kelownabomberfan Posted May 8, 2015 Report Posted May 8, 2015 Is there any sense that Buono would want to trade him? Nope. Wally's not going to do that, unless he's starting to go senile.
JuranBoldenRules Posted May 8, 2015 Report Posted May 8, 2015 Adding a Canadian end who presumably can play 35-40 snaps a game is big. Thomas should be able to handle the rest on the interior. Still need Canadian depth on D. I'm not a fan of the assumption that this signing means the Bombers have solidified 3 NI spots on D. We're still one injury at LB or DL from a ratio nightmare. Don't think this signing impacts who the Bombers will draft. I wouldn't call it a nightmare, that's a little extreme don't you think? Needing two of Thomas, Briggs or Sherman on the field at all times would not be good. Who knows if Newman will be anywhere close to where he was pre-injury? Briggs has big potential, and I see him as kind of a hedge on Hurl, but the other two can't handle more than a couple dozen snaps a game in the right situations. I think we might end up starting 8 Canadians for some in-game flexibility, assuming everyone is healthy. The sooner we get Louie Richardson off the roster the better too. This move probably guarantees it, we've got a good teams guy in Ivan Brown signed too who probably takes Richardson's spot directly, plus draft picks and Newman. Potentially problematic, but we also possibly have the ability of starting up to 5 Nationals on offense, so depending on who's injured, we wouldn't have to even consider this as an option. I also think you'll be surprised of how Newman could get involved in more than just ST. I do agree though that starting 8 is a good idea if we can pull it off. Just can't assume he'll be anywhere near the same player due to the injury. He'll never regain 100% mobility.
James Posted May 9, 2015 Report Posted May 9, 2015 might lean a bit towards waud at 2 now, solidify DL as our 7th What about Max Forde @ 11 or 15? I doubt he gets a serious look in the NFL and he would be good depth IMO. I still hope we use number 2 on Demski, or a top end OL.
Tracker Posted May 9, 2015 Report Posted May 9, 2015 Starting to feel like we're the poor cousins who get all the handmedowns.
Mark F Posted May 9, 2015 Report Posted May 9, 2015 Hurl, Bucknor, Westerman, Greaves, Picard, Neufeld/Goossen, Kohlert (JFG is another option) Demski?
Fatty Liver Posted May 9, 2015 Report Posted May 9, 2015 Hurl, Bucknor, Westerman, Greaves, Picard, Neufeld/Goossen, Kohlert (JFG is another option) Demski? Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble, Grubb. Mark F 1
Goalie Posted May 9, 2015 Report Posted May 9, 2015 Waud will be the guy that falls and the bombers wont go OL at 2 or 11, They will at 15 tho.
GCn20 Posted May 10, 2015 Report Posted May 10, 2015 Ok....who needs OL anyway. Let's not get any and repeat the cycle of draft failure that we have been swimming in since the mid 90s.
JuranBoldenRules Posted May 10, 2015 Report Posted May 10, 2015 Ok....who needs OL anyway. Let's not get any and repeat the cycle of draft failure that we have been swimming in since the mid 90s. Who cares about position? Draft the best player available. You need to start 7 Canadians, not 7 Canadian offensive linemen. Drafting by position out of desperation does not work. Clearly try to bring in players at every spot, but in terms of prioritizing, it just doesn't work. We could draft an OL in the fourth round who will have a better career than the guy rated highest in the draft by CFL.ca today. Tracker, comedygeek, Booch and 7 others 10
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