Blue Bombers add quarterback

[Blue In BC]

Started a few games isn't what I call a starter.

What I'm saying is the chances of any Canadian QB, especially one who didn't have US coaching, becoming a starter in the CFL is remarkably slim. If he makes it he will be a unicorn, like Rourke.

Datillo had nearly 10,000 yards in passing.  While there aren't many there were a few Canadian QB's.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Started a few games isn't what I call a starter.

What I'm saying is the chances of any Canadian QB, especially one who didn't have US coaching, becoming a starter in the CFL is remarkably slim. If he makes it he will be a unicorn, like Rourke.

Better watch out, "cause the times they are a-changin'", in times past it would have been hard to believe Canadians could be the best players at their position, now it's not that unusual.

[dd]

While NAT's are now playing non-traditional positions, they are the exception not the rule. Other that Rourke, there is no NAT in the league in any teams Qb room, and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. No one other than a small group in Winnipeg, even has Elgersma on any Qb radar screen, and I really doubt that changes. I saw him play in the Vanier Cup and he didn't stand out at all, so I m not holding my breath on this guy at all

[bluengold204]

While NAT's are now playing non-traditional positions, they are the exception not the rule. Other that Rourke, there is no NAT in the league in any teams Qb room, and I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. No one other than a small group in Winnipeg, even has Elgersma on any Qb radar screen, and I really doubt that changes. I saw him play in the Vanier Cup and he didn't stand out at all, so I m not holding my breath on this guy at all

Ford

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Ford

Hahaha. I think dd is still right. 

[Tecno]

IMO QB is too important a position to worry much about Nat or non-Nat. You need to find the best player at the position, period. If it happens to be a Nat, that's a bonus, but its not worth enough to even consider starting an inferior QB.

I don't know.  NAT tips the scale a bit.  Let's say you can pick from Alexander or Rourke.  To me Alexander is better, but not by too much.  So which QB do you hire?  The question is made tough because Rourke is a NAT and lets you start, say, another IMP OL.

So, on the margin, being a NAT does alter the calculus.

[bunker]

I don't know.  NAT tips the scale a bit.  Let's say you can pick from Alexander or Rourke.  To me Alexander is better, but not by too much.  So which QB do you hire?  The question is made tough because Rourke is a NAT and lets you start, say, another IMP OL.

So, on the margin, being a NAT does alter the calculus.

I'd sign Rourke. But because I think he's the better QB, not because he's a Nat.

Would you have played Ford over Fahardo? You can start another American, sure, but meanwhile  inferior QB play dooms your play off chances.