Attention OBIE !!!

Please do not let Coach Taffee convince you of keeping an american fullback or american kicker ....
PROMISE ?

… why? this is a waste of time!

Yeah, because Jamie Boreham was so much better than Nick Setta!

Why not move Dickerson to a legitimate tightend and play with 2 real running backs. It may be unconventional by today's standard but I cannot see why you cannot run a tightend offence in the CFL if you have the persnelle tomake it work. It seems to me that is what would make the best use of our present roster and it would allow us to narrow our search for quality recievers. The only problem I see is finding an adequate backup for Dickerson

Gerbear9 = Jamie Boreham

Interesting concept. We used to have tight ends in the CFL....back in the heyday of guys like Dalla Riva, Mel Profit, so on....

With defences having gained the upper hand the past few seasons, perhaps throwing a wrinkle at them with a 'new' offensive scheme employing 2 running backs and a tight end might be useful.

Worth giving it a whirl, anyway. If Hamilton used Dickerson as TE and had Lumsden and Caulley together in the backfield, I wonder if Radlein would be able to backup at the TE spot?

Thats the problem I'm having advocating a back to the future style offence. It seems that last years staff had questions about Rads ability to act as a blocking TE. If he can do it this idea would solve a raft of problems and fit in with our current OC's desire to run the ball first

Bingo. that comment says alot about what been wrong with hamilton. A failure to utilize the players we have on hand in the manner they are most effective.

Moving dickerson to the end seems almost logical, but there are some problems.

  1. The increased ammount of blocking, or affecting the ability to hide blocking schemes. Picking up the blitz after the line has filtered them out is a whole different game from blocking a linebacker at the line of scrimmage.

  2. Dickerson could be gettig open because of play-action, or some other backfeild movement that shifts coverage.

  3. The TE in the CFL has become defunct for a reason. Now, i've not been around quite longe enough to follow football trends, and the developement of offencive stratigies, maybe someone can shed some light on this?

-c

edit

  1. this could be a good one too. Who would take over at FB? and would we have teh depth behind Radlin?

  2. Size? would he weigh enough to play the position?

Why not use a wishbone offence, use both Dickerson & Lumsden with Cauley.

Obie mentioned in his press conference to announce his hiring that he prefers the more typical use of Canadians.

ie. FB, OL, FS and the odd WR/SB

The reason the TE went the way of the dodo was due mostly to the success of offenses utilizing motion from the SB position. The original trial at this offense occured due to a lack of players capable of being effective as both a lineman and a reciever. This evolved to the point that now the second RB never carries the ball but is used soley as a blocking back. It also evolved so that SB's no longer were require to be large men capable of blocking as was the case in the infancy of the concept. This actually allowed a team to utilize an extra blocker on running plays as both SB's would be expected to block linebackers. The bottom line is that evolution does not need to dictate that past offensive concepts cannot work. Since we have a player that not only is suited to being a tightend but has also demonstrated that blocking from a set lined up as a tightend is a strongsuit why not utilize it. If we had to go and look for a player to fill the role I'd say forget it since its almost impossible to find a guy that blocks and is able to catch effectively. As for the wihbone, that only works in 4 down ball and such mocking only reflects poorly on the author

This American Kicker was running up for rookie of the year. He should be resign to a Long Term deal.

Unless we have a very good kicker waiting in the wings this is no time to talk of another kicker it may encourage our present kicker to leave early.

Used to have 14-10 games back then as well.

I think low scoring games that are defense dominated are just as entertaining as high scoring games.

keep Setta, and i like Rads back at FB. Move Dickerson to TE and trade Piercy. Our 3 RB's could be Caulley, Lumsden and Rads with Dickerson at reserve. Dickerson could be good in play action in short yardage situations.

Enough with TE's....this is the CFL not the NFL. With college and the NFL moving to more 3, 4 receiver sets why should the CFL revert back to TE package?

not full time, short yardage. it would be good for play action.

The better question would be .... why not use a tight end in the CFL? I'd really like to hear a case be made to support the argument rather than just its not the NFL or that nobody has done it in 30 years. Make a clear case for total dismissal of the idea. My theory has been that the primary reason the CFL went to the double slot was lack of talent to fill the TE spot. Certainly thats really not the case in the Cats case

the reason is the wide field and the speed of the players needed for the wide field. slot backs are faster than TE's, so they are used more, but i would like to see TE's used more.