TBURGESS Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Take the best player available. If it's Demski, take him. If it's an Oline, take him. This having to take this guy or this position crap is part of the reason we are what we are right now Its not like we have a bunch of all star canadians anywhere on the roster. Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years. and a bunch taken in the later rounds like every team does, what's your damn point? The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players.
17to85 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Meanwhile In Calgary... Jones, Craighead, Lavertu & Bergman. It's not where you draft, it's who you draft. and how you develop them. iso_55 1
Tracker Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I'd take Demski for sure, But I'm not convinced he's still there when we pick, I think it's likely he goes 1st overall to Ottawa. Gotta agree with this- Ottawa's bigger problem was not the O-line, but receivers, and NI receivers at that, so it would make sense for Ottawa to take Demski. But Desjardins has defied logic before.
Mr. Perfect Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Take the best player available. If it's Demski, take him. If it's an Oline, take him. This having to take this guy or this position crap is part of the reason we are what we are right now Its not like we have a bunch of all star canadians anywhere on the roster. Obviously, you haven't been following the Bombers drafts. We used 1 high draft pick on Pencer (Stupid pick) and 1 on Goosen (TBD) in the last 6 years. and a bunch taken in the later rounds like every team does, what's your damn point? The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players. Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Blue-urns 1
SPuDS Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Im in agreement of build the lines first and foremost.. Unless there is an absolute stud at a "non-traditional" roles... I simply don't know enough about Demski but i do think we can grab him and a very good prospect at 11 and later..Isn't that a little young to be drafted? Wah Wah Wah waaaaaaah.... Bah-dum *Ching!*
GCn20 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I don't mind the idea of us ignoring a chronic positional need in the draft IF Walters goes ball to the wall in FA for OL. Don't care what avenue we use to improve our OL. It must be done though. Demski would be a very nice pick but I think once it all shakes out he will end up going number one.
Mike Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Demski slowly venturing into overrated territory around here. Mr. Perfect and Noeller 2
JohnnyOnTheSpot Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Throwing a curve ball here but I can see someone offering a sweet deal to move up for Demski. Maybe we end up with two early picks in a good draft? What would a fair price be that benefits the Bombers?
M.O.A.B. Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 I'm with the Demski for the 2nd overall camp. Pick OLs on the 11th and the 20th. If the Bombers really need to shore up the OL for next year's campaign, we need a vet or 2, who can play right away.
pigseye Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 You can't blame the process for the selections that were made. A bad pick is just that. Mr Dee 1
sweep the leg Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Demski slowly venturing into overrated territory around here. My argument isn't just about Demski b/c I don't know if he's the second best player in the draft or not. My point is that if he is the second best player in the draft we should take him second overall.
James Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Demski slowly venturing into overrated territory around here. Same with Goodrich It's Because they're from Winnipeg
Mike Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Demski slowly venturing into overrated territory around here. Same with Goodrich It's Because they're from Winnipeg They're both very good. But realistically, this talk of Demski going #1 is premature. At least until the combine.
TBURGESS Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players. Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players.
iso_55 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Seems to me drafting a starting OL means he is one of the best players available.
Blueandgold Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Demski isn't any better than Coombs. I'd prefer not to take a guy just because he's from Winnipeg, but if there aren't any O-linemen worthy of being picked number two I'd be okay with taking him.
Jpan85 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Groulx is a guy I would like to see over Demski big strong and the most important thing mean. Can play tackle. NFL threat may be too high though.
mbrg Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 If/when we get to the point where we have 7 good NI starters, then we can afford to take the best player. Until then put me on the best O lineman, not best player side. Folks around here want the Bombers to pick Demski, who they consider the best player. They don't seem to understand that good teams a built from the lines out. We've had a bunch of GM's who followed the best player, in their minds, strategy and it's only worked once with Muamba. Meanwhile, we've had a poor O line for years. Your post makes no sense. How do you get 7 good NI starters if you don't take the best player available (with consideration to availability around the NFL factored in)? Having a bunch of OL who might be ready to play in 2-3 years (right when they become free agents) won't help us. Gotta draft and develop those mid-round guys into being players. How many 1st round picks on Calgary's OL or Saskatchewan's? We desperately need players who can play now regardless of position. That is how the good teams approach the draft. It makes complete sense. Apparently the idea revolves around having 7 NIs start on the Oline...
TBURGESS Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 The idea is to fix the O line first, because everything on offense starts at the O line.
Atomic Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 If we want to fix the OL for next season, it won't be through the draft. That's the reality. That's why I say you take the best player available, regardless of position. If we get a Canadian starter at a different position, that could allow us to start an additional American OL and if we recruit properly that could go further towards giving us a better overall OL than any first-year Canadian OL would. mikey d, Jacquie, 17to85 and 4 others 7
Mr. Perfect Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players. Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly?
Jpan85 Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 Last draft was pretty good. Got three guys out of 5 that made the roster. Derek Jones could push for a starters spot next year. Briggs should be a decent SP teamer. With Everett coming into to camp after a great season at Mount Allison. Along with LH as a rookie free agent was a good year. Tracker 1
TBURGESS Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 The damn point is we haven't been drafting by position. We've been drafting the best available players. Pencer, Etienne...yep, we've been drafting the best available players for a long time around these parts.... Sadly, those are the guys Mack thought were the best available players. So you're being critical of Walters based on one draft then? Because if that's the case your argument is pretty weak, as usual, nevermind that it's incorrect since we drafted an o-lineman with our first pick in this past draft. What's your angle for your argument exactly? Critical of Walters? WTF? How the heck did you get that from what I've typed? Walters didn't go with the best available player or even the best available O lineman. He went with the best available center who was ranked 9th because that's our greatest need. I completely agree with Walters decision. Walters also said he'd draft an O lineman high and another one late in the draft. I agree with that too. Tracker 1
mbrg Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 The idea is to fix the O line first, because everything on offense starts at the O line. Seems like last year the same thing was said about the quarterback. We need to draft Olinemen and we need better play from our Oline, but it's myopic to continue to insist in mid-November that 23 weeks from now we have to use the #2 overall pick on an Olineman, regardless of all information or decisions that happen between now and then, or this organization has failed. Stop dealing in absolutes. sweep the leg 1
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