Injuries?

[Blue In BC]

They could bring Vibert on if he's ready to be the 7th man but with MCI available they don't seem to be using that set very often.  As it is, Neufeld, Reynolds, Vanterpool and Wallace have all have played OT in the past, so they should be able to adapt for in game injury.

Vanterpool isn't on the roster at the moment. I'm speaking with the current OL on the AR, an injury at OT means Neufeld moves to OT and  ELI moves to RG. That leaves no other OL in reserve except an emergency DL like Thomas or Lawson becoming that player. Depth on the IR or PR is not the issue.

If we don't have an injury all is good. If we have an in game injury in Q1 that might be bad. So it's just a comment about depth and risk in game.

We don't know much about Vibert but he might still be an option to be a 7th OL, as the emergency guy. I'd take that to reduce my feeling about in game risk. I think he'd be a preferable emergency player than needing to use Thomas for example which also reduces rotation on the DL.

That would allow other options using the ratio advantage elsewhere.

Anyway let's see who might be available to dress this week and how it gives us options we didn't have against the Elks.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Vanterpool isn't on the roster at the moment. I'm speaking with the current OL on the AR, an injury at OT means Neufeld moves to OT and  ELI moves to RG. That leaves no other OL in reserve except an emergency DL like Thomas or Lawson becoming that player. Depth on the IR or PR is not the issue.

If we don't have an injury all is good. If we have an in game injury in Q1 that might be bad. So it's just a comment about depth and risk in game.

We don't know much about Vibert but he might still be an option to be a 7th OL, as the emergency guy. I'd take that to reduce my feeling about in game risk. I think he'd be a preferable emergency player than needing to use Thomas for example which also reduces rotation on the DL.

That would allow other options using the ratio advantage elsewhere.

Anyway let's see who might be available to dress this week and how it gives us options we didn't have against the Elks.

I would think eventually Kornelson comes off to be replaced by Woods and Vibert comes on but pretty hard to predict with so many Import pieces waiting to slot in.

[TecnoGenius]

I'd make an argument having Vanterpool back on the AR due to how thin our OL depth is at the moment.

The only way Vant gets back on the AR at the moment (with our Brady problem) is if he's far and away better at the run game than Wallace.  They seemed about equal in pass pro, and equal means dress the NAT.

When Vant was in our run game was gangbusters, even with a backup RB.  When Wallace was in our run game was basically neutered until garbage time, both games.  However, some of that may be on teams getting film on Peterson, and Peterson clearly not being Brady 2.0.

Mafia will know if Vant has that extra run edge.  My gut says that when Brady returns we go back to 3 IMP OL, and Wallace goes back to 6th.  However, my thought, as always, is that the preferred lineup is Lofton/Randolph, not Vant/Randolph.  But we won't know that until BOTH Brady and Lofton are healthy!

[Blue In BC]

We've been fairly lucky so far aside from Oliveria getting injured. Some teams are losing key players and others every game.  Hopefully that trend continues for us but it's a long season.

I think Adams is another QB that we can get into his head if he struggles early.  Overall their current injuries are significant and I don't see any great solutions yet.

Just a guess but I think Wilson gets activated at MLB for this game. He may not start but he's been playing and is at game speed. Bighill's time in Calgary might be very short lived. I can't see him willing to sit on the PR for very long now that another MLB was added.