Recent posts

#21

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

#22

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.

#23

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.

#24

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.

#25

Offside Forum / Re: NHL 2026 Playoffs

Last post by Pigskin - May 02, 2026, 08:02:25 AM

Knights and Sabers advance to the 2nd. round.

#26

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

Last post by Sir Blue and Gold - May 02, 2026, 05:40:00 AM

Maybe because of ST... maybe.  Maybe if both Ike & Daniels prove way better than the myriad LBers that are on ST.  Doubt it.  No way we AR 2 FB on the depth chart (especially with Peterson dressed!).

AR'ing both just because we need them on O?  Nah (see my last post).

We never put that much depth weight on O.  Most of our STers and spares are on D.  We'll have Peterson as RB backup, probably 1 NAT REC backup (Corcoran or Cobb), and a backup hoggie.  It would be very un-MOS-like to yank our 18th dressed LBer or extra DB/FS just to field another FB -- a position that only sees the field maybe 1/3 to 1/2 snaps anyway!

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.

#27

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

Last post by jets4life - May 02, 2026, 04:55:26 AM

Unfortunately the golden age of the CFL also included limited access to the NFL product.  Back in the day it didn't make much sense to be a fan of an NFL club as you'd only got to see them once or twice a year on TV.  Some crazy Canadians now buy season tickets so they can fly into every home game, over time we've accepted a distorted reality that is out of wack, but it looks like we are in for a correction.

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.

[stacking the 1 game IR has more cons that pro benefit]

#28

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: "Cleaned up language" (IR,...

Last post by Tecno - May 02, 2026, 04:32:56 AM

Yes, that's all true. Noting that it's still charged against the SMS so stacking the 1 game IR has more cons that pro benefit.

Snipe protection.  That's always the reason touted.  Maybe also player pride?  Middling 6 year vet doesn't really like the humiliation of being demoted to PR??  Some of these players have unhealthy ego/pride problems.

As for why we need a stash at all... it's the same answer as to why you want a +2 AR: you NEED these extra middling/backup players to have a successful season.  Someone important is going to get hurt, and you'd prefer to not fill their spot with a rookie.  The AR is simply too small and the PR isn't a good place for these guys (pride/sniping/salary).

Wasn't it '24 when like half our REC corps was IR simultaneously and we were scraping the bottom of the barrel for RECs?  A reserve that has a legit vet REC (or 2) would have been handy there.

[Interesting.]

#29

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: "Cleaned up language" (IR,...

Last post by Tecno - May 02, 2026, 04:28:22 AM

Interesting.

It will be when the actual text of these "cleanings" are released to the public!

Hard to imagine there's a fool-proof way of outlawing the 1GIR. At any given time, most players are probably dealing with something that could use a week's rest. How would you prove it one way or another?

How do you prove 6GIR one way or another?  Our in-house doc, on our payroll, says boo.  Who's to say otherwise?  "Oh they'd have an x-ray", well that doesn't work for soft-tissue/joint injuries.  There are lots of things that don't show on an x-ray.

Besides, if Johnston cracked down on MMM and willful large SMS overages, which it seems he did, and those solutions were more "honor system" (like threats and peer pressure on the team owners/prez's), then all that may be required to stop 1GIR abuse is clear wording and expectation-setting.

Something like:
"The 1 game injury roster is not to be used to hide, protect or stash healthy players.  A 2-man reserve roster has been introduced for this purpose.  The league will closely monitor injury roster usage."

Not saying this is what's happening... but what on earth could "cleaning up" IR language be then?  Not many other possibilities here.

[obviously still be able to use the 1GIR and to pay PR players whatever they like]

#30

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: Global Draft

Last post by Tecno - May 02, 2026, 04:21:32 AM

I imagine your reserve will change game to game depending on what you might likely need in each game.

Teams will obviously still be able to use the 1GIR and to pay PR players whatever they like.

But will they though (on the 1GIR)?  (See "cleaned up language" thread.)

The PR "pay what you want" thing I fully agree with and wonder why everyone thinks just because a non-ELC player goes to PR they suddenly only get PR money.  A middling vet contract is a contract and (unless it says otherwise) they get that contracted money.

Of course some will doom about "PR sniping", but it never happens, and you can solve it just by moving the snipee to reserve/AR the snipe-attempt-day anyhow.  And the player has to agree to being sniped!  If they are getting their full contract $ on PR, with full knowledge they are just being stashed (i.e. wanted, but not for this week's game or whatever), would they leave for similar $ elsewhere?