BC Lions / Nathan Rourke discussion

[GCn19]

Rourke has played outstanding in his first two games. However, I am not ready to anoint him the next great thing. Not yet. We must see how he handles adversity as a starter, it's different as a backup, and right now teams have limited tape on him. I am sure that there will be a deep dive into his tendencies etc. by DCs that will make life tougher for him. Case in point Cody Fajardo, who in 2019 looked outstanding his first 5 games, until a big drop off came when defences figured him out. I suspect that Rourke will have a long and successful career, I also expect his performances to go up and down this season as he matures.

[the.inkster]

It?s not just that Rourke is playing great (which he is), but he rejigs their whole ratio.  His National status allows them to start 3 imports on the OL, which fixes their biggest problem from last year.

The fact that they have 2 studs at LB and went out and acquired Canadian assets at DE, means they play 3 on defence, which really lets them load up on offence.

That receiving corps is scary.  Cottoy is a beast, and the other 4 are all threats as well.  Speed, size, hands, jump balls, the can do it all.  Their RB went down, but they have 2 more on the PR, and it turns out Their fullback is a Mackie truck.  Who knew?

BC always has good DBs, and the LBs are very good.  If their defensive line has found their mojo, this team has all the elements to compete for first. 

Coming in late to the conversation here.
Did something in the rules change regarding QBs at the ratio? It was my understanding that Canadian QBs don't actually count as a national.

[Blue In BC]

Coming in late to the conversation here.
Did something in the rules change regarding QBs at the ratio? It was my understanding that Canadian QBs don't actually count as a national.

They count against the ratio if they are the starter. Otherwise still designated as QB's overall. You could have 3 Canadian QB's but that doesn't lower the roster minimum requirement for other Canadian players.

So a team starting a Canadian QB is a little like being able to starter a ratio breaking player like a RB for example. While that's true we're seeing some top Canadians in positions we weren't seeing a decade ago. More LB's and DB's starting. More Canadian RB's getting bigger roles etc etc.

[the.inkster]

They count against the ratio if they are the starter. Otherwise still designated as QB's overall. You could have 3 Canadian QB's but that doesn't lower the roster minimum requirement for other Canadian players.

So a team starting a Canadian QB is a little like being able to starter a ratio breaking player like a RB for example. While that's true we're seeing some top Canadians in positions we weren't seeing a decade ago. More LB's and DB's starting. More Canadian RB's getting bigger roles etc etc.

Ah, thanks for the clarification

[GCn19]

They count against the ratio if they are the starter. Otherwise still designated as QB's overall. You could have 3 Canadian QB's but that doesn't lower the roster minimum requirement for other Canadian players.

So a team starting a Canadian QB is a little like being able to starter a ratio breaking player like a RB for example. While that's true we're seeing some top Canadians in positions we weren't seeing a decade ago. More LB's and DB's starting. More Canadian RB's getting bigger roles etc etc.

Not sure that is correct. When Brandon Bridge started for the Riders they were not able to reduce their NAT starter component because he was a NAT. Maybe the rules have changed since then, but I know for sure that at that time there was much discussion about how a NAT QB starting should be a ratio buster but isn't. To my knowledge, the rule was that you designate 2 roster players as QB and nationality doesn't matter, and then you must make up the 20 rostered NATs and 7 starters from the remaining of the roster.  I will freely admit that I am just going off memory here and a few articles that I googled surrounding Brandon Bridge not being counted as one of the 7 NAT starters. Maybe things changed or I am just plain wrong though. Never did a deep dive into it.

[TBURGESS]

A National quarterback will be considered one of a Club?s starting National Players as long as he remains on the field at the quarterback position.

- From the CFLPA collective agreement 2019. (I can't find the latest one, but I'm assuming it's the same.)

[GCn19]

- From the CFLPA collective agreement 2019. (I can't find the latest one, but I'm assuming it's the same.)

Thanks TB. Guess that's what I get for reading ancient articles about Brandon Bridge. Oddly enough the BC depth chart still shows 7 starting NATs besides Rourke so they could have gone 3 IMP OL either way. No doubt that Rourke being a NAT gives them a ton of flex to their starting NATs though.

[Blue In BC]

The Lions also have O'Connor listed as their # 2 QB which maintains that ratio idea if there is an in game injury. Whether he'd go into the game or Pipkin is not guaranteed and the game situation might decide who goes in.

All that said whether a QB or another position Canadian is a starter is just an interesting conversation. It's just that a QB happens so less often but a few are making CFL rosters these days. We might see somebody like Ford get a chance to show his stuff too.

Good to see any young QB doing well. Being Canadian is a bonus.

EDIT: I see the Bombers that were the only team to not have a chance drafting Rourke due to not having a 1st round pick in 2020. Rourke was picked before their 1st pick. That pick was away trading for Collaros. That got us 2 Grey Cup victories. Can't complain about that. lol

[Point of attack]

This Qb., for the Lions, Rourke seems certainly the real deal. Quite a decent arm, good feet, mobility and seemingly a terrific IQ for read and react.

Ask yourself how often a rookie QB at almost any level, can show the kind of confidence and most importantly the poise shown by Rourke. With his IQ and athleticism, it would be pretty surprising if this guy isn?t already a star in this league . Yes you have to acknowledge he?s played against pretty mediocre D but this guy just checks so many boxes.
He?s great for the league for sure.

[Blue In BC]

Ask yourself how often a rookie QB at almost any level, can show the kind of confidence and most importantly the poise shown by Rourke. With his IQ and athleticism, it would be pretty surprising if this guy isn?t already a star in this league . Yes you have to acknowledge he?s played against pretty mediocre D but this guy just checks so many boxes.
He?s great for the league for sure.

QB's like Arbuckle and Evans played extremely well against good teams when the starter was injured. Now not so much.

Let's not nominate him for the hall of fame yet. He's going to face better defences and will need to show poise under pressure from players like Jeffcoat and Jefferson. Secondary's that will contest passes and not leave receivers open by 5+ yards like the Argos did.

A good start for Rourke to build on.

I'm not disputing Rourke played very well and showed high football IQ.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

Rourke has had a really easy time of it. A couple home games against bad teams that had an even worse effort on the night they played. I would hold off before making too many assumptions just yet.

[dd]

No one is nominating him or anointing him for anything. The kid has gotten off to a tremendous start and let?s leave it st that. Why are people so negative and always have to bring up the ya buts??? Will he have ups and downs?? For sure. Get pressure from better defenses, absolutely. Has he had the best start of ANY Qb in the league. Yes. Good for him. And He?s Canadian, better yet.

[Blue In BC]

No one is nominating him or anointing him for anything. The kid has gotten off to a tremendous start and let?s leave it st that. Why are people so negative and always have to bring up the ya buts??? Will he have ups and downs?? For sure. Get pressure from better defenses, absolutely. Has he had the best start of ANY Qb in the league. Yes. Good for him. And He?s Canadian, better yet.

I don't think people or me are being negative. We're just pointing out the opposite where people get carried away in any players early success. Already talk about getting an NFL opportunity for example.

There is an interesting conversation about Rourke and the NFL. It speaks on rookie ELC contracts and how the NFL compares CFL QB's against American draft prospects.

[theaardvark]

Rourke is not a Rookie, he was with the team last year, and got reps...

Yes, he is young, green and has had a surprisingly good debut at undisputed starter against some admittedly weak teams at home.  Will this continue once he hits the road against better teams?   Even after this week, he will have faced teams with a total of 1 win in 8 games (that one win was Tor eeking out a 1 point win on a missed FG by MTL).

These teams were not a test for a team at home.

Facing Ottawa in OTT will be a bit of a test, but still a Ofer team.

Next week comes his real test.  At home, 10 days rest against the undefeated defending 2 time GC champs coming off 5 days rest.  So, everything that could be in his favour in facing a real opponent is there, this is his best chance to prove something.  Not saying there are excuses if the Bombers lose this one, but this schedule is screwed...  TOR on the 4th, BC on the 9th?  Short turnaround, on the road both ends of the country?   Wondering if Osh keeps them in TOR and flies direct to BC, or flies to BC after the TOR game and practices out there (guessing option 2)

Not sure if Rourke signed a 2 or 3 year ELC, but I'm sure there is either a mid-season "Wilder" renegotiation and even then, he has the NFL window should any of 32 teams come knocking...

[Lincoln Locomotive]

In all my years of being a CFL fan I've never seen any rookie QB make a splash like Rourke....period!    Kind of similar to Cale Makar with the Avalanche who won the Norris trophy at 23 and the MVP of the SC finals.    Yes it's only two games....and yes he played against the Elks and the Argos yet the fact remains his stats are off the charts.   Somehow I don't think it's a fluke or he just played very bad teams.....we play him 3 times this season so we will see how he evolves.   If he continues to improve BC will definitely be a contender with that arsenal of offensive weapons they have.    It's refreshing to see Canadian talent at this position.   Right now he's left off where he finished last season and he's on pace this year for perhaps a record breaking season.   This is just what the CFL needs especially in BC where attendance has been very poor.   I'm excited for him and the league.    
Having said that we all know it's a loooong season and much can happen....however if any team wins the Cup other than my beloved Bombers, I hope it's BC!