depth chart for Calgary

As a diehard ticat fan i'll support the ticats in whatever they do but why would you start Brooks over Auggie in the middle? Auggie has proven himself time and time again as a consumate pro. What has Brooks done yet THIS year. Even in preseason we didnt see much of him. The only time ive seen him on the field is on special teams and that 1 yard plunge by Edwards where Brooks got layed out by Edwards in the process. i just dont understand it and where everyone on this site thinks Brooks should start. Glad to see Bradley is now starting, along With Cox at weakside backer.
I think we will be seeing much more of Kojo Aidoo with the injuries to both Ranek and Holmes

Because when you are 0-2 and your D is terrible you make changes.

i dont think they were terrible Crash . they played much better in the second half . Did you see Hitchcock go in for Armour in the second half ???

WE RULE

i would still like to see what auggie could do at outside! To have both barrenichia at outside and brooks in the middle would be wicked! :slight_smile:

Considering that we're dressing 6 linebackers who ALL play (not just special teams), I think you'll see a lot more situational play than in the last couple of weeks, depending on what kind of offense Calgary is running, the score, etc. I'm okay with that - no need to get bent out of shape over who is on the field first, if the unit as a whole functions well.

I agree with Barrenechea. Auggie should be starting. I know Brooks has a good resume, it's just that in all the games he has played we have not seen him produce .We have however sen errors. I n my opinion the problems lay with the secondary. Therefore Crash if you have to make changes maybe you should make changes where changes are due. I would understand if Auggie was not doing his job but he is and well.

I agree with Barrenechea. Auggie should be starting. I know Brooks has a good resume, it's just that in all the games he has played we have not seen him produce .We have however sen errors. I n my opinion the problems lay with the secondary. Therefore Crash if you have to make changes maybe you should make changes where changes are due. I would understand if Auggie was not doing his job but he is and well.

No, he isn't.

Good move. I would also start Gordon over Shaw.

Ben Cahoon had a field day with Barrenechea trying to cover him last Saturday. Barrenechea would do better IMO in a 3-4 defense like Toronto or Calgary use.

I'm surprised at both Ranek and Holmes in the line-up, you would think they'd rest one or both. I'm glad Bradley is starting, glad Brooks is in over Auggie at MLB (Though a 3-4 with Brooks and Auggie would be much more effective). Good to see Cotton dressed, most likely wont play much, but get him back into game shape from his injury.

I'm also wondering why Ralph is still not starting, I've seen nothing but greatness from this kid. PLUS if you did start him (over Yeast) you have room for another import on defense (not sure who we'd use though). Gordon over Shaw. Which would mean you could cycle Justin and Shaw throughout the game to keep their energy up. Also I'd like to see Kornegay, Cody and Bradley split time in thirds so they also stay fresh. Whoever is the least tired in the fourth wins. I can't wait to have Davis back, I wonder if he comes in Aidoo is sent to PR. Also the ball needs to be spread more we have great players, lets use them. Glad to see changes though.

I'm very interested in Ruffin, too bad he's not playing, though it does make sense as to why the Cats' didn't bring him yet. I am a big Boreham supporter, and last game was a fluke, however if Ruffin can punt as well, though a loss of an import spot, it would help us in the long run. (Because Fleming's punting is just as brutal as Jamie's was)

Why! I didn't notice until now. WHY WHY WHY IS YEAST STARTING KICK RETURNER??? :frowning:
I get that Holmes is injured, but anybody but Yeast, I'll return if you want, at least I wont prance into my own endzone and screw us (or take it out to the one)

Yeast stinks as a kick returner. He catch's the ball....wait for the other team to surround him and then decide to dance. And he got the 2 yard return because he fell forward.

He actually took a step forward. He's too short to fall for 2 yards...

lol, oh come on he can fall forward 2 yards, 3 might be pushing it. Seeing how I’m taller then Yeast, I could get 3 yards!

Craig Yeast had a 72 yard punt return for a touchdown against Montreal in game one of the 2005 season. He is a better player than he is given credit for on this website.

One? Wowie! Stokes and Levingston together have something like 30. It's not his skills, it's his lack of heart, the guy doesn't care, he gets paid. He wont take the hit, he'll drop the balls in the middle, he wont adapt, and for that he gets treated poorly. Yeast, if he tried (I don't think he's ever given 100%) would be a dominant force, however if the heart isn't in it, you'll never see the full potential.

We, as fans, can criticize a player’s performance if he does not play well in a game. But we are not close enough to the game to know that a player lacks heart.

By the way, here are the 2005 punt return stats for Yeast, Levingston and Stokes:

Yeast 6 returns/105 yards, 1 TD
Levingston 59 returns/604 yards, 1 TD
Stokes 79 returns/662 yards, 1 TD

Take away the 75yd TD and you have 5 returns for 30 yards. 6 yards a return, wow.