Winnipeg @ BC the Rematch

[Blue In BC]

That's exactly what it should say.

It doesn't have to say that. It only has to reference the CFL or CFLPA. Anyway, what's done is done.

[Jesse]

That's exactly what it should say.

It's going to be whatever company the league hired to this. They're not a part of the CFL.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

It should say "Pick up the phone Zachy. It's important".

Anything less is unacceptable.

[TecnoGenius]

It should say "Pick up the phone Zachy. It's important".

Anything less is unacceptable.

That's why I always have said: call. the. wife.  Wives love checking calls / messages (at least mine does!), and trust me, when the phone says WIFE you pick that thing up.     

[TecnoGenius]

If they switch out Vanterpool for Wallace they'd probably 1 game him, he's in his second season with the team and sending him back to the PR would send a negative message after putting in a superb effort in game #1. I agree any rookie, draft pick or bubble player should accept PR assignment without question, including Peterson if necessary, most are still new to the game and have much to learn and adapt.

It really wouldn't.  I think all WFC players know they may sit on PR for some games and it's not necessarily that they suck.  Sometimes it's ratio, sometimes it's injuries, sometimes it's just we have so many great players.

Vanterpool as a 2nd year IMP should expect absolutely nothing.  On the progression/seniority ladder he's still behind Randolph, who has a ton more live game snaps under his belt, and is arguably better and certainly more versatile.

I don't think Mafia thinks twice before PRing him, if that's what's required.  How many IMP OL have we had pass through the last decade that just languished on PR.  Some never dressing, let alone starting, let alone starting regularly!

[TecnoGenius]

Another possible roster change is adding Hagerty. He's a very good ST player and seems to be healthy again. The catch is that we might be adding the 2nd global in Bailey. If that doesn't happen then Hagerty could replace Novak. Hagerty has 46 games CFL experience compared to 1 for Novak.

I'm a bit baffled.  Does Mafia really pick the roster based on "great ST player!"?  I was of the mind that all those years we really ever only rostered one "great ST player" for his ST skills alone: Mike Miller.

Are you saying there's a 2nd, 3rd, 4th STer who really isn't great on D or O but we really really want to AR him just to beef up ST?  And we'd sacrifice dressing a much better player on O or D because he isn't as good at ST?

A great example is Ayers.  Apparently great at ST, but so-so on D... Let's say we really wanted/needed Cooley as a DI to backup Peterson; are you really saying we say "nah, need to dress Ayers or our ST will suck"?  Isn't it more important to get the needed / BAP onto the AR for the "real teams" even if it "weakens" the ST unit?

[TecnoGenius]

We did acquire Peterson in trade along with moving up in the global draft.

Oh ok, but CFL stats show him as having never dressed for a game before WPG, so wouldn't Peterson still be a "rookie" then?

[Jesse]

Oh ok, but CFL stats show him as having never dressed for a game before WPG, so wouldn't Peterson still be a "rookie" then?

He would have attended Hamilton's training camp last year, played in pre-season games. Does that count?

[Blue In BC]

I'm a bit baffled.  Does Mafia really pick the roster based on "great ST player!"?  I was of the mind that all those years we really ever only rostered one "great ST player" for his ST skills alone: Mike Miller.

Are you saying there's a 2nd, 3rd, 4th STer who really isn't great on D or O but we really really want to AR him just to beef up ST?  And we'd sacrifice dressing a much better player on O or D because he isn't as good at ST?

A great example is Ayers.  Apparently great at ST, but so-so on D... Let's say we really wanted/needed Cooley as a DI to backup Peterson; are you really saying we say "nah, need to dress Ayers or our ST will suck"?  Isn't it more important to get the needed / BAP onto the AR for the "real teams" even if it "weakens" the ST unit?

I'm saying that Novak as a rookie has less value at the moment than Hagerty might have. We're also very deep at LB but a little thin at DB. So Hagerty has more versatility.

Ayers is not a Canadian and he could very well be next up at WIL in game if Wilson gets injured.  Before TC many thought he'd be fighting to be the starter.

So you're comparing apples to apples. Ayers is more than just a very good ST player.

I've repeatedly mentioned that Cooley as just a DI is problematic. At the moment he isn't versatile. If he's on the roster then they should expect him to start. As a back up his use would be very limited requiring an import on offence to come out for him to be on the field. That would be Sterns. If they intend for him to start.

IMO that would be a choice to remove Vanterpool off the roster. to allow that to happen.  Hard to say what Cooley could do. He might be the next great RB or he may have just been a flash in the pan in pre-season. At least Peterson showed a lot in his 1st game but that's a small sample too. Passport is everything.

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I'm a bit baffled.  Does Mafia really pick the roster based on "great ST player!"?  I was of the mind that all those years we really ever only rostered one "great ST player" for his ST skills alone: Mike Miller.

Are you saying there's a 2nd, 3rd, 4th STer who really isn't great on D or O but we really really want to AR him just to beef up ST?  And we'd sacrifice dressing a much better player on O or D because he isn't as good at ST?

A great example is Ayers.  Apparently great at ST, but so-so on D... Let's say we really wanted/needed Cooley as a DI to backup Peterson; are you really saying we say "nah, need to dress Ayers or our ST will suck"?  Isn't it more important to get the needed / BAP onto the AR for the "real teams" even if it "weakens" the ST unit?

Take this with an extra grain of salt because this is even more opinion based than usual:

It depends on the year and to some degree, the opponent. Ayers is one of the most athletic players we've got and O'Shea particularly likes him because he's also one of the toughest. He really is a monster on the teams and will run through (literally) a player-like brick wall. He did it routinely last year and has the concussions to prove it.

They also gave him some WILL reps later in the season. He started there at an away game in Edmonton and maybe one other. Results were mixed and he didn't play there after. Draw whatever conclusions you like but this year he's penciled in as a DE (after we drafted Canadian linebackers) and I think the coaching staff is really trying to find a place he can excel for all the reasons as stated above.

That said, they're also trying to find him a spot because it's very hard to stay on the roster as a primarily American special teams player (who isn't kicking the ball) and we should be aware that that's what he is right now. When we need the roster spot for Cooley, for example, it makes it hard for him to stay rostered (particularly when we're only starting 7 Canadians). If Kramdi goes down we can only fill with an American probably, so same thing.

A guy like Ayers would be very valuable against Tre Ford next Thursday and so if he comes off for Cooley this week I'd expect him back on somehow someway against Edmonton (that's the part about where there's a good opponent fit).

Summary: He's in a weird spot. He's an interesting player who brings a lot but hasn't found a home anywhere on the actual defense which is certainly a big hit to his value on game day. Another reason why I don't really like the ratio rules. If he was Canadian he'd looking at a long career or if more Americans could play he'd have no trouble staying on the roster but he's neither of those things and so it's going to be tough if he can't find a position.

[markf]

Jordan Younger interview was interesting.

"Stay ahead of the curve"

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Take this with an extra grain of salt because this is even more opinion based than usual:

It depends on the year and to some degree, the opponent. Ayers is one of the most athletic players we've got and O'Shea particularly likes him because he's also one of the toughest. He really is a monster on the teams and will run through (literally) a player-like brick wall. He did it routinely last year and has the concussions to prove it.

They also gave him some WILL reps later in the season. He started there at an away game in Edmonton and maybe one other. Results were mixed and he didn't play there after. Draw whatever conclusions you like but this year he's penciled in as a DE (after we drafted Canadian linebackers) and I think the coaching staff is really trying to find a place he can excel for all the reasons as stated above.

That said, they're also trying to find him a spot because it's very hard to stay on the roster as a primarily American special teams player (who isn't kicking the ball) and we should be aware that that's what he is right now. When we need the roster spot for Cooley, for example, it makes it hard for him to stay rostered (particularly when we're only starting 7 Canadians). If Kramdi goes down we can only fill with an American probably, so same thing.

A guy like Ayers would be very valuable against Tre Ford next Thursday and so if he comes off for Cooley this week I'd expect him back on somehow someway against Edmonton (that's the part about where there's a good opponent fit).

Summary: He's in a weird spot. He's an interesting player who brings a lot but hasn't found a home anywhere on the actual defense which is certainly a big hit to his value on game day. Another reason why I don't really like the ratio rules. If he was Canadian he'd looking at a long career or if more Americans could play he'd have no trouble staying on the roster but he's neither of those things and so it's going to be tough if he can't find a position.

Just to further this the discovery of Ayers is the reason Cole is no longer a Bomber, they were both Swiss Army Knife players, but Ayers has greater potential as a WIL.

As for Kramdi's backup, for now Griffin, but expect 2nd round draft pick Smith to move in that direction as he's better suited to DB than he is LB.

[Blue In BC]

Just to further this the discovery of Ayers is the reason Cole is no longer a Bomber, they were both Swiss Army Knife players, but Ayers has greater potential as a WIL.

As for Kramdi's backup, for now Griffin, but expect 2nd round draft pick Smith to move in that direction as he's better suited to DB than he is LB.

I agree about the depth at SAM both short and long term. In at least the 1st half of 2025 ratio comes into play. If Kramdi gets hurt we'd have to switch Cooley to a DI so Griffin could play at SAM.

I'm not sure that switching DI's can happen in game, so it probably means Hallett has to play or 2 Canadian DT's?

[TecnoGenius]

I'm not sure that switching DI's can happen in game, so it probably means Hallett has to play or 2 Canadian DT's?

I'm almost positive the ratio is set in stone on each side (O vs D) at game start (well, 30 min or 24 hours before).

So your Cooley / Kramdi / Griffin example is not legal.  If Griffin takes over for injured Kramdi, you have to add that extra NAT on D.  Yes, that's like Hallett.  Though we could also put Lawson in the 2nd DT spot.