pigseye Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 lol, Ritchie Hall is not the guy to take a defence to the promised land.
do or die Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 Problem is....we have one outstanding DL guy.....and a host of others. This area needs a serious upgrade.
pigseye Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 Problem is....we have one outstanding DL guy.....and a host of others. This area needs a serious upgrade. On the bright side, he's a national, shouldn't be too hard to surround him with outstanding internationals. We need to start 4 nationals on the o-line so that we only need to start 1 at safety and 1 at receiver. Once they get there, things will fall into place.
Goalie Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go.
pigseye Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. History shows it's the way to go, remember Milt, DA, TE and Romby, that's a championship receiver corps.
Noeller Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere.
Taynted_Fayth Posted November 11, 2015 Report Posted November 11, 2015 maybe waggoner can play safety, still a bloody shame we didnt get to see him in the final game
do or die Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 Assuming we can finally bring in top-flight import O Linemen......track record has been none too good, for a while...
bigg jay Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 maybe waggoner can play safety, still a bloody shame we didnt get to see him in the final game He played. I noticed his # a few times during the game, he was only credited with 1 tackle though.
pigseye Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere. Even if you had national starters at all those positions, which we don't, you wouldn't be able to pay them all starter money, you end up settling for second rate internationals which is how you end up starting the Greg Peaches of the league, it's economics, you spend your big money on O and D national line men. Your internationals are your skill players and they come cheaper then nationals.
JuranBoldenRules Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 maybe waggoner can play safety, still a bloody shame we didnt get to see him in the final game He played most of the 2nd half at linebacker.
JuranBoldenRules Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere. Even if you had national starters at all those positions, which we don't, you wouldn't be able to pay them all starter money, you end up settling for second rate internationals which is how you end up starting the Greg Peaches of the league, it's economics, you spend your big money on O and D national line men. Your internationals are your skill players and they come cheaper then nationals. Starting NI OL are going for $200,000 on the open market...don't see any relevance in the point you're trying to make. Spend that on a OL, or spend it on a NI DB who can play, what's the difference? Most of the NI skill guys are going for less because everyone is stuck in the rut of trying to play 3-4-5 NI OL all the time. Noeller 1
Fatty Liver Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 maybe waggoner can play safety, still a bloody shame we didnt get to see him in the final game Sad that the Bombers wasted a good chunk of the season playing Lin J Shell at safety, he stole reps. from players with a future who could have provided flexibility to the ratio. They continually choose vet. place-markers over developing new talent, Romby and Kuale in 2014, Shell and Peach in 2015. Tracker 1
pigseye Posted November 12, 2015 Report Posted November 12, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere. Even if you had national starters at all those positions, which we don't, you wouldn't be able to pay them all starter money, you end up settling for second rate internationals which is how you end up starting the Greg Peaches of the league, it's economics, you spend your big money on O and D national line men. Your internationals are your skill players and they come cheaper then nationals. Starting NI OL are going for $200,000 on the open market...don't see any relevance in the point you're trying to make. Spend that on a OL, or spend it on a NI DB who can play, what's the difference? Most of the NI skill guys are going for less because everyone is stuck in the rut of trying to play 3-4-5 NI OL all the time. Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle.
JuranBoldenRules Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere. Even if you had national starters at all those positions, which we don't, you wouldn't be able to pay them all starter money, you end up settling for second rate internationals which is how you end up starting the Greg Peaches of the league, it's economics, you spend your big money on O and D national line men. Your internationals are your skill players and they come cheaper then nationals. Starting NI OL are going for $200,000 on the open market...don't see any relevance in the point you're trying to make. Spend that on a OL, or spend it on a NI DB who can play, what's the difference? Most of the NI skill guys are going for less because everyone is stuck in the rut of trying to play 3-4-5 NI OL all the time. Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. American OL on their first or second contract make more than players at other positions? News to me. The most overpaid players in the league are NI OL and receivers. If you made a list of the top 5 overpaid CFL players, pretty much all of them would fit. Picard, Getzlaf, Fantuz, Durie, Labatte....
sweep the leg Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. Is there an import ol making more than Elimimian? Or SJ Green or Nic Moore? SPuDS 1
pigseye Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 I disagree with starting 4 nationals on the oline, I think I'd rather start 3 americans on the oline, you can start your nationals elsewhere... Westerman,Kohlert,Chungh,Goossen, Hurl?, Safety, and then 1 other national elsewhere makes way more sense.. say we sign a guy like Bilukidi, or maybe Andrew Harris... This idea that you need to start your nationals on the oline is so old school, yeah ideally that's how you do it but.. in reality, why not start them elsewhere and protect your QB a bit better by starting talent that is better. I don't get the need to start 4 nationals on the oline thing... it really doesn't make sense, I mean, if you have the talent it makes sense but... we don't so for a team like the bombers, it would make more sense to start nationals elsewhere in the lineup and go 3 Americans on the oline.. Goossen,Chung, Bryant,Daniels, American Guard and we are good to go. You were right the first time -- it's not "ideally how you do it"....Ideally you use Americans on the line to protect your best asset, and then use your Canadians elsewhere. Even if you had national starters at all those positions, which we don't, you wouldn't be able to pay them all starter money, you end up settling for second rate internationals which is how you end up starting the Greg Peaches of the league, it's economics, you spend your big money on O and D national line men. Your internationals are your skill players and they come cheaper then nationals. Starting NI OL are going for $200,000 on the open market...don't see any relevance in the point you're trying to make. Spend that on a OL, or spend it on a NI DB who can play, what's the difference? Most of the NI skill guys are going for less because everyone is stuck in the rut of trying to play 3-4-5 NI OL all the time. Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. American OL on their first or second contract make more than players at other positions? News to me. The most overpaid players in the league are NI OL and receivers. If you made a list of the top 5 overpaid CFL players, pretty much all of them would fit. Picard, Getzlaf, Fantuz, Durie, Labatte.... We're talking proven starters, you said it, not guys in their first or second contract, although it would be nice if those guys did pan out once in awhile.
pigseye Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. Is there an import ol making more than Elimimian? Or SJ Green or Nic Moore? Bryants making $160K and SV Rogers north of that. My point is that you spend the money on the best linemen as it's easier to find a Khalil Bass for $60K and still get performance at the position. Over paying internationals at those positions you mentioned is what I'm against, it's idiotic when they grow on trees down south.
Brandon Blue&Gold Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. Is there an import ol making more than Elimimian? Or SJ Green or Nic Moore? Bryants making $160K and SV Rogers north of that. My point is that you spend the money on the best linemen as it's easier to find a Khalil Bass for $60K and still get performance at the position. Over paying internationals at those positions you mentioned is what I'm against, it's idiotic when they grow on trees down south. I thought Ottawa signed him for 145K per year?
SPuDS Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Cuz finding a khalil bass (a guy cut from how many teams AND almost didnt stick here) is so common place? Lol. Man the logic people attempt to use here to justify their odd stances..
17to85 Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Because you're going to spend it on your lines anyways, national or not, starting linemen command more money than starting DB's or LB's or receivers or running backs. You can't compare a national DB making $200K (which doesn't exist btw) to a starting left tackle. Is there an import ol making more than Elimimian? Or SJ Green or Nic Moore? Bryants making $160K and SV Rogers north of that. My point is that you spend the money on the best linemen as it's easier to find a Khalil Bass for $60K and still get performance at the position. Over paying internationals at those positions you mentioned is what I'm against, it's idiotic when they grow on trees down south. Tackles are getting paid the big bucks, but do american guards or centres get paid that much? I seem to recall Brendan Taman bringing in guys for the interior who could play without any issues and that says something cause Taman was pretty hit or miss with scouting. No one really tries to find guards and centres down south preferring to put the Canadians there. I guarantee that if there was a bigger push to use more Americans on the offensive line you'd see less money spent in free agency on the good ones.
pigseye Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Taman, the Ottawa dispersal really helped him, in 2007 they started 4 nationals on the line, gave up the fewest sacks in the league and were coached by Bob Willy. We could start Roberts and 4 international receivers, that's still how you build a championship team. We had Brown on the dline and a national at safety. That team was probably better than the 2001 version that went 14 - 4.
17to85 Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Taman, the Ottawa dispersal really helped him, in 2007 they started 4 nationals on the line, gave up the fewest sacks in the league and were coached by Bob Willy. We could start Roberts and 4 international receivers, that's still how you build a championship team. We had Brown on the dline and a national at safety. That team was probably better than the 2001 version that went 14 - 4. Haha oh my stars you actually said that... I don't think you remember how hit or miss the offense was in 2007, or how dominant the defense was on that 2001 team. 2007 was bolstered bigtime by Gauthier being one of the better tackles in the league and a canadian. They paid a big price to get that guy too don't forget. Picard was still good back then, Andrew Greene was really the unsung hero there too. Guy was a real quality vet on the interior. Rounded it out with Dan Goodspeed at the other tackle who in his day was a good american tackle. 2007 was also a long time ago, the CFL has changed Canadians are playing more and more skill positions and playing them better and better. You don't need to put all your canadians on the OL. It's not the most efficient use of the roster when you don't have those quality veterans to fill the positions. As much as we dislike Bucknor he's still playing maybe the easiest position to hide a Canadian in, much moreso than safety. The additional designated imports make a rotation on the defense a very viable option as well which many teams are taking advantage of. The idea that you MUST use as many canadians on the offensive line is outdated thinking. The key is you must have as many good canadians as possible and where they specifically play doesn't really matter as long as they can play. Right now we don't have enough Canadians who are simply good enough players. Bigblue204 and holoman 2
JuranBoldenRules Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Taman, the Ottawa dispersal really helped him, in 2007 they started 4 nationals on the line, gave up the fewest sacks in the league and were coached by Bob Willy. We could start Roberts and 4 international receivers, that's still how you build a championship team. We had Brown on the dline and a national at safety. That team was probably better than the 2001 version that went 14 - 4. There are 4 DI's now. Most teams are running 7-8 man DL rotations. The supply of NI OL who can manage playing in this league right now is extremely low. If you're trying to build the "ideal" line of 4-5 NI's you better have 3 QBs who can play. That's where the league is today.
holoman Posted November 13, 2015 Report Posted November 13, 2015 Taman, the Ottawa dispersal really helped him, in 2007 they started 4 nationals on the line, gave up the fewest sacks in the league and were coached by Bob Willy. We could start Roberts and 4 international receivers, that's still how you build a championship team. We had Brown on the dline and a national at safety. That team was probably better than the 2001 version that went 14 - 4. Bigblue204 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