Recent posts

#21

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 Training Camp

Last post by theaardvark - May 02, 2026, 05:07:51 PM

I really, really hope more than a few newbies make the AR.

We need some upgrades, and the only way a newbie gets on the AR is if he is a substantial upgrade (MOS loves his vets), so the more newbies, the better the team.

The sheer number of Oline and DB bodes well for upgrading the team...

The position I am most interested in, thought, remains QB.  This is the most potential we have seen in the QB room in a long, long time.

#22

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 CFL Draft - Blue Bomb...

Last post by Throw Long Bannatyne - May 02, 2026, 04:56:31 PM

Not for 1st rounders.  I think 1st rounders should 100% be expected to start in year 1 or year 2.  They aren't as valuable if they take until year 3 because then you have only 1 year to take advantage of their cheap near-ELC wage.  If they light it up in year 3 you get reamed on their re-sign before year 4 (as someone said about Judge).

Look at Kramdi, 2RDP, was already making starts in year 2.  Shay needs to be at least that level.

So me expecting Shay to get many actual game reps (as backup) in year 2 is actually going easy on the kid.  In fact, if we have some dire starter-LBer injury mid-season, it would be great if Shay could start.  See also: Dequoy.

Totally agree, Shay and Smith need to get real game time this season, if they can hold their own against  import contemporaries they move to becoming starters mid-late season or next year.  Sucks to be Tony Jones in this case, but he is an easy replaceable commodity.

#23

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: major announcement - big c...

Last post by Throw Long Bannatyne - May 02, 2026, 04:29:51 PM

When was this...just curious. Around 1984, I could see at least half  of the 49ers and Vikings games on the American channels, which happened to be my 2 favorite teams of the 80s. Was it different in the 70s?

I just Googled the American TV deal in place at the time. The NFL negotiated with the big 3 networks (ABC, NBC, and CBS) in 1982, and struck a 5 year TV deal. The Golden age of CFL would have been 1977-83,I assume? 

NBC (Channel 4) would televise AFC games
CBS (Channel 6) would televise NFC games
ABC (Channel 8 until 1986) would televise Monday Night Football

I know that Channel 12 (CKND TV) would be the Canadian network mainly responsible for televising the NFL for the entire duration of the 80s.  The games would usually go from noon to evening.  I think CTV (Channel 5) also showed NFL games, IIRC.  I'm pretty sure MTN Channel 8 (debuted in Winnipeg in 86) also showed NFL games.

In 1989, TSN became affordable to both sides of the river (Videon and Greater Winnipeg Cable), and with it I believe they showed a Sunday Night Game.  Then of course, with the cable TV boom, and FOX outbidding CBS in 1994 for rights to the NFC games, people could pretty much watch the majority of games for any team.

Need to go back to a time before cable when we only had 3 channels on TV, early to mid 70's would have seen peak attendance for Argos, Als and the Esks.  Free trade kicked down the door to American culture.

#24

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 Training Camp

Last post by Blue In BC - May 02, 2026, 02:55:53 PM

Of course. We will see roster changes without question. I'd be more concerned if we're talking about DIs or Americans but it's always been really easy to roster the Canadians you want since most don't need to start. If you look at the roster from last year's playoff game, for a random example, we could simply remove Ball as a third safety option and have rostered another Canadian on offense. Not advocating for Chris-Ike specifically, just saying there's no world in which we couldn't have both playing if we deem that's the best fit. There's a ton of ways to do that .

Agreed. I think Ball, Kornelson, Kelly, Novak, Cobb, Corcoran and Chris-Ike are players I'm not sure about going into the season. The 2 man reserve might create that additional space week to week as players get rotated in or off the roster.

I lost track but we've drafted and signed some Canadian receivers that weren't drafted. I have no idea whether any one of them might push a player from 2025.

IMO we have a glut of players that are mostly ST players. Maybe there is a small trade to be made for a low draft pick next year or neg list player.  Those that I mentioned are not bad players but we can't keep everybody.

By my rough count we had 90 players before adding new draft choices and a few late import additions.. In theory we'll have to delete 15 - 20 of those by May 12, some of which right after rookie camp. That's just on the horizon. Actually we have to reduce that to 85 before rookie camp. So early next week there will be a few changes.

We're at the point for every new signing of ( counters ) will require another to be released.

#25

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: CFL Game Changes FAQ - UPD...

Last post by Jesse - May 02, 2026, 02:25:15 PM

We already have Stan's replacement.  That problem has been solved.

RT replacement then.

#26

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 Training Camp

Last post by Sir Blue and Gold - May 02, 2026, 02:19:14 PM

Both of those may be true. Chris-Ike is a good ST player.

All that said, there are so many variables including whether we lose 1 Canadian choice by adding a 2nd global player to the AR.

We have 11 draft choices to consider counting the 2 global players. How many push to make the AR and who gets pushed off as a result? Or who gets bumped to the new reserve list?

Which way does the ratio go on the OL and receiver choices?

I was expecting 2 or 3 newbies to make the roster.

It wouldn't be surprising to see some deletions as a result. Players lose opportunities in the numbers game and how the roster gets constructed.

Of course. We will see roster changes without question. I'd be more concerned if we're talking about DIs or Americans but it's always been really easy to roster the Canadians you want since most don't need to start. If you look at the roster from last year's playoff game, for a random example, we could simply remove Ball as a third safety option and have rostered another Canadian on offense. Not advocating for Chris-Ike specifically, just saying there's no world in which we couldn't have both playing if we deem that's the best fit. There's a ton of ways to do that .

#27

Offside Forum / Re: NHL 2026 Playoffs

Last post by JockitchwithRich - May 02, 2026, 02:13:42 PM

Well done Sabres. Their terrific regular season has not made them blink but rather charge on. This should be an another confidence builder.
The Utes gave a decent try but alas could not get the surprise results that the Ducks achieved

#28

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 Training Camp

Last post by Blue In BC - May 02, 2026, 01:23:27 PM

Exactly. Daniels would have the flexibility to replace a FB, WR or OT in a pinch. It's nice to have that kind of flexibility.
His main role will be to play the extra OL on short yardage packages, and maybe some 1st downs where there's an 80% chance of a run.
I think he eliminates the need for a 7th OL on the AR.

Both of those may be true. Chris-Ike is a good ST player.

All that said, there are so many variables including whether we lose 1 Canadian choice by adding a 2nd global player to the AR.

We have 11 draft choices to consider counting the 2 global players. How many push to make the AR and who gets pushed off as a result? Or who gets bumped to the new reserve list?

Which way does the ratio go on the OL and receiver choices?

I was expecting 2 or 3 newbies to make the roster.

It wouldn't be surprising to see some deletions as a result. Players lose opportunities in the numbers game and how the roster gets constructed.

#29

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: Global Draft

Last post by Blue In BC - May 02, 2026, 01:06:21 PM

Maybe it's confusing because you're not thinking from the perspective of whoever pushed this change.  From what I read it sounds like this push was from the CFLPA, and maybe from the commish.  Until I read otherwise, I'll assume the teams weren't the main proponents.

CFLPA wants it for your 3rd bolded point: 2 more players making bank (vs PR money).  That's really all the CFPLA wants, more players earning more money (and safety).  They literally care about nothing else (nor should they), beyond tokenism ("we want the cfl to succeed!").

League would want it as it sounds like they want to cut down on the shenanigans (see the "cleaned up language" thread).  Make stashing 2 guys legit and transparent -- everyone wins.

Why not just +2 the AR?  The teams & league may not have wanted it.  1) That's a very tough change to later reverse if it doesn't work out -- whereas the reserve can be tweaked every season without trouble.  2) May complicate how the teams structure sets & schemes and roster composition -- GM's/HC's may not want to have rewrite all of their carefully crafted plans.  3) If they +2'd the AR without any changes to 1GIR, teams would have gobbled up the +2 and *still* stashed another 2 on 1GIR.  4) Too late for '26 season to +2 the AR anyhow -- have to announce that sort of change in Dec.

I don't find it confusing at all. Whether it has an impact at all on stashing players on the 1 game IR, I doubt. We'll see players still moved to 1 game IR.

I'm not suggesting a 60 man AR ( as an extreme example ). However if you add more players to the AR, there is less need to stash players in that sense.

If you can create a reserve list, you can add or reduce the number on the AR in the future.

#30

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 2026 Training Camp

Last post by LXTSN - May 02, 2026, 01:03:55 PM

If we're going three Canadian receivers we're going to want more Canadians at the skill positions on offense. Even if we're not, there is no reason we can't have both Chris Ike and Daniels on the roster if we want to. There are so many ways to do that.

Exactly. Daniels would have the flexibility to replace a FB, WR or OT in a pinch. It's nice to have that kind of flexibility.
His main role will be to play the extra OL on short yardage packages, and maybe some 1st downs where there's an 80% chance of a run.
I think he eliminates the need for a 7th OL on the AR.