now, Mike said: No, what I meant was look around - this isn’t a “Booch and I” thing anymore. Finally...took some long enough tho.. Piggy 1 and rebusrankin 2
Super Duper Negatron Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 3 minutes ago, Booch said: Finally...took some long enough tho.. I mean... voodoochylde 1
wbbfan Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 The whole roster management thing goes soo far back. And is hand in hand with acceptable mediocrity from mos guys. Weve seen more rando fringe players up jumped to starting for part or all of a season only to instantly disappear when we finally move on. Thomas discussion was heavy early in 2021 when we would slaughter opposing offences, but then randomly give up huge runs and ypc but teams couldn’t hang long enough to keep running. Then stove came back from injury and the only soft spot in the D disappeared. We went through countless imp wrs, some of whom left very bitter because they didn’t get a chance despite the level of play we endured. Every year for as long as I can remember we’ve started out with entrenched dbs who can’t hang. Ever since jsk left we haven’t given new lbers a real chance to shine and our usage has gotten worse and worse. We’ve DI’d guys only to not use them at all more times than I can count too. The thing that changed is for a couple years our over all talent in comparison to the league was soo much higher especially on the line that we could over come it. And now we can’t. bearpants, rebusrankin and BigBlueFanatic 1 2
Fatty Liver Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 4 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said: I think they'll be in 30 fronts a lot. They were last week. Major disappointment is the lack of edge guys. We will likely have very little in the way of pass rush which makes the entire defense weaker. Waiting for Garbutt to come back, no one else left in the hopper. BigBlueFanatic, wbbfan and Stickem 3
captaincanuck12 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 Perhaps we should wait another game before we start the griping of the roster management. The "poor" roster management won us 14 games last year, including major blowouts against BC and Sask in the Banjo Bowl. Yes there is regression. Losing Olivera and Lawler sucks, but injuries happen. It's a little early to be pushing the panic button. Just my .02 bb1, Noeller and Colin Unger 3
Colin Unger Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 I'm not saying that the team has been perfect. I've got gripes about who was dressed that shouldn't have been in the Grey Cup as well. However, there's no gaurentee that we would have won had we dressed Rose and whomever on offence its our anger for O'Shea making the wrong decision that leads us to think a win would have been gaurenteed with Rose on the roster. He could have got lit up just as much as anyone else. Maybe more. Who knows. I was reponding to several different messages. One of which suggested our veterans were going to be costing us more games than our young players this season and I was responding in disagreement to that. TBH on this subject I think its you guys who are ranting not me. Day in day out its the same sky is falling stuff we used to have on these boards back when the team was legitmately bad for decades. I thought that some of that stuff would heal with 2 Grey Cup wins and 4 Grey Cup appearances in 4 years. My main issue is that people are not comparing this organization to something realistic. Like another franchise or somethjing. You're comparison is to perfection. I think they've done a pretty good job over the coarse of time of replacing players and having succession plans. They've had to replace more outgoing players then anyone else for the last 5 seasons. At least half the roster has changed since the 107th Grey Cup. Did they have replacements for Andrew Harris, Couture, Chung, Goosen, Gray, D Adams, Sayles, Salyes, Alford, Nevis, Medlock (Yes Leggio failed but he was a reasonable succession plan), Maston, Richardson, N Taylor... How often does any CFL team in the salary cap era come back to the Grey Cup 4 strait years? I'm not suggesting that team management is above critcism. Not all their moves have been correct. I'm just laying out the reasons why I'm not "yet" worried. I think we can remain competive while doing a mini-rebuild this year and next. Atomic and bb1 2
JohnnyAbonny Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 1 hour ago, Mike said: No, what I meant was look around - this isn’t a “Booch and I” thing anymore. It hasn’t been since they puked all over the place in the 22 GC
Noeller Posted June 12 Author Report Posted June 12 Nah, at least 75% of this board believes, at least to some degree, that the roster use has not been good and that it's literally costing us games, and arguably the past two GCs. You don't have to fully ***** and moan about it, but almost everyone understands this to a degree... BigBlueFanatic, TBURGESS, bigg jay and 3 others 1 5
Super Duper Negatron Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 11 minutes ago, Colin Unger said: My main issue is that people are not comparing this organization to something realistic. There have been literal comparisons to the Argos
Booch Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 20 minutes ago, captaincanuck12 said: Perhaps we should wait another game before we start the griping of the roster management. The "poor" roster management won us 14 games last year, including major blowouts against BC and Sask in the Banjo Bowl. Yes there is regression. Losing Olivera and Lawler sucks, but injuries happen. It's a little early to be pushing the panic button. Just my .02 that being said...also cost us 2 cups....and it's continuing...even if only 1 game.....it's still an issue wbbfan 1
17to85 Posted June 12 Report Posted June 12 1 hour ago, GCn20 said: Bighill on = Woods off. Not true. How is it not true? That's exactly what happened. No one is arguing that it was the only choice, just that it is what happened. Booch and wbbfan 2
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now