GCn20

I really didn't like the way that Buck almost completely abandoned all the pre-snap motion we used to have in our offence. I am not sure why that happened, maybe all the new receivers? At any rate I think it hurt our offence, particularly when Streveler was playing. I am hoping our new OC brings some of that back, It may lead to some growing pains early on, but we were so vanilla the past two years and not just in the play calling but it can be seen pre-snap. That leads me to believe this was way more of a Buck issue than a Zac issue.

Yea,,,I agree. I will caveat that hoggies are a bit of a different breed when it comes to how you prep them though. They need enough wind to play but the veteran big guys just need enough to get the chemistry back. Nothing more really.f

TC is a slog even for the young guys. Guys like Paddy, you are just inviting injury by working them hard in camp. They have nothing to prove and do not need the reps. I agree, that they should be out there and getting some reps and a bit of game time but they don't need a lot, especially the hogs.

Look, I'm not sitting here trying to give Zac a free pass. He needed to be, and needs to be better. I am simply stating the obvious that in the past 3 Grey Cups he has gone up against juggernaut defences while our defence allowed late game heroics by opposing QBs. Should Kelly ever have been able to come off the bench and beat us? Fajardo take it to us in the 4th Q? Arbuckle actually do anything productive let alone beat us? There is more to these losses than Zac's play that's for sure. I would take Dru or Rourke over Zac now too. Sadly, that option is not available to us. Vaj...nope...I'll stick with Zac thank you.

I have no issue with criticism of a QB in the playoffs as long as it comes with praise when he does well also. You were deriding, rightfully so, his play in Grey Cups lately but then suggesting he got lucky in the good games he played. I don't think either of those opinions are a complete story. When his team has played well and executed so has he, when they haven't he hasn't. Is he able to lift a team badly playing up to victory..nope..but I don't see anyone in the CFL right now who can.

Every game has busts by the opponents D. How our QB, receivers etc recognized the opportunity and executed was the difference. I have never been to a football game where I haven't been yelling at the QB that so and so is wide open down the seam, or watch the QB get sacked just as he recognizes the bust. It's not all on what the Riders gave us, it was equal parts how we used it. Were the RIders D making mistakes...yep...but every defence does every game.

We should not be at all surprised by this style coming from Younger. It was the exact same style he played with the Argos when he and Levingston etc were ball hawking the league. Younger excelled in that format, as did our DBs last year, but it means our QB rush quite often is an after thought.

We shouldn't blame him for his bad games, but discredit him when he plays great. There are a myriad of factors behind every great and poor performance a QB has. However, most will lay blame squarely on the QB when his performance appears off, so it's only fair to do the same when things are clicking....otherwise it's a biased take.

I don't mind the getting hands up in the passing lanes approach with the caveat that there has to be a disruptor to force those throws. So a pure pass rusher off the edge, or a DT that can get pressure consistently are a must this year. I love the system, but wish he would go conventional at times too. Keep the offence off balance.

I really don't mind a TV guy coming in as commissioner. His prowess in that field should serve the CFL well as we look to expand our exposure in the USA.

I like Woli as much as the next guy, but he isn't a 1000 yard guy that never got the ball thrown to him. That's just fallacy. In his first two seasons he was getting as many targets a game as Demski and for roughly the same YPC. In fact, that never really changed. Where Demski left Woli in the dust to become our 3rd receiver option was in his YAC and big play ability. Honestly, I don`t get the grousing when our 4thé5th receiving option received 4th and 5th option targets and opportunities. How can we say he was held back. He sure as heck wasn`t better than, and never will be better than, Schoen or Lawler or Demski or Brady O in the battle for targets per game. I am unclear why anyone would think Woli deserved targets over better receivers. He may get that somewhere else that doesn`t have the talent of our receiving group, but that certainly does not mean we held him back. We gave him the targets that he earned according to his place on the depth chart. That`s not holding someone back.

Year one is adjusting to pro speed for most guys, year 2 should see many guys begin bringing their game. Sucks they are doing that but I doubt it has any real impact whatsoever on anyone's roster.

It's good...but a team is only as good as it's depth. SShhhh.,...don't tell the Riders, they haven't figured that out yet.

You arguing this in bad faith. The presumption of the argument is that Woli never comes in as a NAT but an IMP with the Lions. In that case, I don't see him getting any kind of a sniff of quality playing time or touches with the Lions either. The fact of the matter in all of this is that Woli could have been a reasonably productive WR for us or an outstanding possession/TE type of receiver. One will get you more touches and yardage, the other is way more valuable beyond the stats. Woli had an extremely important role within our offence and he did it well. We did not hold him back.

Yea...we are definitely going NAT at centre one way or another.

He had Oliveira as Brady.

The Lions were put between a rock and a hard place. Rourke was ready to come back at a time that meant going over to get him. Why the Lions didn't trade Adams immediately after was their big mistake. That's a crap load of SMS sitting on the bench for the remainder of the season.

They went over because only one of their half million QBs could play at one time.

Yea....this makes no sense whatsoever. The fairest way is everyone move up a slot like in past years.

Yea...he has a point on Petey and Simonise but Woli was literally starting the last 5 games of his year 1 and held the starter position after that. As for Petey and Simonise, they did play many snaps for us and we moved on. Sometimes it is unfair to say they never got a chance when their production was pretty meh in the snaps they were given. Neither Petey nor Simonise has done much of anything since they left so it leads me to believe they just weren't good enough. When we release someone who actually produces somewhere else, the argument can be made we held them back but until then it's kind of unfair to criticize the brass for not playing inferior talent. I mean it's not like we held them on our PR until they were too old to be developed. Both Petey and Simonise were young enough when they left here that they could have shown they were being held back. Neither man did.

He had some potential that went unrealized....but yea...kind of a bit of a flyer in the 3rd round. Probably a 6th round talent really.

I fold my wife all the time, and if you win the bet you can have her....hell if you lose the bet you can have her. I wouldn't take this bet if I were you. lmao

Or maybe he came to the realization that he isn't good enough to be rostered and moved on from football. Seriously, we get your point on roster but digging in your heels about Murphy being denied roster time is a strange use of this argument. At no time did he ever demonstrate that he was better than anyone on our roster.

Walters has listed only 2 NATs on the OL starting in a recent interview, so unless he is bumping Paddy this year it looks like the plan is to go 3 IMP OL. That doesn't mean he can't win the job though and make them change their mind. My guess is that if availability of decent talent is there that our preference would be OL/Receiver in the first two rounds. As you stated, we are thin.

Wallace just improved as time went on for sure. He is going to start for us at some point.