Would you take Andrew Harris or Charles Roberts? 

Charles Roberts

For me - Andrew Harris. Roberts is a more explosive runner, but Harris is more explosive as a receiver and better in pass pro. 

Roberts was the better talent, I would love to see what he would do with this offensive line... but Harris is way more of a professional and that matters. 

With our offense I think Harris is just so much more valuable because of him being so good catching out of the back field, and obviously he's a good blocker, but Roberts running the football was just special. The fact that he has over 1600 yards rushing with no offensive line, and Tee Martin as his starting QB in 2005 is amazing.

Harris ,hand down. I'll never forget how gassed he was in the Cup against Sask after he and Tom Canada partied till the wee hours. Plus Harris is a way better blocker.

They're different backs....I think I'd rather have Harris because he's more of a man. A pro's pro...and like Dave says, that matters...

They do it in different ways but Harris receiver skills put him ahead of Blink. 

I'd take Roberts over Flanders...

Charles Roberts body with Andrew Harris' brain.

I think some of us are forgetting just how good CR was...

 

Edited October 3, 20178 yr by kelownabomberfan

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

Would you take Andrew Harris or Charles Roberts? 

Imagine THAT tandem...!

I’m going to say Roberts although I still haven’t forgiven for his conduct prior to the 2007 Grey Cup.

Roberts was a better back at running the ball, no competition, but the fact Harris is excellent at catching and blocking gives him the edge over blink.

I’ll also add that Roberts was a better compliment to A Milt Stegall and Khari Jones offense but Andrew Harris is the better fit for a Matt Nichols O.

Roberts was unreal but he could not carry a team the way Harris does...  almost no one can.

There have been times this season where the bombers have lost momentum and Harris steps in and basically wills a first down...  Roberts would have gone for a smoke.  

I feel the need to mention that Roberts was a pretty good pass catcher and that he did have four straight seasons over 1500 yards rushing playing behind some terrible offensive lines. I think we're underrating him.

Oh and imagine Khari and Milt playing behind this offensive line with Andrew Harris.

Not sure Mike would want Charlie on his team.

just heard him on the coach's show. It's all about the team with Mike. No room for anybody that doesn't put the team first.

Not sure Charlie was always team first.

Charlie is one of my all time favourites, but I'd rather have Andrew on this team.

But It's a good question

Roberts was one of the best RBs in league history. I don’t even consider these two on the same playing field.

Roberts is old and lost a step.  Andrew Harris #ForTheW

What about Willard Reaves?

6 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Roberts was one of the best RBs in league history. I don’t even consider these two on the same playing field.

agreed 100%. Love Harris, but I can't think of any other RB league wide in the last 20 years that I would take over Blink.

Cornish or Harris. That's a more interesting comparison, imo.

Edited October 3, 20178 yr by Judd

12 minutes ago, Jesse said:

Roberts was one of the best RBs in league history. I don’t even consider these two on the same playing field.

Agree as well. Harris is good, but Roberts was an unreal talent. 

I think some people are forgetting how good Charles Roberts really was.. When he retired he was regarded as one of the best running backs in the history of the CFL. I appreciate Harris for everything he does for this team but Roberts was something special. 

I think some of you are forgetting how good Roberts was... He was a great pass catching back too and he didput in effort blocking when asked. The only major plus for Harris is his attitude. Harris is good and a Canadian, but Roberts was better. 

Harris is doing this at the age of 30 Charles Roberts had been out of football  for 2 years by the time he was 30.