Winnipeg @ BC the Rematch

[Blueforlife]

If the team decides to add Munier-Bailey to the AR which Canadian is most probable to be removed? If BO can't play there is a domino effect that could change the answer. If they take out Vanterpool, then we might need to add Vibert. We could also see Cobb added in as receiver depth.

However, back to the base question I think Novak would be the odd man out. I'm not suggesting he isn't a good player but from a depth point of view, he's excess at the moment. Gaining Bailey would give us an additional player off the edge and coaches are high on him too.

Leroux probably comes in for Benson.

The rest depends on whether they decide to add Cooley. They might but the direct changes to accommodate that includes multiple options.

For that matter it's not 100% certain Oliveria doesn't dress. If his injury doesn't risk further damage, he could be the emergency back up rather than needing to start.

Agree Novak

[Blue In BC]

Another ratio puzzle to solve, I don't think they would dress Kornelson along with Lawson and Jake if Woods was healthy, although they might have to.  Ratio flexibility is hampering lineup decisions in multiple positions.  Big picture, maintaining 3 Natls. on the O-line is an important objective.

Getting Woods onto the AR is another tough choice regarding choosing the DI's. I don't think I ever expected to have both import DT's active at the same time. I'd like to but it's not easy. It seemed depth at DE would be the 1st choice. That meant seeing Person added.

Since Wood is still not healthy that's a question for another day. I don't think adding Person this week falls into the choices that will be made.

The injury to Oliveria and what we do about it is where choices will be made.

[Blueforlife]

Injuries

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Getting Woods onto the AR is another tough choice regarding choosing the DI's. I don't think I ever expected to have both import DT's active at the same time. I'd like to but it's not easy. It seemed depth at DE would be the 1st choice. That meant seeing Person added.

Since Wood is still not healthy that's a question for another day. I don't think adding Person this week falls into the choices that will be made.

The injury to Oliveria and what we do about it is where choices will be made.

Going to re-watch the game to get a better understanding of what they did, but it seems they solved their pass rush problems in multiple ways, so the DE pass rush becomes less important.  Thinking back to last year  pretty sure they had 4 DT for most games, 2 Natls + 2 NI's, but it's hard to say what position Garbutt was playing much of the time. Willie may be the last of a dying breed of tall willowy DE's, even the Bombers have passed on guys that fit that mould.

[theaardvark]

Dod Clercius get nicked?  Not good...

[Blue In BC]

Going to re-watch the game to get a better understanding of what they did, but it seems they solved their pass rush problems in multiple ways, so the DE pass rush becomes less important.  Thinking back to last year  pretty sure they had 4 DT for most games, 2 Natls + 2 NI's, but it's hard to say what position Garbutt was playing much of the time. Willie may be the last of a dying breed of tall willowy DE's, even the Bombers have passed on guys that fit that mould.

I think having added Vaughters at DE and Lawson back from injury at DT made a big difference. Also didn't think the Lions run game was that good in the 1st place.

My point was that we have Canadian depth at DT but not a lot going on for depth at DE. The global player could help in that regard and is a ratio freebe for the elimination of a Canadian back up, as mentioned perhaps Novak.  Novak probably only sees reps on ST's at the moment.

However there still isn't an open spot for Wood as a DI even when he's healthy. Keep in mind that when we were starting 8 or 9 Canadians that gave us a lot more flexibility.

I saw a couple of things on the daily IR list. One was the Clercius was a DNP. That doesn't mean he can't play but he's not 100%.

The other was that Rourke went from " limited " to " DNP ". I'm not convinced he'll play and if he does, he'll have difficulty with distance, velocity and accuracy IMO.  For that matter if impacts his mobility and ability to take a hit.

Lionbackers now suggesting that Rourke will not play and that forces a ratio change as well.

[Blue In BC]

Dod Clercius get nicked?  Not good...

Yeah, that's a concern on top of everything else. Might be necessary to add Cobb as receiver depth.

[TecnoGenius]

Dod Clercius get nicked?  Not good...

On the bright side, I'd be very curious to see what Corcoran can do in live fire.  However, he'll probably suck on the blocking compared to Clercius: he seems tiny / water-buggy.

However, you are correct in that no Clercius would be far from ideal.

[TecnoGenius]

Over in Vancouver Nathan Rourke was listed as limited. Gary Peters who had an uncharacteristically bad outing in Winnipeg hits the list with a thigh injury and a limited designation.

Maybe Peters got hurt on the same high speed tackle that took out Brady.  LOL, it would have been better for everyone had he not caught up with Brady!

[TecnoGenius]

After the depth chart is submitted, an injury substitution can be made up to 30 minutes before kickoff. The player removed from roster must end up on an injured list and a practice roster player can be added to the active roster.

I've always wondered how this worked.  Thanks!  So the "punishment" for changing the roster on a GTD is the player MUST go to IR.  Kind of like the "3 plays" rule for an on-field injury works in-game.

However, it is limited to just 1 change?  If not, you could lie about a bunch of players who you wanted to send to IR anyhow being fake GTDs so the opponent doesn't know who you are really going to dress.  Then you send them to the IR like you always intended to.

Of course that would stand out like a sore thumb and get you frowns from the other teams...

[TecnoGenius]

Cooley crash landed on the planet owned by the most dominant RB in the CFL who also happens to be the reigning MOP and MOC.  Either he didn't do his homework, had no knowledge of the ratio, or someone sold him a bill of goods regarding his opportunity to make the team.

...

Possible scenario he gets in a few games this season, does well, and they trade him for draft picks or a more usable asset later on.  If not, gone next off-season.  One extra thought, when does Brady's deal expire?

I think many are jumping the gun on both Cooley and Peterson.  They are both rookies and really have proven nothing.  Even one great game by Peterson doesn't mean anything, because first game rookies often blow things up because of lack of film (not to diminish his initial success).

It would take sustained success over many games for either to be considered to be "worth" anything in terms of trade or other-team interest.  Until then the IMP is just one of many "dime a dozen" hopefuls, and Peterson is just another JA27 (not a bad thing, mind you).

We can all be hopeful though!  They certainly appear to have the "it" factor so far!

[TecnoGenius]

I'm not sure any of the options mentioned would be willing to return to PR. However that is speculation.

Any/all of the rookies, or guys who were mostly on PR in '24, will be "willing to return to the PR".  If they're not, then they'll get Gaitor'd and Rutledge'd.

For example, Vanterpool, Randolph and Peterson should all have no expectations to be on AR.  And the fact that we've been practicing with Wallace at LG not only hints that we'll go with 3 NAT OL (and thus Vatnerpool to PR), but we're almost certainly ARing (and probably starting!) Cooley.

Again, let's not get ahead of ourselves on all of these "expected PR" guys being on the PR.  That's the normal dev route.  No one should get a big head.  If nothing else they've all seen how easy it is to get on the AR as ratios / IRs dictate.

[TecnoGenius]

After Preseason O'Shea was talking about how we needed to find a way to get Cooley onto roster and see what he can do
This seems like the perfect opportunity to do so

Yup and yup.  MOS made the rare statement about Cooley.  Haven't heard that since Schoen and D.Alford's first TC's/PS's.  And I don't think he said they "needed to find a way", I think he said "they have to find a way" to get him rostered.

There may not be a more perfect time to do so than now.  It'll be darn hard to get Cooley on AR when Brady is healthy because Cooley seems to be a one-trick pony (too bad for him).  If he could return or REC, it would be a different story...

[Stats Junkie]

The other was that Rourke went from " limited " to " DNP ". I'm not convinced he'll play and if he does, he'll have difficulty with distance, velocity and accuracy IMO.  For that matter if impacts his mobility and ability to take a hit.

Lionbackers now suggesting that Rourke will not play and that forces a ratio change as well.

According to Farhan Lalji, Rourke was QB1 during the walk through portion of Tuesday's practice. Rourke then sat out the full speed portion of the practice with Jeremiah Masoli taking over as QB1.

Nathan Rourke - post practice on Tuesday

- it still hurts
- it is something that could turn into a longer injury if not handled properly

[TecnoGenius]

- it still hurts
- it is something that could turn into a longer injury if not handled properly

Ya, I can't believe no one has brought up Fajardo's legendary "obliques".  Man did TSN play that store TO DEATH that year going into our WDF.

So if you want to know how long Rourke will be out, just try to remember how long Fajardo was out.  I think it was a couple/few weeks.  And when he went into that WDF he was clearly 100% -- TSN talking points notwithstanding.