Blue Bombers Transactions - October 28, 2025
WINNIPEG, MB., October 28, 2025 – The Winnipeg Blue Bombers today announce the following transactions:
Added to practice roster:
National receiver AK Gassama
Bad sign.
They needed an extra receiver to help in practice to not over work the other guys.
Quote from: gobombersgo on October 28, 2025, 03:50:57 PMThey needed an extra receiver to help in practice to not over work the other guys.
They only practice twice!
The over work line is what MOS said on the coaches show but I call bs. He said that right after saying Strev might not be done this year, don't count him out. To me he is here because Demski can't go. He knows the offense not sure about his game shape though. One more injury and he could play next week should we advance.
Quote from: Waffler on October 28, 2025, 04:06:33 PMThey only practice twice!
The over work line is what MOS said on the coaches show but I call bs. He said that right after saying Strev might not be done this year, don't count him out. To me he is here because Demski can't go. He knows the offense not sure about his game shape though. One more injury and he could play next week should we advance.
Sure hope they don't waste a roster spot on Gassama on gameday, Corcoran can back up the receivers and if there are 2 injuries insert Peterson in Demski's spot. May be a good idea to transition him to that spot anyway like they did Flanders, if Brady is here for the long haul he'll never get to play.
Quote from: gobombersgo on October 28, 2025, 03:50:57 PMThey needed an extra receiver to help in practice to not over work the other guys.
That's BS. They could use Echols, Mitchell and Logan during practice whether they intend to play any of them or not.
They could even use Chris-Ike. It's 1 practice and a walk through.
I don't see Gassama on the game day roster.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 28, 2025, 04:23:28 PMSure hope they don't waste a roster spot on Gassama on gameday, Corcoran can back up the receivers and if there are 2 injuries insert Peterson in Demski's spot. May be a good idea to transition him to that spot anyway like they did Flanders, if Brady is here for the long haul he'll never get to play.
I REALLY like the idea of putting Peterson in Demski's position if Demski can't go. Peterson is a playmaker, put the ball in his hands and he'll make a play, that's the guy we need in there. Is he a pure reciever, no, but he's a playmaker. If I recall correctly, Demski was a RB in his high school or university days and converted to SB, do the same thing with Peterson vs letting him rot on the bench watching guys maybe catch a ball and gain 1-2 yards after catch.
Quote from: dd on October 28, 2025, 04:44:34 PMI REALLY like the idea of putting Peterson in Demski's position if Demski can't go. Peterson is a playmaker, put the ball in his hands and he'll make a play, that's the guy we need in there. Is he a pure reciever, no, but he's a playmaker. If I recall correctly, Demski was a RB in his high school or university days and converted to SB, do the same thing with Peterson vs letting him rot on the bench watching guys maybe catch a ball and gain 1-2 yards after catch.
Not enough time to transition him this week but should be considered over the off-season if he's still under contract. Don't think he'll stick around like Johnny A. did patiently waiting for the chance that never comes. Demski likely plays at least 2 more years, so he won't be retiring anytime soon.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 28, 2025, 05:06:42 PMNot enough time to transition him this week but should be considered over the off-season if he's still under contract. Don't think he'll stick around like Johnny A. did patiently waiting for the chance that never comes. Demski likely plays at least 2 more years, so he won't be retiring anytime soon.
While that's possibly true, adding Gassama at this point in time is not an effective choice either. Either Cobb or Corcoran gives us a starter and depth in the same way as last week. Not as good as Demski but it's the reality if it comes down him not playing.
I'm not opposed to Peterson being the next option up behind those two receivers. Even Chris-Ike as the 3rd choice if injuries hit.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 28, 2025, 05:06:42 PMNot enough time to transition him this week but should be considered over the off-season if he's still under contract. Don't think he'll stick around like Johnny A. did patiently waiting for the chance that never comes. Demski likely plays at least 2 more years, so he won't be retiring anytime soon.
Agreed. They'd better make him a much bigger piece of the offensive puzzle, as he's shown he's more than capable of producing and if ND10 is gone in 2 years, there should be no problem transitioning him to that roll and maintain our quality NAT talent.
Quote from: dd on October 28, 2025, 04:44:34 PMI REALLY like the idea of putting Peterson in Demski's position if Demski can't go. Peterson is a playmaker, put the ball in his hands and he'll make a play, that's the guy we need in there. Is he a pure reciever, no, but he's a playmaker. If I recall correctly, Demski was a RB in his high school or university days and converted to SB, do the same thing with Peterson vs letting him rot on the bench watching guys maybe catch a ball and gain 1-2 yards after catch.
Hard pass to have an RB at receiver. Emergency replacement yes.
Quote from: Blueforlife on October 28, 2025, 09:43:55 PMHard pass to have an RB at receiver. Emergency replacement yes.
If he has receiver potential why not? He's behind Brady in the RB competition in, at least, the near future. He has enough talent to interest any team and someone will surely sign him when his next contract is due. And I doubt he will want to be a back up here for the next several years.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 28, 2025, 10:53:24 PMIf he has receiver potential why not? He's behind Brady in the RB competition in, at least, the near future. He has enough talent to interest any team and someone will surely sign him when his next contract is due. And I doubt he will want to be a back up here for the next several years.
Because he is a running back and there are likely many other options at receiver that are better than him. I have seen the idea of fans proposals to change players positions in the past and I usually don't think they are good ideas. My point is why try to change a players position when they already very good at what they do. Success at RB doesn't mean he would be successful at receiver. A very rare combination of skills allows for that.
I would try to retain him at RB. I see us running Canadian RBs for as long as we can. A pillar of strength for us to allow for ratio flexibility.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 28, 2025, 10:53:24 PMIf he has receiver potential why not? He's behind Brady in the RB competition in, at least, the near future. He has enough talent to interest any team and someone will surely sign him when his next contract is due. And I doubt he will want to be a back up here for the next several years.
Nick demski was a running back converted to a receiver, how did that work out??
either we find a spot for him or another team will. He's miles better than augustine and everyone knows that
Id like to see Petersen or Ike added into tightend sets. Gives us some added blocking and options
Quote from: dd on October 28, 2025, 11:19:21 PMNick demski was a running back converted to a receiver, how did that work out??
either we find a spot for him or another team will. He's miles better than augustine and everyone knows that
Takes a special talent to switch positions
Demski was just that
Sample size on Paterson is too low to say he is miles ahead of Augustine but shows incredible promise
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 28, 2025, 10:53:24 PMIf he has receiver potential why not? He's behind Brady in the RB competition in, at least, the near future. He has enough talent to interest any team and someone will surely sign him when his next contract is due. And I doubt he will want to be a back up here for the next several years.
Why not? It would appear the absolute best place a NAT RB can choose to be is in WPG. They get to dev behind the best (first AH, now BO) on a run-focused team, and are then next in line to be the future superstar.
Worked for Brady. I'm sure you could have said to Brady in his 2nd year "you'll never get to start instead of AH, you might as well switch teams"! That would have been bad advice.
(Yes, "but JA27...". The difference with Johnny is he was never talented enough to become a legit starter. He's not even STE level, which isn't that high.)
Quote from: Tecno on October 29, 2025, 12:41:21 AMWhy not? It would appear the absolute best place a NAT RB can choose to be is in WPG. They get to dev behind the best (first AH, now BO) on a run-focused team, and are then next in line to be the future superstar.
Worked for Brady. I'm sure you could have said to Brady in his 2nd year "you'll never get to start instead of AH, you might as well switch teams"! That would have been bad advice.
(Yes, "but JA27...". The difference with Johnny is he was never talented enough to become a legit starter. He's not even STE level, which isn't that high.)
Exactly how I see it as well. Not surprising we are on the same page. I would pay Peterson well to wait.
Quote from: Tecno on October 29, 2025, 12:41:21 AMWhy not? It would appear the absolute best place a NAT RB can choose to be is in WPG. They get to dev behind the best (first AH, now BO) on a run-focused team, and are then next in line to be the future superstar.
Worked for Brady. I'm sure you could have said to Brady in his 2nd year "you'll never get to start instead of AH, you might as well switch teams"! That would have been bad advice.
(Yes, "but JA27...". The difference with Johnny is he was never talented enough to become a legit starter. He's not even STE level, which isn't that high.)
Use him or lose him, Peterson is an ambitious young guy that's only wanted to play football since he was 10 and isn't going to settle for second fiddle if given a choice. He was a Hervey project from the UofA and followed Ed to Hamilton from Edmonton, easy to see them connecting again in his home province.
Remembering the early games when Brady was out, I thought he was decent catching the ball out of the backfield, his stats back that up he was 10/15 for 51 yds. almost all picked up on YAC.
Disagree with your opinion on Augustine, he's a talented scat back that showed up in the wrong decade, every team wants a power back like Brady now.
I hate to be this guy but it's kind of embarrassing if we're actually talking about dressing a running back as a receiver (for the first time no less) for a playoff game.
Peterson isn't a special talent. He's a Canadian kid who is therefore afforded a special number of chances to develop due to fake scarcity created by a dumb rule.
If we didn't have the ratio he wouldn't have made it out of training camp.
He's not a receiver. He's an adequate backup and change of pace running back for a Canadian. I say for a Canadian because if he was American he wouldn't be good enough to roster.
We all better hope for the league's sake he doesn't get activated as a receiver unless the CFL is roughly on par with high school football in Nunavut.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 02:40:08 AMI hate to be this guy but it's kind of embarrassing if we're actually talking about dressing a running back as a receiver (for the first time no less) for a playoff game.
Peterson isn't a special talent. He's a Canadian kid who is therefore afforded a special number of chances to develop due to fake scarcity created by a dumb rule.
If we didn't have the ratio he wouldn't have made it out of training camp.
He's not a receiver. He's an adequate backup and change of pace running back for a Canadian. I say for a Canadian because if he was American he wouldn't be good enough to roster.
We all better hope for the league's sake he doesn't get activated as a receiver unless the CFL is roughly on par with high school football in Nunavut.
I am certainly not suggesting we start Peterson at receiver in the playoffs. I am suggesting that he may feel he has the talent to start with a team at running back and move to that team. Because BO20 did not follow that may not mean anything to Peterson. Brady is a Winnipeger, has ties in Winnipeg, and that had to have some bearing for him to remain in Winnipeg, despite the ability he has.
I would suggest that if Peterson is a decent receiver we give him an opportunity, while he is still a Bomber, to see what he can do in that position. It is not that we are deep in receivers at this point.
I would think he has shown enough talent this year that we would want to try to keep him here.
Quote from: Blueforlife on October 28, 2025, 10:56:43 PMBecause he is a running back and there are likely many other options at receiver that are better than him. I have seen the idea of fans proposals to change players positions in the past and I usually don't think they are good ideas. My point is why try to change a players position when they already very good at what they do. Success at RB doesn't mean he would be successful at receiver. A very rare combination of skills allows for that.
I would try to retain him at RB. I see us running Canadian RBs for as long as we can. A pillar of strength for us to allow for ratio flexibility.
We tried several different options last season and very few have been successful. I am not suggesting we change his position. Give him opportunity to see if he can play more than one position. I can almost guarantee you that when he becomes available, and assuming he stays on the same trajectory, another team will try to sign him. He is from Alberta and does not have same ties to Manitoba that Brady O. does.
With the talent he SEEMS to have, he will not patiently sit behind Brady for several seasons.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 29, 2025, 01:13:11 AMUse him or lose him, Peterson is an ambitious young guy that's only wanted to play football since he was 10 and isn't going to settle for second fiddle if given a choice.
But wasn't Brady the same? Yet he sat how many years behind AH before being the star? If it's good enough for BO20, why not Peterson?
What did we give Brady in year 3 to entice him to stay? Probably a nice ELC bump. Just do the same with Peterson. No one will pay Peterson Brady money to steal him away -- not yet anyway. Just bump him to be $ competitive and tell him he's the next Brady, just be patient.
I'm not sure Peterson is the next Brady, but from what we've seen he could be. 30% chance?
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 29, 2025, 01:13:11 AMDisagree with your opinion on Augustine, he's a talented scat back that showed up in the wrong decade, every team wants a power back like Brady now.
Which part? That he's no Brady? Or that he's no STE? Both STE/JA27 have started some games this season. Neither has been very effective, but to me STE has been better. JA seems to have been healthy-PR'd after mediocre performances.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 02:40:08 AMI hate to be this guy but it's kind of embarrassing if we're actually talking about dressing a running back as a receiver (for the first time no less) for a playoff game.
Agreed. If I'm looking at Corcoran, Cobb & Peterson, I'm making Cobb a starting REC because he's flashed nice and is more senior. Corcoran too only if we're short due to injury -- but if ratio allows I'm using Mitchell instead.
Peterson is a free dress anyhow, no need to make any AR decisions. If he gets a look in a special package, ok fine. If it works well, maybe give him 2-3. But no way he's stepping in for a "real" REC slot position for more than a couple of special plays.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 29, 2025, 05:01:57 AMI can almost guarantee you that when he becomes available, and assuming he stays on the same trajectory, another team will try to sign him.
But WPG *must* have a backup RB. That *must* be a NAT unless we have another weird year with 10 starting NATs. The *only* way you get an IMP as your backup RB is if he's already dressed, like at returner -- like Logan -- or he's a legit or potential future dual threat (like McCrae or Flanders).
So if we must have a NAT backup RB (absent the rare instances above) then by definition we must fill the spot via:
a) keeping/paying Peterson
or
b) drafting or FA'ing someone equally as promising
So watch the draft class to see if (b) is even an option -- and I don't see FA as useful because STE/JA/etc are not as good.
Therefore, my money is on us paying Peterson enough to keep him. And it shouldn't be much.
Quote from: Tecno on October 29, 2025, 06:06:14 AMBut WPG *must* have a backup RB. That *must* be a NAT unless we have another weird year with 10 starting NATs. The *only* way you get an IMP as your backup RB is if he's already dressed, like at returner -- like Logan -- or he's a legit or potential future dual threat (like McCrae or Flanders).
So if we must have a NAT backup RB (absent the rare instances above) then by definition we must fill the spot via:
a) keeping/paying Peterson
or
b) drafting or FA'ing someone equally as promising
So watch the draft class to see if (b) is even an option -- and I don't see FA as useful because STE/JA/etc are not as good.
Therefore, my money is on us paying Peterson enough to keep him. And it shouldn't be much.
Must is too strong, nice to have more like it. Brady is pretty durable for a RB. If injured, in a pinch we play Chris -Ike for the remainder of the game, then activate a (better than Peterson) import RB off the PR. I like Peterson, and he gives us ratio flex if Brady goes down, but we would survive his loss. There are also good nat RBs graduating every year. He's faster than Brady, but cannot break tackles the way Brady and AH33 did.
Ok I see you meant nat RB is a must, not specifically Peterson, fair enough.
Quote from: Tecno on October 29, 2025, 05:46:37 AMBut wasn't Brady the same? Yet he sat how many years behind AH before being the star?
Two years - and really only one season if you want to get technical. Oliveira was drafted in 2019 but only played in two games up until his season-ending injury. He saw a lot playing time in 2021 due to Harris' injury issues. He then become the team's starting tailback for the 2022 season after Harris' departure in FA. FWIW, Harris and Oliveira are ten years apart, which is a pretty huge gap for athletes.
I don't know if that situation is comparable to this one with Oliveira and Peterson.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 29, 2025, 04:49:52 AMI am certainly not suggesting we start Peterson at receiver in the playoffs. I am suggesting that he may feel he has the talent to start with a team at running back and move to that team. Because BO20 did not follow that may not mean anything to Peterson. Brady is a Winnipeger, has ties in Winnipeg, and that had to have some bearing for him to remain in Winnipeg, despite the ability he has.
I would suggest that if Peterson is a decent receiver we give him an opportunity, while he is still a Bomber, to see what he can do in that position. It is not that we are deep in receivers at this point.
I would think he has shown enough talent this year that we would want to try to keep him here.
Sure. If he wants to sign for league minimum or you want to give him a modest raise and release Brady. If he comes in at $120,000 - $150,000 can we really justify spending ~$420,000 on a pair of running backs? The salary cap is about $6M so that would be about 7% of the cap?
To put it another way, how much worse would Quinton Cooley have done if we gave him the ball this season at $70,000 backed up by Chris-Ike and an American RB on the PR? How much better a team would we have been if that $350,000 was directed to the offensive and defensive line?
I argue much better.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 02:40:08 AMI hate to be this guy but it's kind of embarrassing if we're actually talking about dressing a running back as a receiver (for the first time no less) for a playoff game.
Peterson isn't a special talent. He's a Canadian kid who is therefore afforded a special number of chances to develop due to fake scarcity created by a dumb rule.
If we didn't have the ratio he wouldn't have made it out of training camp.
He's not a receiver. He's an adequate backup and change of pace running back for a Canadian. I say for a Canadian because if he was American he wouldn't be good enough to roster.
We all better hope for the league's sake he doesn't get activated as a receiver unless the CFL is roughly on par with high school football in Nunavut.
It's 100% embarrassing that our receiver depth is this weak. Same as when we have to trot Streveler out there. It should not happen.
That said, it's an extremely biased take for you to claim Paterson is only here because he been afforded extra chances due to the ratio. He's absolutely proved he's belonged in every opportunity and is in his rookie season. He hasn't been hanging on for multiple years at the bottom of the roster playing only ST.
Quote from: Jesse on October 29, 2025, 01:56:45 PMIt's 100% embarrassing that our receiver depth is this week. Same as when we have to trot Streveler out there. It should not happen.
That said, it's an extremely biased take for you to claim Paterson is only here because he been afforded extra chances due to the ratio. He's absolutely proved he's belonged in every opportunity and is in his rookie season. He hasn't been hanging on for multiple years at the bottom of the roster playing only ST.
I think Peterson has been very good this season. The kid might get some good offers in FA.
Quote from: Jesse on October 29, 2025, 01:56:45 PMIt's 100% embarrassing that our receiver depth is this week. Same as when we have to trot Streveler out there. It should not happen.
That said, it's an extremely biased take for you to claim Paterson is only here because he been afforded extra chances due to the ratio. He's absolutely proved he's belonged in every opportunity and is in his rookie season. He hasn't been hanging on for multiple years at the bottom of the roster playing only ST.
If there was no ratio and you could have rostered Quinton Cooley or Peterson with equal roster implications which one would you have chosen based on the pre-season and training camp? Peterson has had a year to develop because he's easy to roster. Cooley was given walking papers he's not.
Which one had the chance to be better? Which one was more talented? It's Cooley by a mile. But the CFL plays this game every year and the on-field product suffers for it. So many middling to below average Canadian players will never be stars but get ride the coat tails anyway due to an outdated and poorly implemented rule. Put another way, if you're American, you must be a walk on star (sorry in advance Quinton) and if you're Canadian you get several years to develop even if the projection is that you'll never be a good starter (let's start Peterson at receiver). So out of touch with today's sports landscape, the cost of tickets and what the majority of people actually want. In my opinion of course.
Quote from: Pigskin on October 29, 2025, 02:42:14 PMI think Peterson has been very good this season. The kid might get some good offers in FA.
Peterson is a rookie so he's here next season for sure, hopefully they can figure out in that time how to integrate him into the offence instead of parking him on the sidelines, because he is a play maker. From his first game this season he knew what he was doing and he made a direct impact, it took MCI till the end of his second season to make his first big play. Can't waste talent like that, they have to figure out a way to get him involved, it would actually help Brady's game.
I don't see him as a replacement for any receiver other than Demski and his unique receiver/RB combo, which will be very hard to replace when he's done. A normal receiver is not going to take a hand-off and run it up the middle, they did that with Janarion Grant once and he broke. Peterson has the power, the speed and hopefully the hands to replicate Demski's ability in the short game, probably asking too much to expect him to haul in home-run balls over his shoulder.
I never suggested they use Peterson as a receiver for the upcoming playoff games but would love to see him lineup beside Brady for a few snaps to open up more running options. As we've seen in the past 2 seasons, if a defence intends to stuff Brady they can shut him down, just as they could occasionally with Harris. Difference is they had LaPo then who could scheme around a clogged up running game, now they have Hogan.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 05:46:46 PMIf there was no ratio and you could have rostered Quinton Cooley or Peterson with equal roster implications which one would you have chosen based on the pre-season and training camp? Peterson has had a year to develop because he's easy to roster. Cooley was given walking papers he's not.
Which one had the chance to be better? Which one was more talented? It's Cooley by a mile. But the CFL plays this game every year and the on-field product suffers for it. So many middling to below average Canadian players will never be stars but get ride the coat tails. Put another way, if you're American, you must be a walk on star and if you're Canadian you get several years to develop even if the projection is that you'll never be a good starter.
Cooley did get rostered and did get playing time and didn't show any better than Peterson.
Saying he was clearly more talented is just an uniformed opinion based on very little.
Quote from: Jesse on October 29, 2025, 05:55:33 PMCooley did get rostered and did get playing time and didn't show any better than Peterson.
Saying he was clearly more talented is just an uniformed opinion based on very little.
True, as good as he was in pre-season Cooley failed to make much of an impact when given his chance.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 29, 2025, 05:01:57 AMWe tried several different options last season and very few have been successful. I am not suggesting we change his position. Give him opportunity to see if he can play more than one position. I can almost guarantee you that when he becomes available, and assuming he stays on the same trajectory, another team will try to sign him. He is from Alberta and does not have same ties to Manitoba that Brady O. does.
With the talent he SEEMS to have, he will not patiently sit behind Brady for several seasons.
Hard stop not having him play two positions imo. He is a good RB, chances are we will always have better options on the roster or PR than him at receiver. Emergency situation yes, other than that, hard pass.
Pay the man to stay and he might. He will get reps when Brady is hurt or rested and could take over when he is done. I'm with Techno, we need Canadians at RB till the end of time. Unless Charlie 2.0 comes around lol.
Quote from: Jesse on October 29, 2025, 05:55:33 PMCooley did get rostered and did get playing time and didn't show any better than Peterson.
Saying he was clearly more talented is just an uniformed opinion based on very little.
Cooley was given a grand total of 10 rushing attempts on the season. There was never a fair competition between them because of where they were born. If Peterson was born in North Carolina and Cooley was in Alberta, we'd have had a full year of Cooley and Peterson wouldn't have even been invited to a CFL camp.
Quote from: Blueforlife on October 29, 2025, 09:47:14 PMHard stop not having him play two positions imo. He is a good RB, chances are we will always have better options on the roster or PR than him at receiver. Emergency situation yes, other than that, hard pass.
Pay the man to stay and he might. He will get reps when Brady is hurt or rested and could take over when he is done. I'm with Techno, we need Canadians at RB till the end of time. Unless Charlie 2.0 comes around lol.
Nope. Any team looking for a starting running back would be crazy not to go after Peterson. Bombers can't give him a starter's salary if he is a backup here. "Pay him" (presumably a starting RB salary) is a non-starter.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 05:46:46 PMSo out of touch with today's sports landscape, the cost of tickets and what the majority of people actually want. In my opinion of course.
The majority of fans have no idea who their RB is if it's not a star. You think the avg WPG fan had any idea it was Peterson on or Cooley on in the games they played? Some dude got the ball and ran forward into a pile. That's all most people see.
Unless your RB is Brady, no one is buying tickets (or not) because of a couple of starting NATs at RB or REC vs more talented IMPs. Most casual fans couldn't tell you 2 NATs on their team.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 05:46:46 PMWhich one had the chance to be better? Which one was more talented? It's Cooley by a mile.
I'd say Peterson was/is better. Yes, like you said, he got extra time to dev because of the passport. But in the end, he turned out better.
The proof? Not a single other team picked up Cooley, not even the ones who start IMP RBs, and not even the ones suffering RB injuries.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 01:52:31 PMTo put it another way, how much worse would Quinton Cooley have done if we gave him the ball this season at $70,000 backed up by Chris-Ike and an American RB on the PR? How much better a team would we have been if that $350,000 was directed to the offensive and defensive line?
I argue much better.
It's a fair thought experiment. I'd say Brady directly won 1-2 games this season. Once you factor in that he makes teams focus on stopping our run (opening up the RECs, in theory), he maybe won us 2-3 more. If we started Cooley instead, no one will key on our run, and Cooley isn't getting us those extra wins. Everything would be that much harder on Zach & the REC corps. Our team isn't built like BC or MTL to be pass heavy.
And this could probably be considered an "off year" for Brady, because we generally stunk so much. His value to us would increase if we were having a 2021 year.
But starting a non-ELC IMP would still cost $150 or so... so you're really only saving $100 (unless factoring in future Peterson-retention costs). I don't think getting 1 extra superstar OL would make up for the loss of Brady.
Besides, it's all moot. WM has decided Brady is the face of the Bombers for the next long while and that's that.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 10:36:09 PMCooley was given a grand total of 10 rushing attempts on the season. There was never a fair competition between them because of where they were born. If Peterson was born in North Carolina and Cooley was in Alberta, we'd have had a full year of Cooley and Peterson wouldn't have even been invited to a CFL camp.
Maybe. Probably. NATs do get the extra breaks, but it often pays off. In they end they still have to be good, unless they are just a ratio-hider like Hurl. Luckily for the CFL, there are a lot less ratio-hiders than there used to be -- used to be at least one on every team. Most teams now have quality NATs that are starting.
It is the CFL and I'm fine with letting our boys get extra time to dev & flourish. Not like the IMPs didn't get zillions of opportunities and dev in the US of A!
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 29, 2025, 10:47:34 PMNope. Any team looking for a starting running back would be crazy not to go after Peterson. Bombers can't give him a starter's salary if he is a backup here. "Pay him" (presumably a starting RB salary) is a non-starter.
Yup, over simplifying it. Yes a chance clubs try to sign him. Also a chance many others are happy with an American back that are a dime a dozen. Paying him a reasonable offer is a great value, insurance policy and future proofs our positon. You 1st said we should try him at receiver which is a long shot a little out there idea imo. Now you claim he is as good as gone unless we pay him starter money. Not buying what you are selling which is pretty normal. Agree to disagree. A great talent that we should retain at RB. Make him an offer he can't refuse. Don't have to break the bank imo. If we have success this post season and next players will want to stay here. Bombers are the class of the CFL with steady coaching, good management and the best stadium and fans imo.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 10:36:09 PMCooley was given a grand total of 10 rushing attempts on the season. There was never a fair competition between them because of where they were born. If Peterson was born in North Carolina and Cooley was in Alberta, we'd have had a full year of Cooley and Peterson wouldn't have even been invited to a CFL camp.
This is the CFL, even though you want us to be NFL Jr. we are not and Canadians have the advantage due to the ratio rules and I sure hope that how it will always will be. Your argument holds no weight imo as that just how the league is structured.
Cooley was good, American RBs at his level are not hard to find. Peterson at his age is a rare talent to have immediate success. I don't agree with your assessment of Cooley vs. Peterson. Both good, need more sample size to make a determination of the talent, effectiveness comparison. Different types of backs. I have a lot of faith in Peterson having a decent career in the CFL. Cooley is likely one and done, which he doesn't deserve but its how it is.
I'm with Techno, TLB and Jesse on this one.
And like someone already said, Peterson is a lock on ELC for 2 years (1 year - 2026 - left). At least that's what it appears to be...
Was he a '25 DP by HAM and they immediately traded him to us, and thus the original '25 ELC continues on, but now in WPG?
Therefore all of this discussion can easily be put off until FA27.
Quote from: Blueforlife on October 30, 2025, 12:57:25 AMYup, over simplifying it. Yes a chance clubs try to sign him. Also a chance many others are happy with an American back that are a dime a dozen. Paying him a reasonable offer is a great value, insurance policy and future proofs our positon. You 1st said we should try him at receiver which is a long shot a little out there idea imo. Now you claim he is as good as gone unless we pay him starter money. Not buying what you are selling which is pretty normal. Agree to disagree. A great talent that we should retain at RB. Make him an offer he can't refuse. Don't have to break the bank imo. If we have success this post season and next players will want to stay here. Bombers are the class of the CFL with steady coaching, good management and the best stadium and fans imo.
This is the CFL, even though you want us to be NFL Jr. we are not and Canadians have the advantage due to the ratio rules and I sure hope that how it will always will be. Your argument holds no weight imo as that just how the league is structured.
Cooley was good, American RBs at his level are not hard to find. Peterson at his age is a rare talent to have immediate success. I don't agree with your assessment of Cooley vs. Peterson. Both good, need more sample size to make a determination of the talent, effectiveness comparison. Different types of backs. I have a lot of faith in Peterson having a decent career in the CFL. Cooley is likely one and done, which he doesn't deserve but its how it is.
I'm with Techno, TLB and Jesse on this one
Again, nope. As you have stated numerous times we agree to disagree - on numerous levels.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 10:36:09 PMCooley was given a grand total of 10 rushing attempts on the season. There was never a fair competition between them because of where they were born. If Peterson was born in North Carolina and Cooley was in Alberta, we'd have had a full year of Cooley and Peterson wouldn't have even been invited to a CFL camp.
This is football. You have to make to with the opportunities you get. And they liked Cooley. MOS said you find a way to keep that guy on the roster at the beginning of the season. But he didn't outperform Peterson, so they made they choice.
In Peterson's first game he went 23 for 130 and a TD.
Quote from: Tecno on October 29, 2025, 11:17:16 PMAnd this could probably be considered an "off year" for Brady, because we generally stunk so much. His value to us would increase if we were having a 2021 year.
I know you put "off year" in quotes. But so many people people are blaming Hogan for not running Brady enough when they only reason Brady's stats are down is because he was injured for 3 games and skipped the last one. He actually had career highs in receiving yards and targets and was on pace for more carries/yards/TDs than last year in the games he played. He would have been close to career highs had he been healthy.
Quote from: Jesse on October 30, 2025, 09:33:22 AMThis is football. You have to make to with the opportunities you get. And they liked Cooley. MOS said you find a way to keep that guy on the roster at the beginning of the season. But he didn't outperform Peterson, so they made they choice.
In Peterson's first game he went 23 for 130 and a TD.
I know you put "off year" in quotes. But so many people people are blaming Hogan for not running Brady enough when they only reason Brady's stats are down is because he was injured for 3 games and skipped the last one. He actually had career highs in receiving yards and targets and was on pace for more carries/yards/TDs than last year in the games he played. He would have been close to career highs had he been healthy.
BO missed the 1st 3 games if you discount the 1st 4 plays of game 1. Then like many veterans he was rested last week. So it was really a 14 game season on the field. Play calling limited him in other games.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 29, 2025, 10:36:09 PMCooley was given a grand total of 10 rushing attempts on the season. There was never a fair competition between them because of where they were born. If Peterson was born in North Carolina and Cooley was in Alberta, we'd have had a full year of Cooley and Peterson wouldn't have even been invited to a CFL camp.
(https://media.tenor.com/2jiBcYLNpeEAAAAM/eye-roll-ugh.gif)
Quote from: Jesse on October 30, 2025, 09:33:22 AMThis is football. You have to make to with the opportunities you get. And they liked Cooley. MOS said you find a way to keep that guy on the roster at the beginning of the season. But he didn't outperform Peterson, so they made they choice.
In Peterson's first game he went 23 for 130 and a TD.
Jake Thomas went 9 tackles for 18 games and can you care to guess why he continued to be rostered? Was it because...wait for it...he was born in Canada? Ding. Ding. Ding. It wouldn't have mattered what Cooley did or Peterson did, it really only mattered where they were born. Either would be on the team today solely based on that alone. That's just cold truth.
Quote from: Blueforlife on October 30, 2025, 12:57:25 AMThis is the CFL, even though you want us to be NFL Jr. we are not and Canadians have the advantage due to the ratio rules and I sure hope that how it will always will be. Your argument holds no weight imo as that just how the league is structured.
Cooley was good, American RBs at his level are not hard to find. Peterson at his age is a rare talent to have immediate success. I don't agree with your assessment of Cooley vs. Peterson. Both good, need more sample size to make a determination of the talent, effectiveness comparison. Different types of backs. I have a lot of faith in Peterson having a decent career in the CFL. Cooley is likely one and done, which he doesn't deserve but its how it is.
I'm with Techno, TLB and Jesse on this one.
This whole ratio business is so poorly thought out. It isn't even the least bit Canadian.
I argue more Canadians would feel proud and identify with a league that has equal rules for all, where talent and hard work alone is celebrated. A league where it doesn't matter where you are from, if you are good enough, you will be welcomed and find comfort in friends, family and teammates.
Right now we have a league where Canadians are paid more to do less. Have a very unfair advantage over others based solely on birthplace or family lineage.
It's probably the most un-Canadian thing I've ever seen twisted into Canadian values in my life. And it makes the product worse. There is no National Canadian Football team we are training for. If Cooley isn't as good as Peterson, why do we need to give Peterson a half marathon of a head start?
The league will get there eventually because the thinking and logic is flawed.
(https://media.tenor.com/Uk8exXrosBMAAAAM/laughing-colin-jost.gif)
A few years ago I also got laughter when I said we should move to align more with the US game. Here comes 2026 and 2027.
We're also starting the season even earlier in 2027 as revealed by the Grey Cup announcement in Regina. Wonder why that is? Clearly they're not doing it to overlap more with NHL playoffs so there must be some other motivation.
Let's bookmark this and revisit in a few years once the CBA is renegotiated with the new commissioner and we'll see who's laughing then.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 04:25:53 PMA few years ago I also got laughter when I said we should move to align more with the US game. Here comes 2026 and 2027.
We're also starting the season even earlier in 2027 as revealed by the Grey Cup announcement in Regina. Wonder why that is? Clearly they're not doing it to overlap more with NHL playoffs so there must be some other motivation.
Let's bookmark this and revisit in a few years once the CBA is renegotiated with the new commissioner and we'll see who's laughing then.
What laughter are you talking about. We are all very much concerned that this is exactly what is happening. That's why we're all upset.
What are you even talking about?
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 02:10:53 PMThis whole ratio business is so poorly thought out. It isn't even the least bit Canadian.
I argue more Canadians would feel proud and identify with a league that has equal rules for all, where talent and hard work alone is celebrated. A league where it doesn't matter where you are from, if you are good enough, you will be welcomed and find comfort in friends, family and teammates.
Right now we have a league where Canadians are paid more to do less. Have a very unfair advantage over others based solely on birthplace or family lineage.
It's probably the most un-Canadian thing I've ever seen twisted into Canadian values in my life. And it makes the product worse. There is no National Canadian Football team we are training for. If Cooley isn't as good as Peterson, why do we need to give Peterson a half marathon of a head start?
The league will get there eventually because the thinking and logic is flawed.
Absolutely I agree.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 04:25:53 PMA few years ago I also got laughter when I said we should move to align more with the US game. Here comes 2026 and 2027.
We're also starting the season even earlier in 2027 as revealed by the Grey Cup announcement in Regina. Wonder why that is? Clearly they're not doing it to overlap more with NHL playoffs so there must be some other motivation.
Let's bookmark this and revisit in a few years once the CBA is renegotiated with the new commissioner and we'll see who's laughing then.
Better chance at better weather.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 04:25:53 PMA few years ago I also got laughter when I said we should move to align more with the US game. Here comes 2026 and 2027.
We're also starting the season even earlier in 2027 as revealed by the Grey Cup announcement in Regina.
Let's bookmark this and revisit in a few years once the CBA is renegotiated with the new commissioner and we'll see who's laughing then.
With he blowback on losing the 55 yard line, and polls showing reduced viewership based on that alone, actual movement towards "aligning" with the NFL (ratio, 12 men, waggle, fair catch, 3 downs...) ain't a never gonna happen.
In 5 years, when the cosmetic changes prove out to be improvements and not hurt the CFL game experience, you might see some movement on ratio.
I'd be all for a change in ratio that makes a "Real Canadian" as someone born in Canada or a citizen that was a resident during his football development years (9-18) and educated at a Canadian school, or a product of Canadian minor football. Maybe have a Second Tier Canadian that uses current eligibility. And reduce the Nats to 3RC+3STC starters, and 12RC+6STC on the active roster, with unlimited PR spots for Real Canadians.
"Nationalized Americans" makes no sense. Unless the player becomes a full time resident, gets his citizenship and has been here a significant time (6 years?), then I'd be OK with a couple Veteran Naturalized Canadians in the STC ratio.
As to 3 downs, or any of the other uniquely Canadian CFL rules, as I said, ain't a never gonna change.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 04:25:53 PMA few years ago I also got laughter when I said we should move to align more with the US game. Here comes 2026 and 2027.
We're also starting the season even earlier in 2027 as revealed by the Grey Cup announcement in Regina. Wonder why that is? Clearly they're not doing it to overlap more with NHL playoffs so there must be some other motivation.
Let's bookmark this and revisit in a few years once the CBA is renegotiated with the new commissioner and we'll see who's laughing then.
You want American football? Watch American football (and I bet you do, as most NFL fans are the ones who support these rules). I do not. Leave the CFL Canadian..do not Americanize our beautiful game and field.
Sorry, but I do not feel the same. I also do not watch the NFL, I love the CFL. It is far better of a game. It should have been left alone.
Quote from: Tecno on October 30, 2025, 01:27:55 AMAnd like someone already said, Peterson is a lock on ELC for 2 years (1 year - 2026 - left). At least that's what it appears to be...
Was he a '25 DP by HAM and they immediately traded him to us, and thus the original '25 ELC continues on, but now in WPG?
He was cut by the Ti-Cats and resigned, does that void the terms of his rookie contract?
From Wiki:
"Peterson was selected by the Hamilton Tiger-Cats in the fourth round, with the 36th overall pick, of the 2024 CFL draft. He signed with the team on May 3, 2024. He was released before the start of the 2024 CFL season and returned to Alberta for his final season of U Sports eligibility. Peterson re-signed with the Tiger-Cats on December 9, 2024. On April 29, 2025, the morning of the CFL draft, Peterson, the second overall pick in the 2025 CFL global draft, and the 39th overall pick in the 2025 CFL draft were traded to the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for Kyle Samson."
Better than the average bear.
"On June 12, 2025, in Winnipeg's season opener against the BC Lions, Blue Bombers starting running back Brady Oliveira left the game with an injury late in the first quarter. Peterson then made his CFL debut, rushing 23 times for 130 yards and one touchdown as Winnipeg won 34–20. Peterson was named the CFL Running Back of the Week."
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 02:10:53 PMThis whole ratio business is so poorly thought out. It isn't even the least bit Canadian.
I argue more Canadians would feel proud and identify with a league that has equal rules for all, where talent and hard work alone is celebrated. A league where it doesn't matter where you are from, if you are good enough, you will be welcomed and find comfort in friends, family and teammates.
Right now we have a league where Canadians are paid more to do less. Have a very unfair advantage over others based solely on birthplace or family lineage.
It's probably the most un-Canadian thing I've ever seen twisted into Canadian values in my life. And it makes the product worse. There is no National Canadian Football team we are training for. If Cooley isn't as good as Peterson, why do we need to give Peterson a half marathon of a head start?
The league will get there eventually because the thinking and logic is flawed.
Disagree with exactly everything you state. You simply don't like the structure of this great league. I believe the ratio rules are critical to keep this truly a Canadian game and ensures the strong ties to our communities and Universities. It allows Canadians to dream and play in the great league. Now we just have to fix the business side. We have built a traditional of many generations on how we have structured this great league.
You describe the NFL, its an option if you don't like this game. We are ok with that.
Quote from: blue_gold_84 on October 30, 2025, 03:35:05 PM(https://media.tenor.com/Uk8exXrosBMAAAAM/laughing-colin-jost.gif)
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Quote from: ModAdmin on October 30, 2025, 06:07:46 AMAgain, nope. As you have stated numerous times we agree to disagree - on numerous levels.
Turning a young stud RB into a receiver is a terrible idea, yup.
Signing / retaining him is a real possibility, again yup.
Keeping him as a RB is the most logical and likely outcome. Check.
Quote from: Throw Long Bannatyne on October 30, 2025, 05:59:03 PMHe was cut by the Ti-Cats and resigned, does that void the terms of his rookie contract?
That's interesting! Then I think it would all depend on what the terms of the 2nd HAM signing are. If it is 2 year, signed around FA25, then we don't worry about it until FA27. And one would think that HAM would have tied this guy down to a 2 year? Why give him the luxury of only a 1 year?
Guess it will take someone privy to contract terms to tell us. Or we wait to see if he's a pending FA when the lists start coming out.
Quote from: Sir Blue and Gold on October 30, 2025, 02:10:53 PMThis whole ratio business is so poorly thought out. It isn't even the least bit Canadian.
I argue more Canadians would feel proud and identify with a league that has equal rules for all, where talent and hard work alone is celebrated. A league where it doesn't matter where you are from, if you are good enough, you will be welcomed and find comfort in friends, family and teammates.
You could just as easily go the other way. Let's change the CFL to exclude everyone who's not Canadian. I'd probably rather do that than turn into XFL-North.
In fact, I do believe at one time that was the case -- before the concept of an "IMP".
Ratio will always be part of the CBA discussions, and as long as ratio means that more than 50% of the league needs Canadian status, we know how that works. Stack the voters...
The minute the union gives in on any of the ratio, then the ratio becomes in peril of totally disappearing. Because when the union is majority non Canadian, why would they vote to exclude themselves?
The biggest issue with True Canadians making the league is the fact that Americans have access to high level training and coaching from the time they can walk. Canadians in certain areas have good high school mentors, and a limited number get into Universities with decent levels of coaching, and a select few come up through the junior ranks, but in general, by the time they are eligible to play CFL ball, their skills are just not honed the same way Americans are, or "fake passport" Nats.
So True Canadians need some time at the pro level to catch up and blossom. Creating a pathway for them to develop at the pro level, be it special PR's or expanded AR's that allow you to carry addition True Canadians on ELC's need to be in place to protect that development. There will be some that jump the line due to pure talent, like the Philpots, but others will need a few seasons of "seasoning".