Roster Player Categories

[Blue In BC]

So grant is both a DI and a Nationalized American. He can replace BOO for up to 23 players. O'Leary-Orange is not the starter so when is he going to see Grant in for him as a replacement. Makes no sense to pick a back up rather than an actual starter. They may as well have picked Woli or Oliveria and Grant might have seen the field on offence 2 or 3 times.

I vote for trashing this rule. Too many variations, exceptions, categories etc.

[Jesse]

So grant is both a DI and a Nationalized American. He can replace BOO for up to 23 players. O'Leary-Orange is not the starter so when is he going to see Grant in for him as a replacement. Makes no sense to pick a back up rather than an actual starter. They may as well have picked Woli or Oliveria and Grant might have seen the field on offence 2 or 3 times.

I vote for trashing this rule. Too many variations, exceptions, categories etc.

If you take our depth chart at face value and we're not hiding our plans until game time - it seems as if we're ignoring the rules and simply deploying our roster as we always would.

[Pete]

with the new rules I have no clue why we are not utilizing Thomas as a di rather than cole. We could make bighill or jeffcoat the Naturalized american. and rotate thomas in regulary on the line without ratio concerns

[theaardvark]

OK, looking at the roster and the lineup card, I have

3 QB
19 Ints (without Grant)
20 nat + Grant
2 globals

44 players...

The rule states:


    Maximum of 3 QBs (no designation)
    Maximum of 19 American players
    Minimum of 21 National players
        Including one nationalized American
    Minimum of 1 Global player

**45th player would be an extra national or global player

So, it looks like we are using the DNA in Grant, who is basically a DI.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

So grant is both a DI and a Nationalized American. He can replace BOO for up to 23 players. O'Leary-Orange is not the starter so when is he going to see Grant in for him as a replacement. Makes no sense to pick a back up rather than an actual starter. They may as well have picked Woli or Oliveria and Grant might have seen the field on offence 2 or 3 times.

I vote for trashing this rule. Too many variations, exceptions, categories etc.

I'd prefer that too, don't like to see players like Jake or Woli treated poorly just because they made up a rule that allows them to.  The league deserves some backlash, CFL fans need to take back their game.

[theaardvark]

The starting lineup posted on facebook confuses me...

What is a Designated National? And why is BOO designated as such?

Why is Wolitarsky a "Nationalized American as well as Grant? (Typo?)

And what is a Designated American and why is it Castillo?

[TecnoGenius]

Tweeted rule:

2. "Each team must also identify... a DNS and back-ups, each of whom are eligible to be replaced in-game by the DNA."

We've made Woli and BOO the DNS's on O (shown with the square brackets).  That's legit.  Though it will be funny when DNA Castillo comes in as WR. 

On D we haven't designated any DNS!  Hahaha.  Read rule #2 again: "each team MUST".  On each side: "on the correspoding side of the ball".  Funny, the first sentence can be read as not needing to designate a DNS on D, but it's implied by the second sentence.  Really great ambiguous rule-writing again, CFL.  Clear as mud.

Hahaha.  MOS PM me for tips on how to do this right. 

[TecnoGenius]

But that's not the big problem: the huge massive problem is we have no one on this depth chart on D that we can use as DNA!  There are no vet IMP backups!  We are going to be in breach of the rules.  We will be breaking the "must" aspect of rule #1.  This isn't an optional, nice-to-have thing.  This is a you-must-do rule as real as the existing ratio rules.  Try not playing 7+ NATs and see what happens to you.  That's what's going to happen to us with this depth chart as it is.

So, what is the solution without changing the AR? ...

(edited based on new DI/DA nomenclature: the fact that DA is just the replacement term for DI)

[TecnoGenius]

The best option I see is to start Haba at DE.  Jeffcoat becomes the DNA.  Jeffcoat then plays the reps he normally would (no 23 rule) in place of Haba, and Haba does the spelling he would have anyway.  We gain virtually nothing by this.  That's fine, at least we'll comply with the rules.

We'd make every NAT on the DL a DNS.

We would gain the option of doing a cheetah with Haba, Jeffcoat, Bennett, Willie.  But I can't see that unless we are up big.

This is proof that The Mafia, just as KW said, has put zero thought into this in terms of signing FAs or structuring the AR.  Zero.  None.  Nada.

Going forward, if we hired a kick-butt IMP DT of any vintage, we make Alexander the DNA and have Hallett start FS.  The beast DT would start.  Fatboi would backup/spell.  We'd have only one starting NAT on D (Hallett) and he'd only play X-23 snaps.  Actually, he could play less because when Thomas spells the beast BA could come in for Hallett.  Hallett could potentially play zero snaps (but he would for spelling).

[pdirks67]

I haven't seen HAM's chart yet (anyone have links?).  Game tracker isn't showing it yet?

Here's the Hamilton depth chart:
https://cdn.ticats.ca/app/uploads/ticats/2023/06/08121042/Depth-Chart-Roster-Week-1-%40-Winnipeg-1.pdf

[TecnoGenius]

3 QB
19 Ints (without Grant)
20 nat + Grant
2 globals

44 players...

The rule states:
    Maximum of 3 QBs (no designation)
    Maximum of 19 American players
    Minimum of 21 National players
        Including one nationalized American
    Minimum of 1 Global player

First off, critically important, the FAKENAT DNA/DNS rules have nothing to do with AR tabulation.  A DNA is still an IMP for whatever limit (19?) the AR rules say.  The FAKNET DNA/DNS stuff only counts for the in-game snaps!  So your "without Grant" and "+ Grant" thing above isn't the way it works.  Grant (if the DNA) counts to the 19.

You are right, I get 20 IMPs.  Are you sure it's 19?  If it's 19, we are one over and in violation of the existing ratio rules.  But are you sure you're right?  I don't see how we could be "over".  We have 4 DAs (nee DIs) shown (Castillo, Grant, Haba, Cole), and we are starting precisely 7 NATs.  All that is normal.  So the IMP limit must be 20?  What gives?

BinBC??

[pdirks67]

I had a heck of a time reading through threads to find the Bomber depth chart, so re-posting an image of it.

[TecnoGenius]

Here's the Hamilton depth chart:

(edited based on new DI/DA nomenclature: the fact that DA is just the replacement term for DI)

Argh, cfl.ca/players has all the stats down at the moment so I can't confirm if players I don't know count as fakenat vets; but I'll assume they do.

HAM is doing it (more) right.  Duke Williams as the DNA on O is a great choice.  DNS of their 2 NAT SB is correct.  Duke can sub in for those bad NAT SBs for 23 plays, and he can sub in for IMP Bayless for the rest.  HAM is using this to their advantage and clearly gave it some thought when making signings on O.

On D they have not specified any DNA!  They are thus in violation of the rules.  Nor any DNS/DNSB's.  Doh.

They start 2 NATs on D so they should have some good options to "win".  I think playing with Davis as DNA and Kongbo/Bennett as DNS would be a winner.  That would allow them to get Osei out of the game on O and allow for starting only 1 NAT WR.

The funny thing is, the limiting factor here seems to be that teams don't have enough good IMP talent on AR to make use of DNAs on both sides.  HAM seems to have this problem, WPG has this problem... I want to see a depth chart and AR that really maximizes the "win" you can get from this FAKENAT stuff.  Will we see it in week 1?

[TecnoGenius]

with the new rules I have no clue why we are not utilizing Thomas as a di rather than cole. We could make bighill or jeffcoat the Naturalized american. and rotate thomas in regulary on the line without ratio concerns

I think whether IMP-Thomas or Cole is the DI would be somewhat independent of who the DNA is.  What do we gain by having IMP-Thomas DI behind Walker in terms of the FAKENAT rules?

I do think that in any event of who the DI is, you start Haba at DE and Jeffcoat becomes the DNA.  The only FAKENAT "win" is how you get that DNA on the field for a NAT for 23 snaps.  Our DL isn't set up for that because we have no extra IMP DTs!  The "win" has to come from Fatboi coming out.  Or the ideas about starting FS Hallett as I mentioned before...

[Blue In BC]

Tweeted rule:

1. "each team will identify... one player on each side of the ball as their DNA"

WPG has designated Castillo as DA (with the little "DA" subscript).  He is not on any side of the ball.  He cannot be the DA.  Even if he could be called "O", he cannot sub in for anyone on O because what's he going to do, be the RB or WR?  This almost looks like a The Mafia giving the middle finger to the CFL: "see how stupid your new rules are! we fart in your general direction".

Then on D we made LB B.Cole the DA (with the little "DA" subscript).  Cole isn't even valid as a DNA because he's a freakin' rookie!!  They need to have 3/5 years on team/league to qualify!  Hahaha.  Mafia stick it to the crap rules!  Ambrosie is going to be calling them real soon now, or forcing them to forfeit the game.

Either The Mafia misunderstands the tweeted rules so badly or they are openly mocking them.  If the former, MOS needs to get his eyes into this forum thread stat! 

Castillo is a DA which is the new term for DI. Same deal with Cole. The other two are Grant and Haba. Grant is the only one that would qualify as the Nationalized American but he could only replace O'Leary Orange and he's not a starter anyway.