Official Game Day Thread - Winnipeg at Edmonton - Sept. 21, 2024

[bunker]

Thanks Junkie!!  That must have been some quick scramble work by some poor sod sweating it out back @PAS to get that revised chart done in time!

So we did play with only 44.  Bummer.

The flight is a charter/private jet, so why don't we bring our "best available PR player" to every away game?  Just in case.  Doesn't have to be in the same position or even on the same side of the ball.  Just has to be someone who can sub in for a warm-up injury.  Either a talented NAT, if we have one, or our best PR IMP... or one of both.

For instance, we could have had Adams dress as the 45th, no?

There would be advantages to bringing an extra player. But how often is a player actually injured in warm-up? And how do you predict who it is, in terms of trying to decide who to bring, in terms of position, ratio. There's also the extra cost (meals, hotel...granted fairly small), and the fact that even charters have a fixed capacity in terms of seats available. Might be a reasonable question to ask on the coaches show, O'Shea might even answer it...

[Blue In BC]

There would be advantages to bringing an extra player. But how often is a player actually injured in warm-up? And how do you predict who it is, in terms of trying to decide who to bring, in terms of position, ratio. There's also the extra cost (meals, hotel...granted fairly small), and the fact that even charters have a fixed capacity in terms of seats available. Might be a reasonable question to ask on the coaches show, O'Shea might even answer it...

Yeah the trick is guessing who you'd need to add. That said, the number of choices is limited to players on the PR. So choosing one isn't rocket science either. You could bring 1 extra offensive player ( an OL ) or an extra defensive player ( DL ).

Team already had depth in most other areas, so that would seem easy. At home you already have those players on the bench as spectators.

[bunker]

For this game, I might have brought another receiver, since we were pretty light on receiver depth. Which would not have helped much with this injury. So its a bit of a guessing game.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Yeah the trick is guessing who you'd need to add. That said, the number of choices is limited to players on the PR. So choosing one isn't rocket science either. You could bring 1 extra offensive player ( an OL ) or an extra defensive player ( DL ).

Team already had depth in most other areas, so that would seem easy. At home you already have those players on the bench as spectators.

What happened to the game day reserve? In years past they always had a man or 2 extra  ready to go on the gameday roster and it wasn't revealed until game time which unlucky players would not dress or play.  I'm not clear if this is the case anymore.

[Blue In BC]

What happened to the game day reserve? In years past they always had a man or 2 extra  ready to go on the gameday roster and it wasn't revealed until game time which unlucky players would not dress or play.  I'm not clear if this is the case anymore.

The roster used to be 46 players of which 1 wouldn't dress. That never made any sense to pay a player for a full game check but not allow him to play.

Deleting the " extra " player it allowed the annual SMS to be used over the rest of the roster somewhere. A player on an ELC is about $74K so that's enough for a few raises etc.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

The roster used to be 46 players of which 1 wouldn't dress. That never made any sense to pay a player for a full game check but not allow him to play.

Deleting the " extra " player it allowed the annual SMS to be used over the rest of the roster somewhere. A player on an ELC is about $74K so that's enough for a few raises etc.

I guess they made the change strictly for economic reasons, yesterday's situation was why the extra reserve was in place for as long as it was.  With so many bodies to maintain, chances are one will malfunction prior to gametime. Stanley's timing was a bit off a few weeks ago, that would have also fit the situation well if he would have been declared sick prior to gametime.

[Blue In BC]

I guess they made the change strictly for economic reasons, yesterday's situation was why the extra reserve was in place for as long as it was.  With so many bodies to maintain, chances are one will malfunction prior to gametime. Stanley's timing was a bit off a few weeks ago, that would have also fit the situation well if he would have been declared sick prior to gametime.

Yes but you can add a player and some players are designated GTD. So a team must have the replacement available to add a player late etc.

Taking a couple of extra on the road has a nominal cost. Much less than an actual game day check as in the past. The PR players are still getting their weekly $$$ amount.It's just less than a full game check. Then if you need to activate somebody, you can.

[gobombersgo]

I guess they made the change strictly for economic reasons, yesterday's situation was why the extra reserve was in place for as long as it was.  With so many bodies to maintain, chances are one will malfunction prior to gametime. Stanley's timing was a bit off a few weeks ago, that would have also fit the situation well if he would have been declared sick prior to gametime.

When the league had the game day stratches (used to be 4 players then changed to 1), those players normally didn't travel with the team to away games. So having those reserve players wouldn't have helped with yesterday's situation.

If it was a home game then the team could have easily replaced Wilson with another player. The team has done this on occasion in the past.

Also, the official roster size is 44 (with an option to dress one additional Canadian or Global player). So technically the team wasn't down a player but they did dress 1 less American than normally the case.

[TecnoGenius]

For this game, I might have brought another receiver, since we were pretty light on receiver depth. Which would not have helped much with this injury. So its a bit of a guessing game.

But you don't need to guess the position.  Just consider any extra guy you fly out as an extra depth guy, regardless of who gets Kyrie'd.  For instance, our team can always use an extra DL dressed.  So I would usually bring an extra DL.

We all know an extra body as depth at DL will be appreciated and used by our team.  (And probably same with LB.)  Or WR when we are light at depth, as you said.

The Kyrie'd player is a sunk cost: just ignore who actually goes out.  Instead think of bringing someone else as a free bonus.

As for cost: hotel rooms are usually shared except for QB, no?  Chances are they already have an odd number of non-QB players, so the hotel is 0 cost.  Food is negligble, as would be per diem.  And in any event, that's all off-SMS so who cares about cost?

[Blue In BC]

When the league had the game day stratches (used to be 4 players then changed to 1), those players normally didn't travel with the team to away games. So having those reserve players wouldn't have helped with yesterday's situation.

If it was a home game then the team could have easily replaced Wilson with another player. The team has done this on occasion in the past.

Also, the official roster size is 44 (with an option to dress one additional Canadian or Global player). So technically the team wasn't down a player but they did dress 1 less American than normally the case.

Has any team actually not dressed a 45th player intentionally? I mean many teams end up with the 2nd global on their AR. Mostly since their 1st global is a kicker and the 2nd is on an ELC anyway.

A few times that is almost a forced decision as injuries to Canadian depth players eliminates the choice between the 2 choices.

That said, why is it a choice to intentionally only roster 44 instead of having to choose the extra player?

A team out of the play off hunt next week could save $4K per game for the last 3 games by only using 44 players.

Teams expecting to miss the playoffs could shuffle some higher paid players to the 6 game IR this week to save some cash. It would also allow to manage roster numbers on the PR and get a longer look at a few players.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Speaking of roster management isn't this traditionally the time of year the Bombers bring in a handful of prospects for tryouts for TC next season?  Other than the 3 QB's they brought in it seems awfully quiet on that front.

[Blue In BC]

Speaking of roster management isn't this traditionally the time of year the Bombers bring in a handful of prospects for tryouts for TC next season?  Other than the 3 QB's they brought in it seems awfully quiet on that front.

You must have missed the activity. The PR has been loaded up to the max or near max. With Wilson going back on IR they might have room for one more addition.

Currently the PR shows 18 players but the 2 Rifles players don't count. We moved Samson to the 1 game IR so in theory we have 1 more spot to reach 17 allowed when 2 spots are listed for global players.

In theory that gives us 2 spots due to the Wilson issue.

I don't think we lost anybody else during the game and I'm not aware of anyone on the 6 game that might come off now besides Cole?

Also not convinced we keep 2 QB's on the PR past this week. Perhaps one gets a futures deal for TC 2025.  I say this because there are not enough practice reps for 5 QB's on rosters at this time of the season. Even in TC 5 is a bigger number for too long an extended time.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

You must have missed the activity. The PR has been loaded up to the max or near max. With Wilson going back on IR they might have room for one more addition.

Currently the PR shows 18 players but the 2 Rifles players don't count. We moved Samson to the 1 game IR so in theory we have 1 more spot to reach 17 allowed when 2 spots are listed for global players.

In theory that gives us 2 spots due to the Wilson issue.

I don't think we lost anybody else during the game and I'm not aware of anyone on the 6 game that might come off now besides Cole?

Also not convinced we keep 2 QB's on the PR past this week. Perhaps one gets a futures deal for TC 2025.  I say this because there are not enough practice reps for 5 QB's on rosters at this time of the season. Even in TC 5 is a bigger number for too long an extended time.

Unfortunately I don't check the Bomber roster page or the CFL transactions page as much as I used to, having unreliable or old information, statistics and data does not enhance the CFL fan experience.

[TecnoGenius]

Has any team actually not dressed a 45th player intentionally? I mean many teams end up with the 2nd global on their AR. Mostly since their 1st global is a kicker and the 2nd is on an ELC anyway.

I don't see why any team would dress less than the max.  We have seen a couple of teams "dress" their dinged-up QB who is just on the sidelines in civvies or no helmet.  That is the only case I can think of where you knowingly "waste" an AR spot.  I think this is done as a courtesy to the QB so he keeps getting his game cheque and any performance/dressing bonuses.

No team cares about the real-world $$, regardless of how "poor" they cry.

But you make a good point: teams do care about the SMS$, and once you no longer care about winning, you can shrink the AR to get a few more bucks to pre-sign/pre-bonus stars for next year with this year's SMS$.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

I don't see why any team would dress less than the max.  We have seen a couple of teams "dress" their dinged-up QB who is just on the sidelines in civvies or no helmet.  That is the only case I can think of where you knowingly "waste" an AR spot.  I think this is done as a courtesy to the QB so he keeps getting his game cheque and any performance/dressing bonuses.

No team cares about the real-world $$, regardless of how "poor" they cry.

But you make a good point: teams do care about the SMS$, and once you no longer care about winning, you can shrink the AR to get a few more bucks to pre-sign/pre-bonus stars for next year with this year's SMS$.

That'd be a clever accounting trick, but I'd be surprised if the CFLPA didn't have the minimum number of players dressed stipulated in the CBA.