Morencie, who's been paid in full each of the past 3 weeks on the Reserve List, has been moved to the PR and Nicolson has been activated to the 46-man Roster. The other move, earlier in the week, saw Schmidt go to the 9-Game Injured List and his spot on the Active Roster taken by Fournier. Who, of the 46. will join DeWit, Reid and Wladichuk as Reserves this week -- Fournier, Nicolson, or ....... could it be ....... Bauman?
None of these changes will blow anyones hair back, Nicholson might see play or 2 on the 'special' teams
Thought, because of the number of receivers, it might possibly be Bauman sitting this week, but the word from Montreal is that all eight will play. So, Fournier won't dress, but will still get his first CFL game cheque.http://scratchingpost.thespec.com/
Another little twist that could prove exciting this week is not shown on the chart. But, Obie says Cobb will get his first shot at returning kicks tonight, alongside Thigpen.http://www.ticats.ca/video/index/id/12673
to the 9 game Inj. List several days ago.
That's been fixed. Schmidt is on the 9-game injured list. Samuel Fournier will take his place on the 46-man roster.
The text version shows Beveridge ahead of Barker. Am I missing something? Is Barker injured, or does he just suck?
Is this another one of our failed #1 picks?
Where ya been Eagle? Beveridge has been the starter every game this season. While the majority of fans seem to see Barker as the better safety, the coaches see otherwise and we assume that they (coaches) believe Beveridge's experience is the difference maker. Both also play special teams. The only stats on the two players so far this season are:
Defensive Tackles -- Beveridge 9 / Barker 0
Special Teams Tackles - Beveridge 2 / Barker 3
Forced Fumble - Beveridge 0 / Barker 1
While Barker seems to have better speed and may be a better tackler, Beverage does seem to have slightly better positioning. Not a bad situation to be in though, having to decide between the two.
Actually, there was one play in the Calgary game (I think) where I could have sworn I saw both of them on the field. I don't remember what the situation was. Maybe 2nd and long? Or maybe one of the DBs needed to come off for a play or two? Anybody else see this?
Yeah there was a play or two where they both were on the field.It's in one of their defensive packages, sort of like the NFL's Dime package where they usually get an extra safety on the field.Don't think we tried this last year though, so that means Marshall's opening up his playbook more this year :cowboy:
People should be scared of a cfl safety, he should be able to deliver bone crunching hits and Beveridge cant do that...
They used the two safeties on Second and long against Winnipeg last week.
If I recall correctly Winnipeg made the first down..
But I loved last week anyway..... NOW let's get them in Montreal tonight.
Oskee wee wee
True, he ain't no Hitchcock. But I don't think anyone was ever afraid of Henley either (except quarterbacks). I always thought the safety's primary role was to take the deep man, and provide coverage if someone else gets beat long. And to make sure that if they make the catch, they don't get much further. Hence the name. Or is that an archaic definition from the days of the "flanker" and "halfbacks?
Oh, and sorry, Sandy, for messing up your name on an earlier post. Darned spill chequer.
Yeah - my apologies. I guess I am not as Eagle-eyed as I thought I was - :lol: :lol: :lol:
But what does that tell you of our coaches picks?
Are we saying that Barker needs more time to 'learn' the position? The big thing about Barker when he was 1st chosen was his speed. So why is his positioning so important, if he is supposed to make up for it by speed?
I think I remember back in the 70's - the hated ARGOS had a defensive back called: Tim Anderson.
He was supposed to have speed to burn.
Once, he got badly beat by a receiver, and was like 15-20 yards back, when he chased after him, and eventually caught him before getting into the end-zone. So, speed does matter.
With that - why is Barker still not playing 1st-string?