Mock Drafts

[ModAdmin]

Here is the first of mock drafts...this one prepared by 3DownNation...

https://3downnation.com/2024/03/13/john-hodges-2024-cfl-mock-draft-1-0/

[kkc60]

I like the first two picks. Two RB/FB in the first three picks for us might be a bit of an overcorrection.

[theaardvark]

Looks like Hodge is listening to a board member...

[CrazyCanuck89]

Check out my mock

https://forums.cfl.ca/t/my-2024-mock-draft/91276/2

[Pete]

1   edm   Deblanco  lb
2   ottawa   Mardner     wr
3   sask   manu     ol
4   cal   Brubacher dl
5   tor   mital     wr
6   ham   straker   lb
7   bc   Busby     wr
8   wpg   Hergol     ol
9   mtrl   Labrosse  db
         
10     edm   Hergott     dl
11   ottawa   Dumoulin-Duguay    ol
12   sask   Okopoko     dl
13   cal   Una     ol
14   cal   Blackburn db
15   bc   Wallace   ol
16   ham   Canton-arku lb    
17   wpg   Chris-Ike rb
18   edm   Sambu     dl
19   bc   Herzog     rb
20   wpg    Roane    dl

[CrazyCanuck89]

1   edm   Deblanco  lb
2   ottawa   Mardner     wr
3   sask   manu     ol
4   cal   Brubacher dl
5   tor   mital     wr
6   ham   straker   lb
7   bc   Busby     wr
8   wpg   Hergol     ol
9   mtrl   Labrosse  db
         
10     edm   Hergott     dl
11   ottawa   Dumoulin-Duguay    ol
12   sask   Okopoko     dl
13   cal   Una     ol
14   cal   Blackburn db
15   bc   Wallace   ol
16   ham   Canton-arku lb    
17   wpg   Chris-Ike rb
18   edm   Sambu     dl
19   bc   Herzog     rb
20   wpg    Roane    dl

The first round you hit needs for each team.  I think Edmonton can go BPA, there Canadians weren't the problem.

[dd]

I don't get why they say we have a glaring need at fullback. I didn't think anyone had a glaring need for a fullback. Teams generally bring in an extra O lineman at TE and engage the defense at the line. FB is an old outdated position

[CrazyCanuck89]

I don't get why they say we have a glaring need at fullback. I didn't think anyone had a glaring need for a fullback. Teams generally bring in an extra O lineman at TE and engage the defense at the line. FB is an old outdated position

It's not really outdated, the position itself has evolved to a tightend/fullback.

[Blue In BC]

Speaking of drafts, the Global draft is only 2 rounds this year. Any thoughts on choices for these players?

We've only got 1 remaining from each of the last 2 global drafts.

[LXTSN]

I don't get why they say we have a glaring need at fullback. I didn't think anyone had a glaring need for a fullback. Teams generally bring in an extra O lineman at TE and engage the defense at the line. FB is an old outdated position

Yeah it's a little outdated. The game is faster and QB's can throw farther and that stretches out the field a lot.
With that said, they can be very effective if you have a good one. If you can use a FB rather than a 7th OL, you can have another threat on the field. I don't think we are throwing the ball to Eli any time soon.
I would love to see a FB that actually gets the goal line touches. I feel we haven't seen one of those in a while. There is a great saying about fullbacks, "If you need them to get you 1 yard, they will get you 3. If you need them to get you 5 yards, they will get you 3."

[theaardvark]

FB is a position that, in certain instances, has a place.

Here's something I haven't seen mentioned.

Streveler.

He is literally a FB, and with 2 QB's on the field allowed, we have a FB who has far more dimensionality than any NAT FB ever. 

So lets drop the "We need to draft a FB" discussion, OK?

our needs OLine pipeline, then BPA.  If BPA nets is a LB/ST guy , a depth WR for the PR and DB/FS/SAM backup with ST capabilities (including returning), we will be fine.  We have NATS at so many positions, BPA will be good anywhere.  Maybe a second or third Oline, or a flyer pick on someone who has NFL opportunities that eventually may come north.

[Pete]

FB is a position that, in certain instances, has a place.

Here's something I haven't seen mentioned.

Streveler.

He is literally a FB, and with 2 QB's on the field allowed, we have a FB who has far more dimensionality than any NAT FB ever. 

So lets drop the "We need to draft a FB" discussion, OK?

our needs OLine pipeline, then BPA.  If BPA nets is a LB/ST guy , a depth WR for the PR and DB/FS/SAM backup with ST capabilities (including returning), we will be fine.  We have NATS at so many positions, BPA will be good anywhere.  Maybe a second or third Oline, or a flyer pick on someone who has NFL opportunities that eventually may come north.

I've advocated for a while that what makes the most sense for our team is a tight end. Can block when needed while still maintaining a offensive threat. One pick that might be available is Kevens Clercius at 217 lbs  (Mital would be the best choice but he will be unavailable by the time we pick). Another wr with size who had impressive combine numbers is ANTOINE, Frederik at 213 lbs  4.51 40 speed and 21 bench reps. Hladik is another who might surprise as a receiver ( his brother Ben was also undervalued not being drafted until the third round.)

[Pigskin]

I am not sold on the FB. We had Burtenshaw here for 2 years and I don't think he touched the ball. He also wasn't used much for blocking. A TE is a interesting idea. A big body player that could be used in a few different scenarios.

[TecnoGenius]

Yeah it's a little outdated. The game is faster and QB's can throw farther and that stretches out the field a lot.
With that said, they can be very effective if you have a good one. If you can use a FB rather than a 7th OL, you can have another threat on the field. I don't think we are throwing the ball to Eli any time soon.
I would love to see a FB that actually gets the goal line touches. I feel we haven't seen one of those in a while. There is a great saying about fullbacks, "If you need them to get you 1 yard, they will get you 3. If you need them to get you 5 yards, they will get you 3."

I'm in the "need a FB/TE" camp.  Whilst not important for many teams, the fact that MOS/Buck wasted a DI spot on a FB/TE for like half the season should tell you how important that role is to our O.

On my season rewatch it's pretty clear the early loss to BC sparked a massive rethink and desire to better protect Zach.  That's when we started going heavy a whack ton.  And we kept doing it all season and post-season.  That meant 6 and 7 OL set, or 6 + Jackson.  (Did we ever see 7 + Jackson?)

Having that extra guy be a FB/TE does make D's defend the spot, since they often are the forgotten sneak-out guy for a short pass.  From memory we targeted Jackson 3 times?

But don't count out Eli for a target.  In his first year he'd go 7 yards downfield when he had no one to block and turn and put his hands up to catch a pass.  It was my favorite thing ever and I'm dying to see them chuck to him just once!  If he has good hands, why not?

I think we really missed Miller and that's why we wasted that DI... because none of our NATs could do it.  However, you'd think FA for a young-ish, has-promise TE/FB could also yield something, and for cheap?  (How did we get Miller?)  So waste a high DP or maybe wait another year for a FA?

I'm thinking we may want 2 DP OL, and certainly 1.  Whether that leaves room for a TE/FB... I hope so.  BPA: we don't need just a rando player, we need certain positions, unless we just want to use BPA as trade bait.  If BOO is gone then we're super short at NAT WR backup, especially seeing how many NAT WR/RB we start...

[Pigskin]

I would say with BOO signing with Hamilton we currently only have Murphy as a backup Canadian WR. So, I would think we have a WR fairly high on our shopping list for the draft.