Recent posts

#91

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 1st & 10 | The Blue Bomber...

Last post by Blue In BC - November 30, 2025, 01:29:28 PM

All true, but like you said, off-SMS so really the $$ doesn't matter at all.  He was probably close to ELC anyhow, and no one will steal him in his current state.  There's precedent for re-signing a guy like this.

Yes they have done that in the past. It's a question of math per se. If all the others return then they already potentially have an extra DB for the 1 game IR or PR. They'll want to have an import or 2 DB on the PR, so that works against him.

If he's actually going to be ready for TC then he'd be in competition against Lawson ( as an example ) or any injury in TC. That raises his value.

As I suggested, I'm not expecting him back but things could change if we lose one of our starters.

We have 5 DB's that were added from either the PR late in the season or post season. Many will be looked at during tryout camps etc. By the time TC comes around we usually have about 8 rookies trying to find a spot on one of the rosters.

Even if we retain most of our starters, we need to get younger, faster and cheaper as part of a succession plan.  That means new depth on the PR for the most part.

[1990s, there were about 165 plays per game. Today the league average is a little more than 140 plays]

#92

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: New rules / commissioner's...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:46:22 AM

Unfortunately, through other initiatives by the league to reduce game time into a 3 hour time slot, we have lost a number of plays per game. Based on numbers from the mid-1990s, there were about 165 plays per game. Today the league average is a little more than 140 plays per game. If you want to increase scoring, find a way to increase the number of plays. Theoretically, a 10% increase in the number of plays should result in a 10% increase in scoring per game.

Very interesting details.  I think a lot of the "lower plays per game" comes from teams that are active clock-bleeders.  And I don't just mean outside the whistles, which the 35s clock will put a stop to.  I mean bleeding the clock within the 20s by taking it down to 2-5s every single snap (unless down at the end of the halves).

WPG is one of these clock-bleeding teams.  SSK turned into one as well: since they copied everything that made WPG great for 5 straight seasons.  I think there were 1-2 more teams, but I can't remember who.  Wouldn't surprise me if Buck/BC was one.

I don't think teams in 90's were smart enough or cared enough to mold their strategy around "shortening the game" (reducing the plays).  Clearly some HCs(etc.) have run the numbers and decided it's a winning strategy.  Or it could be that "top teams" (or "running teams"?) have an advantage when doing so.

These same clock-bleeding teams will bleed that new 35s down to the last 2-5s all the same.  I'm not sure how'd you stop a team from doing this -- or if you'd even want to.  But it would increase the play count.

I'm reminding of F1's Niki Lauda, whose philosophy was to win races as slowly as possible -- basically do as little as possible to win, but still win.  That's totally a MOS philosophy.  Why put the ball in the air 90 times a game when you can win by running 40 and passing 30?

[Smart companies listen to the input of its customer base]

#93

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: New rules / commissioner's...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:37:58 AM

Smart companies listen to the input of its customer base. The CFL is obviously not a smart company.

Yes, especially the last few years where customers are quick to ruin a brand should they feel disrespected or ignored.  See Cracker Barrel (as mentioned), Bud Light, etc.

Gone are the days where you can force feed loyal customers an antithetical agenda.

CFL may be in the process of finding this out...

[decided not to continue on]

#94

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: New rules / commissioner's...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:35:39 AM

He did, but it was after the BOG voted 5-4 in favour of removing him, they needed 7 votes against to remove him, but he decided not to continue on.

I haven't heard that stat before, but I'll take your word for it.  You could tell by his last pressers that he wanted to still be commish.  I also think he had an idea Johnston was going to come in and ruin everything.  Ambrosie was practically in tears in those last pressers.  And no, I don't think it was just "I'll miss my job".

[lack of harmony exists between the CFL and the CFLPA currently]

#95

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: CFL (Non-Bombers) off-seas...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:28:57 AM

Interesting read, provides some background to the $400k SMS bump that arrived just before TC. It sounds like a lack of harmony exists between the CFL and the CFLPA currently.

There was ever harmony between CFL & the PA?   

[have screws in the cleats]

#96

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: Favourite Lesser Known Blu...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:28:01 AM

Can't ban me because I run too fast. Helps that I have screws in the cleats.

staples!

[Bonds took a step back]

#97

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 1st & 10 | The Blue Bomber...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:25:06 AM

Bonds took a step back this year as teams picked on him
He was average at best and with Youngers defence ie a heavy focus on coverage vs pressure thats not good enough.

I don't know.  I stand by my assessment that he was improving at a good pace, week to week and YoY.  Bridges & Lawrence were weaker, and Bridges was axed and Lawrence was off the AR by year end.  Bridges was the one they really picked on.

The did test Bonds a fair bit too but I think he started to dissuade them from thinking that's he was a freebie.

Bonds knows the system well, been here 2 whole seasons, started a ton of games, and at 29 should have some tread left.  If we scout a new D.Alford then ya, Bonds is likely the guy on the bubble, but if we don't, we need the starter-capable guys -- even if they are going to sit on 6GIR a while.

Also depends on whether Lawrence is back.

#98

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 1st & 10 | The Blue Bomber...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:19:48 AM

I don't know that is true for Bonds regarding him going onto 6 game IR. He's a potential free agent and they would have to re-sign him before adding him onto IR.

All true, but like you said, off-SMS so really the $$ doesn't matter at all.  He was probably close to ELC anyhow, and no one will steal him in his current state.  There's precedent for re-signing a guy like this.

[unlikely to pursue a DB or LB in FA]

#99

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 1st & 10 | The Blue Bomber...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:18:44 AM

One certainty, the bombers unlikely to pursue a DB or LB in FA, they prefer to recruit them or pick them out of the discard bin.

Darn right.  And we also almost always find a very good (starting caliber within 2 seasons) DB via USA scouting.  That's at least one part of our scouting game that is working really well.

LBs seem easy to draft and to steal from other teams.  They seem plentiful -- except maybe top MLBs.

[Holm, Nichols]

#100

Blue Bomber & CFL Discussion Forum / Re: 1st & 10 | The Blue Bomber...

Last post by Tecno - November 30, 2025, 08:17:12 AM

Maybe. Holm, Nichols, Houston, Parker, Kramdi, Lawson and Bonds are all potential free agents.

Boy, I could have sworn Holm/Nichols were locked up thru '26 -- on a 2 year.  Or maybe that was already from FA24 and the 2 years is up?

Everyone who's not a "superstar" should be locked onto a 2 year.  It makes no sense to piddle with these 1 years for middling players (no, I'm not saying Holm/Nichols are "middling"!).