Blue Bombers Forum
October 23, 2021, 05:31:01 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 78
  Print  
Author Topic: [OLD] Blue Bombers roster - 2017-2018  (Read 281380 times)
Horseman
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1885


« Reply #45 on: November 22, 2017, 01:05:16 PM »

Maybe we can bring Carmichael back?

Yeah...said no one ever!
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29909



« Reply #46 on: November 22, 2017, 01:07:40 PM »

Maybe we can bring Carmichael back?

He's not a free agaent, he's suspended on his entry deal, he's a Bomber for 2018 unless he gets released...
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29505


GC107 Champions!


« Reply #47 on: November 22, 2017, 01:51:12 PM »

I want Lefevour back, but I hope we can improve on our backup QB situation. 

This is where I stand. LeFevour as the 3QB/jumbo package plays is good. It may be time to move on from Davis and go a different route, though.

Meh. I hardly think that qualifies him as a ?must sign?. Teams shouldn?t have that much money tied to a third string QB.

How much LeFevour making in 2017?
Logged

#forthew
#gotthew

No drought about it.
Still can't fix stupid. Can't quarantine it, either.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22284



« Reply #48 on: November 22, 2017, 02:25:43 PM »

I don't like the idea of bringing back LeFeavour just so he can run short yardage. Yes - he does do that well but he can't throw the ball worth a darn which even as a backup should probably be a primary consideration. In short yardage, we really only need one yard-ish. He often gets more than that, which is gravy, but that's not worth him taking a roster spot from a QB who could potentially help us at the actual QB position in case of injury or the spot of a guy that can actually play if we finally discover someone like that.
Logged
theaardvark
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29909



« Reply #49 on: November 22, 2017, 03:49:54 PM »

I don't like the idea of bringing back LeFeavour just so he can run short yardage. Yes - he does do that well but he can't throw the ball worth a darn which even as a backup should probably be a primary consideration. In short yardage, we really only need one yard-ish. He often gets more than that, which is gravy, but that's not worth him taking a roster spot from a QB who could potentially help us at the actual QB position in case of injury or the spot of a guy that can actually play if we finally discover someone like that.

I'm ecstatic at having LeFevour here at #3 on the DC, and at a commensurate wage.  Yes, having a specific short yardage QB taking up space on the DC sounds silly, but I think it is quite astute.  Especially when that guy does have some CFL experience and can come in in a pinch. 

We need a #2 QB on the roster, whether that is Davis or someone who came through the PR last year, we need someone with upside that doesn't have a high cost associated with him.  No Glenn, Lulay, Franklin... we need to develop a guy.  Whether Davis is ready to be that guy, or someone else, we need someone that other teams will covet as their #1 in 2 years, like Franklin...
Logged

Unabashed positron.  Blue koolaid in my fridge.  I wear my blue sunglasses at night.  Homer, d'oh.
Sir Blue and Gold
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 22284



« Reply #50 on: November 22, 2017, 04:23:20 PM »

I'm ecstatic at having LeFevour here at #3 on the DC, and at a commensurate wage. Yes, having a specific short yardage QB taking up space on the DC sounds silly, but I think it is quite astute.  Especially when that guy does have some CFL experience and can come in in a pinch.

We need a #2 QB on the roster, whether that is Davis or someone who came through the PR last year, we need someone with upside that doesn't have a high cost associated with him.  No Glenn, Lulay, Franklin... we need to develop a guy.  Whether Davis is ready to be that guy, or someone else, we need someone that other teams will covet as their #1 in 2 years, like Franklin...

Why is it astute? Are the extra yards he picks up in those situations worth both the extra SMS cost he would command and the roster spot we've committed to the guy? I would say no. Most quarterbacks can pick up a yard or two, he's not special in that regard. If you want to develop a quarterback you have to find one worth developing. To find one, you need roster spots for QBs available.

If Dom isn't the guy to be the backup, you need a Kevin Glenn type or someone who can actually go in and play if Nichols gets hurt. That means your new QB can't be two. If we're serious about developing a quarterback, we'd sign a veteran QB like KG to go in for Nichols, get rid of LeFeavour and put a new quarterback in the 3 spot and possibly one on the PR. If you don't, you're left with LeFeavour starting when your 'number 2' inevitably isn't ready yet.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 04:27:05 PM by Sir Blue and Gold » Logged
Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13865



« Reply #51 on: November 22, 2017, 05:32:57 PM »

How much LeFevour making in 2017?

More than a developmental QB on his first contract.

I would love a vet QB to come in for short yardage, but it needs to be a guy who can perform in other scenarios as well. LeFevour has proved he can't really do that. The vet also has to be the primary back-up, with a cheaper contract thrown at a younger guy.

Otherwise we have too much tied into one positional spot.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7467



« Reply #52 on: November 22, 2017, 08:07:24 PM »

I really question bringing in a developmental QB in the short term contract environment that is currently the model. I would predict Nichols plays for the Bombers for at least another 4-5 years, how do you keep a developmental guy progressing and content without a real shot at starting over a 2-3 period?  Even if Davis had the potential of Franklin, he doesn't stand a chance of stepping up to #1 with the Bombers in the near future and would most likely move on at some point.

I think it may be time to readjust the thinking and find contentment with holding on to a vet. QB like LeFevour, Glenn or Crompton who accepts their role as second string yet are accomplished enough vets. to step in and perform when needed.  Let other teams develop QB's and pick them up when needed.  Until Nichols is to the point that he is ineffective enough to lose his job and a progression has to be made I honestly don't see the point of having a young developmental QB on the roster other than being a spare arm for practice.  The counter point is that a serious injury can end a career at anytime but in that scenario the team is probably screwed anyways and the developmental guy is usually not at the point that he can carry the load.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2017, 08:31:44 PM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 29505


GC107 Champions!


« Reply #53 on: November 22, 2017, 08:08:24 PM »

More than a developmental QB on his first contract.

I would love a vet QB to come in for short yardage, but it needs to be a guy who can perform in other scenarios as well. LeFevour has proved he can't really do that. The vet also has to be the primary back-up, with a cheaper contract thrown at a younger guy.

Otherwise we have too much tied into one positional spot.

Well, that's a given. But I still have to wonder if LeFevour is making significantly that much more than any other #3/jumbo package QB around the league.

I also wonder how much the Bombers do have tied up in the QB position relative to other teams.
Logged

#forthew
#gotthew

No drought about it.
Still can't fix stupid. Can't quarantine it, either.
gbill2004
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 15560



« Reply #54 on: November 22, 2017, 08:09:22 PM »

I really question bringing in a developmental QB in the short term contract environment that is currently the model. I would predict Nichols plays for the Bombers for at least another 4-5 years, how do you keep a developmental guy progressing and content without a real shot at starting over a 2-3 period?  Even if Davis had the potential of Franklin, he doesn't stand a chance of stepping up to #1 with the Bombers in the near future.

I think it may be time to readjust the thinking and find contentment with holding on to a vet. QB like LeFevour, Glenn or Crompton who accepts their role as second string yet are accomplished enough vets. to step in and perform when needed.  Let other teams develop QB's and pick them up when needed.  Until Nichols is to the point that he is ineffective enough to lose his job and a progression has to be made I honestly don't see the point of having a young developmental QB on the roster other than being a spare arm for practice.  The counter point is that a serious injury can end a career at anytime but in that scenario the team is usually screwed anyways and the developmental guy is usually not at the point that he can carry the load.
The other benefit to developing QBs is that if one catches fire, maybe you can flip him in a trade for some valuable draft picks other assets.  
Logged
bunker
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2088


« Reply #55 on: November 22, 2017, 08:13:19 PM »

I really question bringing in a developmental QB in the short term contract environment that is currently the model. I would predict Nichols plays for the Bombers for at least another 4-5 years, how do you keep a developmental guy progressing and content without a real shot at starting over a 2-3 period?  Even if Davis had the potential of Franklin, he doesn't stand a chance of stepping up to #1 with the Bombers in the near future and would most likely move on at some point.

I think it may be time to readjust the thinking and find contentment with holding on to a vet. QB like LeFevour, Glenn or Crompton who accepts their role as second string yet are accomplished enough vets. to step in and perform when needed.  Let other teams develop QB's and pick them up when needed.  Until Nichols is to the point that he is ineffective enough to lose his job and a progression has to be made I honestly don't see the point of having a young developmental QB on the roster other than being a spare arm for practice.  The counter point is that a serious injury can end a career at anytime but in that scenario the team is usually screwed anyways and the developmental guy is usually not at the point that he can carry the load.
I was thinking the exact same thing. I'm 58, and I don't think I'm going to live long enough to see the Bombers develop a starting QB.
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7467



« Reply #56 on: November 22, 2017, 08:27:05 PM »

I was thinking the exact same thing. I'm 58, and I don't think I'm going to live long enough to see the Bombers develop a starting QB.

The environment has changed, both Ottawa and BC attempted the QB transition recently with mixed results but I think BC would be crazy to give up on Jennings without first improving their O-line.  Rarely does a QB transition go smoothly.
Logged
gobombersgo
Global Moderator
*****
Posts: 3902



« Reply #57 on: November 22, 2017, 08:27:53 PM »

I also don't see the need to develop a QB to be your next starter. The reality is that most of the starting CFL QBs were groomed by a different team. The Bo Levis of this league that come in and start and remain the starter for the team that brought them to Canada is rare.
Logged

Jesse
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 13865



« Reply #58 on: November 22, 2017, 09:47:55 PM »

I really question bringing in a developmental QB in the short term contract environment that is currently the model. I would predict Nichols plays for the Bombers for at least another 4-5 years, how do you keep a developmental guy progressing and content without a real shot at starting over a 2-3 period?  Even if Davis had the potential of Franklin, he doesn't stand a chance of stepping up to #1 with the Bombers in the near future and would most likely move on at some point.

I think it may be time to readjust the thinking and find contentment with holding on to a vet. QB like LeFevour, Glenn or Crompton who accepts their role as second string yet are accomplished enough vets. to step in and perform when needed.  Let other teams develop QB's and pick them up when needed.  Until Nichols is to the point that he is ineffective enough to lose his job and a progression has to be made I honestly don't see the point of having a young developmental QB on the roster other than being a spare arm for practice.  The counter point is that a serious injury can end a career at anytime but in that scenario the team is probably screwed anyways and the developmental guy is usually not at the point that he can carry the load.

I understand what you?re saying but I disagree for a few reasons.

1. Money. If we?re signing three vets, we?re spending too much.

2. Like gbill pointed out, you don?t just develop QBs for yourself, they?re a renewable resource. Wally has been doing it for years. Find a guy, if he performs well in a few games, you get a first round pick out of it.

3. We shouldn?t be satisfied with what we have. Nichols is better than what we?ve had for years, but why not try to upgrade? If our scouts see a prospect that they love, we need to bring him in.
Logged

My wife is amazing!
66 Chevelle
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4481


« Reply #59 on: November 22, 2017, 11:29:05 PM »

I've often wondered about this developing players thing. How much of this actually goes on in the league? Given the limited amount of time they practice through the week, it seems that only true time would be in training camp. However, that seems more like an evaluation opportunity more so than coaching up a player. Other than that, is it just throw reps in practice with the team or is there a 'process' that a team does? With the NFL they have the money and the time to have the #2 be a scout squad for the #1 defense, so they get a lot more 'real' reps, so to speak... just curious...
Logged

just because you can doesn't mean you should...
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 78
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!