Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

 

ohhhh I was 'corrected' lol. Good one (use the waiters voice in 'The Shining' for that one). Yes you are correct - as Anthony Mulumba will be patrolling the Blue bomber dline any day now, won't he? Well, I guess he could. I do get a bit mixed up sometime. What I meant was - you draft a player (Muamba) and he plays well, so well he gets an NFL shot after his two year contract runs out (and before it was in his option year he could do that) well, if/when he fails..... unless his option year was still running - U F A . He can go anywhere. So we drafted Henoc first overall, guess what? He's a UFA if he comes back to the CFL - we don't have his rights. This is what I meant. Still a joke.

 

And how is that substantially different from an import player who goes back to the US of A, flunks out and then tries to return to the CFL? You pays yer money and you takes yer chances. If the player has been treated well, he will probably but not certainly return to his former team. No guarantees in this business- even if you hold the rights to a given player who goes to the NFL, by the time he is done there, he could be too beat up or past his prime to be of any value here.

 

 

 

This. 

 

It doesn't even matter if they go to the NFL or stay in the CFL.  A guy like Picard is a perfect example... we drafted him, he played out his contract and then bolted as a free agent.  No NFL involved but we still lost him.

 

Complaining that a team doesn't retain the rights to a player (rookie or vet,  Canadian or American, it doesn't matter) after they have played out their contract is ridiculous.  It happens in all sports (although some leagues do it differently with RA/UFA status).

Posted

 

What have we become here in Bomberland where we have to settle for a washed up QB and a has been RB. Maybe Reaves and Ploen could make a comeback seriously this team has no vision for the future and keeps digging a bigger hole. They had a whole year to find talent and now were being fed table scraps. Have a feeling this forum might explode after the weekend. 

Really tho...Marshall isn't a washed up has been. If he was used properly he would easily be a 1000 yard rusher and money scoring inside the 5

 

Wasn't talking about Marshall, he has potential, my comment was directed at Chevon Walker

Posted

Can we trade Nichols for Simmons?

 

And then can we finally fire MB when Nichols gets hurt after two games?  After all, he is a pocket passer that will 'fit' the system...

Posted

Doesn't inspire confidence in Davis when they said he's only been here for a month but didn't know enough to play yet.

He was awful today in practice. Early on it looked like Davis and Brohm were splitting reps but it shifted in Brohms favour very quickly.

Posted

 

 

Edmonton is going to own the 7th round in 2017  ;)

No, cause they just traded it to Hamilton.

 

How do you trade a conditional pick?  Or was the only condition that Nichols report here?

 

It is a sure 7th rounder, it will upgrade to 6th rounder if Nichols is still with the Bombers in 2017.

Posted

New #Bombers QB Matt Nichols: "...only been here for about 6 hrs now and have a pretty good grasp on the O now." #bn

 

Is he a quick study or is the offense that basic?  I think I may already know the answer.

I don't imagine that any team's given offence is that radically different than another team's one in terms of what a play looks like. A post pattern is a post pattern, a screen play is a screen play, a crossing route is a crossing route. The terminology may be different in the play-call, but the X's and O's would probably be quite similar. The issue is knowing that "Omaha" is your new team's name for a fly route when you called "Bulldog" on your old team. The other issue is in-game play-calling, which is knowing when to run what play against what defensive scheme is being shown. That's where offences will differ, not in what plays are in their repertoire. That is why offences look more or less successful; what is called and when, and not in what actual plays are in the playbook.

Posted

 

 

Edmonton is going to own the 7th round in 2017  ;)

No, cause they just traded it to Hamilton.

 

How do you trade a conditional pick?  Or was the only condition that Nichols report here?

 

 

No, they likely traded their own 7th round pick.

Posted

I wonder if Brohms shits the bed if they go out and sign Gale also? Three years in the Argos system he should be "experienced enough"

 

he's got more experience than all of our back-ups (except for Nichols) combined!

Posted

 

I'm OK with this move. 7th round in 2017 is very cheap and pretty sure most will forget at 2017 CFL draft why we dont have 7th rnd pick.

 

I guess the expected changes will be:

 

IN:

Nicholls,

Simmons,

Walker,

Lemon

Adams

 

OUT:

Brohm (will be released later this week? ;) )

Littlejohn

T.Thomas

Peach (will be released too)

Gordon

Oooh. My nipples are hard....

 

That is WAYYYY too much information.

Posted

 

 

I'm OK with this move. 7th round in 2017 is very cheap and pretty sure most will forget at 2017 CFL draft why we dont have 7th rnd pick.

 

I guess the expected changes will be:

 

IN:

Nicholls,

Simmons,

Walker,

Lemon

Adams

 

OUT:

Brohm (will be released later this week? ;) )

Littlejohn

T.Thomas

Peach (will be released too)

Gordon

Oooh. My nipples are hard....

 

That is WAYYYY too much information.

 

Sorry to overstimulate you with the visuals.

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...