Can you win with a no-edge RB?

[Pigskin]

You're missing my point, we play a lot of guys who are borderline.

Wallace is average at best. Neufeld has lost a step. Lawson is at best an average DT. Nield has been a disappointment and really shouldn't start. Demski is on the decline.

We have Smith who is excellent and young, Kramdi and Brady above average.

Look at BC. Canadian QB who is a top 2 QB. Star Canadian WR in McInnis. Star DE in Betts who is Canadian. Plus Cottoy at WR, Couture.

How about the Riders with Emilus and KSB? Both better than any of our Canadian wrs. Ferland is better than anybody on our offensive line. Campbell an above average starting Canadian on D.

Just because the Mafia trots guys out and plays them doesn't mean the guys should play or that they're good.

I would throw Findlay on to this list. A player that we passed over in the 2025 draft. 6'2" 207 safety with
84DTs, 11 STs, 2 INTs. This kid is already a star. The Bombers Canadian players need to be better. Bombers need to draft better. 

[RebusRankin]

But you're comparing team-best NATs to our "ratio-busting" positions.

Lawson may be an average DT, but he's basically elite when compared only to NAT DTs.  Smith is soon going to be elite among NAT SAMs.  Kramdi is elite among "QBs of the D" -- there's no other NAT who does that.

So you can't pit McInnis or Betts against these guys.  You need to pit McInnis against Demski (wash in my books, rather have Demski), and Betts against another NAT DE.

To be fair you should be comparing the 3-4 other BC starting NATs that nobody can name against some of our weaker NAT starters.  THAT is what's fair.

Every team has among the 7 starters: 1-4 NAT "stars", 1-2 NAT "goods", and 1-3 wastes of space.  Such is the nature of the ratio, the cap, and limited quality NATs.

If anything, our starter NAT "average" is much higher than other teams, who usually have 3-4 stars and 3-4 forgettables.  This is a good thing.  Look at the whole and compare to the whole in BC, and you'll probably come to the same conclusion. ( * excluding Rourke, because that's "cheating" ) 

You're dreaming if you think McInnis and Demski are a wash.

You're also dreaming if you think our starting nationals as a group have more above average players than other CFL teams.

Ok, let's compare BC.
Rourke-Elite
McInnis-Elite
Betts-Elite
Cottoy-Above average
Findlay-Aove average
Couture-Average
Una-Average at best
Beaulieu-Average at best

Winnipeg
Brady-Elite
Kramdi-Above average
Smith-Above average moving towards elite
Demski-Above average but declining
Nield-Below average
Eli-Average to below average
Wallace-Average to below average
Neufeld-Average but decling
Kelly-So below average its a joke he starts

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Maybe unrelated but does anyone recall the game early last season or the one before when the Bombers took the ball and ran Brady over 10 plays consecutively the entire length of the field for a TD? I suspect that game was against the Elks and possibly they may have remembered the slight.

[Tecno]

You're dreaming if you think McInnis and Demski are a wash.

If you isolate just this season, Demski is better IMHO.  From memory: McInnis has more catches, more targets, but he doesn't get TDs.  Demski is surely tied or beating McInnis in TDs (again, from memory).

McInnis has TONS of drops, and like TSN said a couple of weeks back, every team knows how to stop the slant that is basically his only play.

Demski can do everything, and most important is often our seam go.  Ya, his stats are down this season, but he's still my man over McInnis!

As for the rankings, you're being generous to BC, and BC isn't the best example anyhow because they've built a very solid set of NATs: one of the best in the league.  And you missed my point that it's not "is the player overall elite vs all players", it's "who's elite among NATs in their position".

I agree BC is 3 stars, but I say 2 normal, and 3 forgettable/developing.  If you exclude the "cheat code" Rourke, who really is their 8th, it's 2/2/3.

To me we are 3/2/2.  Kelly isn't a "desired starter" and shouldn't be on that list.

The overall point is if you weight stars 4, middle 2 and blah 1, our average of the best starting 7 is higher than BC's and most teams.  And our "role players" are generally better too.  Yes, even Kelly is better than most backup FS's; and that's the needed comparison for him.

It'd be a fun game to grade out the other 7 teams by looking at their last depth charts.  But none of this is a surprise, as the toughest part of building a good CFL team is slowly loading up with top NATs and minimizing your Sam Hurls.  IMPs can be "bought"; NATs -- much harder.