Anyone have any details on the injury situation for our 2 NAT FBs? Are we hoping one or both comes back this season? And hopefully sooner rather than later?
NAT FB Awachie released by TOR today. If one or both of ours is out until next season, do we take a look at Awachie? He probably wouldn't be expensive.
Our O likes to have a FB around, and a legit FB would probably be better in the blocking role than plopping Case in there sometimes. We seem to be rotating random rookie receivers in there to fill that role right now.
I wondered the same thing. He might be worth a call / look on the PR. I also wondered why he was released!!
At 6'3" 262, he is a big FB. He's been around for 7 years, not much for offensive stats. Can he pass block?? Doesn't seem to be a stand out on teams either. 31 games, 15 STs.
Quote from: Pigskin on August 07, 2024, 04:55:45 PMAt 6'3" 262, he is a big FB. He's been around for 7 years, not much for offensive stats. Can he pass block?? Doesn't seem to be a stand out on teams either. 31 games, 15 STs.
In theory the only thing he can do is block which is something we need. Whether he is worth removing another Canadian from the roster to make space, is the question. SMS is a question as well.
The Riders already picked him up and is playing for them tomorrow.
With their injuries they currently have no Canadian depth.
Quote from: gobombersgo on August 07, 2024, 09:05:55 PMThe Riders already picked him up and is playing for them tomorrow.
With their injuries they currently have no Canadian depth.
Doh. We snooze we lose. This season it seems decent depth guys are being snapped up almost immediately.
KW should keep this in mind and pre-plan what positions we should jump on before other teams do.
No one has answered my questions about injury-lengths yet though... anyone have a clue when our guys are back?
Quote from: TecnoGenius on August 08, 2024, 12:13:10 AMDoh. We snooze we lose. This season it seems decent depth guys are being snapped up almost immediately.
KW should keep this in mind and pre-plan what positions we should jump on before other teams do.
No one has answered my questions about injury-lengths yet though... anyone have a clue when our guys are back?
We will find out the first day the boys are back to practice.
Quote from: TecnoGenius on August 08, 2024, 12:13:10 AMDoh. We snooze we lose. This season it seems decent depth guys are being snapped up almost immediately.
KW should keep this in mind and pre-plan what positions we should jump on before other teams do.
No one has answered my questions about injury-lengths yet though... anyone have a clue when our guys are back?
He's returning to where he played previously. Bombers may have made a call but he choose to go where he was familiar.
I really don't think the Bombers are very interested in other teams releases. Walters isn't on the phone to every guy that gets released. I think they believe in their scouting, their ability to draft and develop and bring guys along the Bombers' way. When O'Shea tells you they like the guys they have, he means it. We certainly don't need to be spending SMS on a fullback.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 02:03:53 PMI really don't think the Bombers are very interested in other teams releases. Walters isn't on the phone to every guy that gets released. I think they believe in their scouting, their ability to draft and develop and bring guys along the Bombers' way. When O'Shea tells you they like the guys they have, he means it. We certainly don't need to be spending SMS on a fullback.
Yes but the guys we have are both injured. We did pick up Feltmate after he was released but he also got injured.
None of these guys are going to be much more than SMS salaries so that shouldn't be an issue. Chris-Ike and Feltmate are both on 6 game IR. It's possible one comes off early but both could be season ending. Our info doesn't really tell us.
Quote from: Blue In BC on August 08, 2024, 02:44:07 PMYes but the guys we have are both injured. We did pick up Feltmate after he was released but he also got injured.
None of these guys are going to be much more than SMS salaries so that shouldn't be an issue. Chris-Ike and Feltmate are both on 6 game IR. It's possible one comes off early but both could be season ending. Our info doesn't really tell us.
Sure, yes, the guys we've listed as fullbacks are out. However, that doesn't mean we need to airlift in another one. That position is basically exclusively used in supporting roles which we've done a fine job in working through. Chris-Ike and Awatchie couldn't be more different despite both being "full backs" and would be used differently anyway.
We have a FB on the AR, his name is Streveler.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 03:19:03 PMSure, yes, the guys we've listed as fullbacks are out. However, that doesn't mean we need to airlift in another one. That position is basically exclusively used in supporting roles which we've done a fine job in working through. Chris-Ike and Awatchie couldn't be more different despite both being "full backs" and would be used differently anyway.
That's true although we did feel a need to bring in Feltmate in June. Even though they have different roles, having an actual player with FB experience does / can have role.
A FB should be able to block and be a little lighter / faster on his feet than using Wallace or Eli as a TE. Some FB's are actually used nominally as a receiver or a short yardage player.
The catch 22 is that he displaces another player that may have a more significant role on ST's or offence.
I'm not upset we didn't sign him. We don't know whether they tried to sign him. I wouldn't have been upset if they did sign him or another equivalent.
This was due to having problems on the OL with Collaros getting sacked or pressured too often. Perhaps Randolph solves part of that issue. We'll see how that goes after a few more games.
We don't really know how long Neufeld will be out or whether he will become the starter again later this season. He's played in 128 games and Randolph as played in 1.
Quote from: theaardvark on August 08, 2024, 03:36:53 PMWe have a FB on the AR, his name is Streveler.
Last game I swear I saw Eli filling in at FB.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on August 08, 2024, 04:23:47 PMLast game I swear I saw Eli filling in at FB.
Probably will see 1 of Eli or Wallace in that role or as a TE. There will be a 50 lb higher weight using an OL so foot speed will be slower.
OTOH, I'd like to see a pass to a 300 lb OL and watch a 170 lb DB try and tackle him. lol
I had hoped over the past couple of seasons that Augustine could be used in that manner but his blocking must be suspect. Too bad because he'd be a much better potential offensive weapon the defence would have to take into account. I don't think they'd seriously worry too much about Feltmate or Eli.
Quote from: Blue In BC on August 08, 2024, 04:30:05 PMProbably will see 1 of Eli or Wallace in that role or as a TE. There will be a 50 lb higher weight using an OL so foot speed will be slower.
OTOH, I'd like to see a pass to a 300 lb OL and watch a 170 lb DB try and tackle him. lol
I had hoped over the past couple of seasons that Augustine could be used in that manner but his blocking must be suspect. Too bad because he'd be a much better potential offensive weapon the defence would have to take into account. I don't think they'd seriously worry too much about Feltmate or Eli.
We don't put Feltmate or Eli or anyone in as eligible to use offensively in that role. If we run something, it's like a once or twice a year play call. They are in to protect or assist in getting a +1 at the line for running situations. The role of a fullback in the modern CFL has really evolved to be blocking orientated. Backfield protection falls to the running back and they're required to be able to do it well. We don't (and no one else really) needs a half blocker/half running back which is what a more traditional full back used to do. You either use a proper offensive lineman to block or you keep the 5th receiver in as a legitimate route-running passing option.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 04:43:54 PMWe don't put Feltmate or Eli or anyone in as eligible to use offensively in that role. If we run something, it's like a once or twice a year play call. They are in to protect or assist in getting a +1 at the line for running situations. The role of a fullback in the modern CFL has really evolved to be blocking orientated. Backfield protection falls to the running back and they're required to be able to do it well. We don't (and no one else really) needs a half blocker/half running back which is what a more traditional full back used to do. You either use a proper offensive lineman to block or you keep the 5th receiver in as a legitimate route-running passing option.
Always thought Shane Gauthier could fill the FB role well with a little bit of training following in the footsteps of ex LB Mike Miller. Gauthier's role as a LB looks to be diminished this season, which is too bad as he's better than Bighill at pure run stopping.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 04:43:54 PMWe don't put Feltmate or Eli or anyone in as eligible to use offensively in that role. If we run something, it's like a once or twice a year play call. They are in to protect or assist in getting a +1 at the line for running situations. The role of a fullback in the modern CFL has really evolved to be blocking orientated. Backfield protection falls to the running back and they're required to be able to do it well. We don't (and no one else really) needs a half blocker/half running back which is what a more traditional full back used to do. You either use a proper offensive lineman to block or you keep the 5th receiver in as a legitimate route-running passing option.
It doesn't hurt if you have a FB that can be an offensive option. Just because there are few FB's at the moment that aren't that option, doesn't mean some don't exist with that capability.
We know that Augustine can run and catch. If he could block well, then he'd be a perfect fit.
Feltmate was very good on ST's as well.
Lions have Mackie and he's used a few times as an offensive weapon.
Argos now list Adeboboye on the roster as a RB but on the depth chart as a FB. He has the ability to be used as an offensive weapon.
Quote from: Blue In BC on August 08, 2024, 05:13:29 PMIt doesn't hurt if you have a FB that can be an offensive option. Just because there are few FB's at the moment that aren't that option, doesn't mean some don't exist with that capability.
We know that Augustine can run and catch. If he could block well, then he'd be a perfect fit.
Feltmate was very good on ST's as well.
Lions have Mackie and he's used a few times as an offensive weapon.
Argos now list Adeboboye on the roster as a RB but on the depth chart as a FB. He has the ability to be used as an offensive weapon.
And in 8 games he has 8 carries for 89 yards rushing and 5 catches for 27 yards passing. Assuming all of those plays are when he's in as an actual fullback (which may or may not be true [I doubt it is]) that's not much production. I'm not saying it's a terrible idea, it's just not going to move the needle much either.
What I am saying is it's far more valuable to have good protection and run blocking than what amounts to 14.5 yards in offensive production per game. If we're looking at it from that lens then we would much rather have Eli or a 6th offensive lineman in the game. This is not just an 'us' thing. That's the trend across the league for probably the last 10 years or more.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 06:46:55 PMAnd in 8 games he has 8 carries for 89 yards rushing and 5 catches for 27 yards passing. Assuming all of those plays are when he's in as an actual fullback (which may or may not be true [I doubt it is]) that's not much production. I'm not saying it's a terrible idea, it's just not going to move the needle much either.
What I am saying is it's far more valuable to have good protection and run blocking than what amounts to 14.5 yards in offensive production per game. If we're looking at it from that lens then we would much rather have Eli or a 6th offensive lineman in the game. This is not just an 'us' thing. That's the trend across the league for probably the last 10 years or more.
Yeah, if given the choice of rolling with a fullback or a 7th olineman Id go with the rostering a 7th olineman.
That's what the Stamps decided to do this week. They moved their fullback to the practice roster and are now dressing 7 olineman.
Lucas Robertson is available to scoop up if someone wants a fullback/TE ( in 8 games he has 0 rushes and 1 catch)
The Riders on the other hand picked up a fullback as they had more of a need. They are only dressing 6 olinemen for tonight's game.
I think they need to put Jake in at FB. After all, FB FatBoi just has a certain ring to it. And everyone likes revisiting the Fridge. I know I do.
Quote from: theaardvark on August 08, 2024, 09:00:12 PMI think they need to put Jake in at FB. After all, FB FatBoi just has a certain ring to it. And everyone likes revisiting the Fridge. I know I do.
I know you are joking but if anyone from the defence comes in on offence it would be Jefferson. He has been in on a few goalline plays in the past and did start his college career as a receiver/ tight end.
Is FB Mike Sellers from "Thunder & Lightning" days still able to play?!! :) He was a MAJOR load back in the day combined with Charles (don't call me Charlie) "Blink" Roberts! ;)
Quote from: gobombersgo on August 08, 2024, 08:44:37 PMYeah, if given the choice of rolling with a fullback or a 7th olineman Id go with the rostering a 7th olineman.
That's what the Stamps decided to do this week. They moved their fullback to the practice roster and are now dressing 7 olineman.
Lucas Robertson is available to scoop up if someone wants a fullback/TE ( in 8 games he has 0 rushes and 1 catch)
The Riders on the other hand picked up a fullback as they had more of a need. They are only dressing 6 olinemen for tonight's game.
That isn't the only choice. We've dressed 7 OL all season and have also had a FB. Eliminating the 2nd Global player from the AR is one way to do that. Another way is to eliminate a Canadian LB or DB. Charbonneau or Kelly for example.
Quote from: Blue In BC on August 08, 2024, 09:51:17 PMThat isn't the only choice. We've dressed 7 OL all season and have also had a FB. Eliminating the 2nd Global player from the AR is one way to do that. Another way is to eliminate a Canadian LB or DB. Charbonneau or Kelly for example.
Obviously we
could find room, but what I'm trying to point out is that there really isn't a need to, since the assignments we'd give to a full back are largly being handled by other players.
It's fine if you're just a fan of the hybrid blocking back/running back as a concept and wished it came back in vogue, I agree with you there -- it's fun to watch -- but fun to watch isn't how the Bombers choose who plays on game day and across the league that skillset really isn't used much like it used to for reasons already explained.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 11:15:15 PMObviously we could find room, but what I'm trying to point out is that there really isn't a need to, since the assignments we'd give to a full back are largly being handled by other players.
Have you been watching the Buck O in '23 and '24? We run FB (as TE or half-back to the QB) sets probably every 4th play on average when we're allowed to run "our O" (i.e. not desperation time).
In '23 we even wasted a DI spot on an IMP FB nearly every game! That's how important a FB is to the Buck/MOS book.
I think it's killing Buck/MOS there is no true FB on the roster at the moment, and I'm sure they're eyeing options if our 2 natural FBs are going to be out for a full 6 games. We 100% for sure want a true FB available for the lead up/into the playoffs.
I think BinBC suggested in another thread we could also be eyeing calling up Mr. Seal Jackson. We still have the ratio room, though wasting a DI kind of sucks (just like last year).
So you're 100% right CFL teams don't "need to" have a FB... but I think I've proven we really
like to. I guarantee you this: if one of our guys is fully healthy tomorrow, they are in the next game.
Quote from: gobombersgo on August 08, 2024, 08:44:37 PMYeah, if given the choice of rolling with a fullback or a 7th olineman Id go with the rostering a 7th olineman.
Quote from: Blue In BC on August 08, 2024, 09:51:17 PMThat isn't the only choice. We've dressed 7 OL all season and have also had a FB. Eliminating the 2nd Global player from the AR is one way to do that. Another way is to eliminate a Canadian LB or DB. Charbonneau or Kelly for example.
BinBC is right: False dichotomy. It's not either-or, it's both-and. We almost always dress 7 OL
and a FB. I see nothing to indicate that we want to move away from that. Not saying it's the best/right choice, but it's the choice Mafia makes every time, and it seems to work for us.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on August 08, 2024, 06:46:55 PMAnd in 8 games he has 8 carries for 89 yards rushing and 5 catches for 27 yards passing. Assuming all of those plays are when he's in as an actual fullback (which may or may not be true [I doubt it is]) that's not much production. I'm not saying it's a terrible idea, it's just not going to move the needle much either.
The O stats production of our FB is irrelevant. We don't care if they run or catch. They are protection, road-grading, and misdirection.
If we get a "free" 1st down or TD because they sneak out unnoticed (as other teams often do), then that's gravy. And probably very worthwhile gravy, because not only do you gain something, but you force every subsequent opponent to plan around your FB being a threat.
Miller would get 1-2 pass looks a season. Jackson got 1-2 (I think caught 1, dropped 1?). That's pretty normal for our Mafia-led team.
Quote from: gobombersgo on August 08, 2024, 09:17:15 PMI know you are joking but if anyone from the defence comes in on offence it would be Jefferson. He has been in on a few goalline plays in the past and did start his college career as a receiver/ tight end.
Jefferson is a receiver, Thomas is a FB. Bring them both, iron man football.
We already play with 6-7 OL on many plays. We don't need to roster a FB.
It's essentially a dead position.
I agree it should be, a tight end is much more useful , however O'Shea doesn't seem to agree in that we kept Jackson around all last year, and we used a 2nd round draft pick to get Chris-Ike. (where we could have gotten Ajou Ajou or Christopher Beaulieu)
Quote from: Pete on August 09, 2024, 09:54:34 PMI agree it should be, a tight end is much more useful , however O'Shea doesn't seem to agree in that we kept Jackson around all last year, and we used a 2nd round draft pick to get Chris-Ike. (where we could have gotten Ajou Ajou or Christopher Beaulieu)
Chris-Ike was a no brainer pick, he won the combine right here in Winnipeg, no doubt MOS and Walters loved what they saw. He's a beast, and the best of everything you want in a NAT utility player. He backs up BO20, and is a ST demon. Ajou went late in the draft, it wasn't just s that passed by him, for reasons I do not know. He went from bing a top 20 pick to dropping off the top 20 in the final ranking. And we had drafted Kevens Clercius already, with Wolitarski and Demski on the roster as well.
Chris-Ike is going to be a fan favourite very soon.
Quote from: Jesse on August 09, 2024, 09:24:48 PMWe already play with 6-7 OL on many plays. We don't need to roster a FB.
It's essentially a dead position.
Quote from: Pete on August 09, 2024, 09:54:34 PMI agree it should be, a tight end is much more useful , however O'Shea doesn't seem to agree in that we kept Jackson around all last year, and we used a 2nd round draft pick to get Chris-Ike. (where we could have gotten Ajou Ajou or Christopher Beaulieu)
Pete is right. MOS/Buck love to run 5OL + FB, or 6OL + FB. Heck, I'm not sure we haven't run 7OL + FB before.
We can say we think it's "wasted", sure. But the reality is our team LOVES to field their FBs. This is a
fact you can see for yourself if you just go back and watch the games this year and last (before all of our FBs were injured).
That said, we could start a thread debating what's better: sets with 6OL+FB or 7OL. Just because MOS/Buck do it, doesn't mean it's right!
Quote from: TecnoGenius on August 10, 2024, 02:42:55 AMThat said, we could start a thread debating what's better: sets with 6OL+FB or 7OL. Just because MOS/Buck do it, doesn't mean it's right!
It just gives you a bit more flexibility without losing a heavy blocker.
Quote from: J5V on August 10, 2024, 03:03:02 AMIt just gives you a bit more flexibility without losing a heavy blocker.
I'm talking about actual schemes/sets, not just dressers. We almost always
dress 7 OL + 1 FB. My previous comment was specifically about on-field sets. I should have been more clear, my bad!