Jamel Richardson

So I was just reading on NFL.com and on there is a headline “Cowboys Ink Standout Canadian League WR.” So that got me kind of curious who this “standout” was. Lo and behold it’s Jamel Richardson from my Roughriders. My question is why is he considered “standout” by the NFL. He didn’t do much up here in my opinion. When I think standout CFL receivers I think Stegall, Simon, etc. Just goes to show it must come down to size down there (Richardson is 6’3" and 220lbs.) Any thoughts on why guys like Stegall and Simon can’t make it down there?

they are not good enough for the NFL.

I hear ya but it just makes me wonder why an average guy like Richardson even gets a shot. Just another body for the qb’s to throw to in camp?

Stegall and Simon are WAY better than Jamal Richardson, but not good enough for the NFL?!?

I'd guess that the reason those guys haven't gone to the NFL is because a) they're too small or b) they don't want to anymore.

If a CFL player does or doesn't make it in the NFL, it comes down to A LOT MORE than just skill.

The fact that the NFL calls Richardson "standout" but doesn't consider Simon and Stegall to be is mostly (OK, entirely) a PR spin. Which, at the same time, will make the CFL look second-rate when he gets cut by the Cowboys. "The CFL's best receiver couldn't make it." Well, maybe they're just getting us back for Ricky Williams :wink:

And of course they're not going to mention that there were actually at least 40 players with more yards than him in 2006. They're not going to say "he's a standout receiver, although actually he has less yards over his 4-year, 39-game career than Geroy Simon gained in 2006 alone".

Either way, thanks to the NFL for making it seem like our less-than-mediocre players are the best we've got :roll:

I was thinking the same thing Canuckev. I think size (Height) has a lot to do with that.

I'll start by making the claim/prediction, that had Jamal not been injured last year, he was going to have a breakout year and become an elite receiver in the CFL.
Potential means a lot of things, but potentially, Jamal will be better than Dominguez and that means potentially, he could become one of the best receivers in the league.
And I think he has a legitimate shot at making an NFL club. Better than KK's odds....

Size is a factor, but as the CFL lists Stegal at 6'1" and Simon at 6'0", it isn't that much of an issue.
Milt had his opportunity and stuck in the NFL for a few years, but couldn't crack the starting lineup.
I don't think Geroy has had a crack, but I'd place him in the "latebloomer" catagory. Even in his first years in Winnipeg, he did not exactly shoot the lights out.

The difference has more to do with age, than size.
Jamal is only 25. Last year was the first year he was even eligible for the NFL draft, but as he was under contract, he was also under the radar.
As for the apparent headline, of course they said "standout". Or I suppose the Cowboy media guys are in the habit of referring to player signings with the term "mediocre"?
Not to mention that the word "standout" literally means he caught somebody's attention. It does not necessarily mean he was the best....yet....

So the answer to the question as why Jamal, but not Geroy or Milt?
It is back to what I started by saying--it is potential. And there is a direct correlation between age and potential.
And Jamal has the "potential" to be a great receiver.

Jamel is better than avg, imo. He has excellent size - something some great CFL receivers (and NFL hopefuls) lack.

Actually, I think KK has a better chance at making the Colts than Jamel does of making the Cowboys, now that D Rhodes signed with Oakland. He has a legitimate shot to become Indy's 3rd RB because Rhodes left.

Don’t get me wrong.
Talentwise, if given a true opportunity, KK is awesome.
But he is a little undersized for the NFL–about 20-25 pounds. And that means strength.
Jamal is exactly what the NFL is looking for.
Size, youth, speed.
He never played NCAA ball, so rather than a college resume, he has a few years of pro(CFL) ball on his regime.What people seem to overlook is that he was only 20 years old when he came to Regina, and has gotten better every year.
When he got hurt last year, he was our leading receiver, and may have been leading the league.
I hope someone in Indy takes a real look at KK.
And I hope Jamal shows his real potential in Dallas.
Selfishly, I hope these guys come back to Sask, but I wish them nothing but the best.
And odds are JR won’t be back in Sask even if he doesn’t make Dallas…Shivers guy…Tillman…say no more…

My god Arius, still on the Roy bandwagon? He is gone , so live with it. The reason Jamal Richardson wont be back is we have Dominguez, Fantuz, Flick, Armstead, Murphy , Anderson, Yeast, Grant and French. Along with new signees Hill and Tinch- it will be very competitive at reciever when TC rolls around. IMO, Tillman has done a great job at finding receivers, better than what Roy could have accomplished.

Realistically Tillman hasnt exactly found anything... Signed people, yes - from other CFL teams, but like actually finding receivers? Plz...

I make two posts about Jamal, of a couple of hundred words, and because I make one tiny statement--which is 100% accurate by the way--about the Shivers/Tillman change over, and it all translates into "the Roy bandwagon"?
It will continue to be fair game to A). compare Tillman to his predecessor (notice that you do so all the time), and B). make true statements regarding the fact that GMs and players have loyalties to each other.
Look at the the players that Tillman has released, and the ones he has signed and there are two common threads. Most, if not all the players released, or lost to free agency were some of Shivers biggest supporters. That is, I am sure just coincidence.
And guys like Yeast, Murphy, Flick, etc., etc., etc., are all guys that Tillman brought in while he was in Ottawa, or in Murphy's case, as far back as the Lions.
These are realities, and predictable realities, and it is not in the past, but is an accurate description of what is happening today.
And it is commentary, not editorial to say so.
And in the case of Jamal Richardson, it likely will affect any decision to return to the Riders. My comment was accurate--and was a relatively neutral statement regarding the Roy/ET change over.
Still, the fact is, most of the vast array of receivers you name were in fact brought in by Roy.
Most of the receivers who will play this year, were brought in by Roy.
And as JM points out, most of Tillman's people are cast-offs, not fresh talent.
The only new receiver, out of I believe 12,that Tillman has signed is Tinch, who I might add I hope will cause Grant to lose his job.
And I think of the signings, Flick and Hill are the only ones I like, although Anderson is a dark horse. Yeast and Murphy are cannon fodder.
But none of those guys are as good as I think Jamal Richardson is going to be. As I stated, I believe he may be better than Dominguez....who is easily the best receiver that will be in camp...
And so losing him, just like we lost Derik Armstrong, are points against the Tillman record, which, with 68 players out of a possible 75 signees in the off-season, continues to be a solid C.

The reality is that some high-priced players had to go, and realistically when you look at who was productive and who wasnt, who would have YOU released? Schultz? Perry? Jurineack? Would you have kept Davis, the least productive and the poorest attitude of the Dline? The reason players were released or signed elsewhere as free agents was the new SMS system, nothing more. To say it is because they were big Roy supporters is horsesh*t. I dont think the Riders are under the cap yet, so other high priced guys might be let go-- and you can bet it is because of the new salary cap and NOT because they were supporters of Roy. Remember YOU are the one who made the original comparison of Shivers vs. Tillman-- had you left that part out your original post here, we would not be having this discussion.

The only comment I made was that if Jamal Richardson, if released by the Cowboys and therefore a free agent, looks north again, he is less likely to resign with the Riders because Tillman is here and not Roy.
And by extension, I believe Tillman is less inclined to sign him because they have no history.
What part of that do you think is not accurate?
We saw with Derik Armstrong, that Tillman choose not to even offer him a contract, opting for Yo Murphy instead.
And we also saw that Derik Armstrong openly commented that because Roy wasn't here, that he had less interest in returning to Riderville.

If what I am saying doesn't ring true, then how come the day after Tillman was signed myself and many others predicted there would be a number of "Shivers" guys that would leave, one way or the other, and that they would be replaced by "Tillman guys" and that is exactly what has happened.
And you know what?
Not only was it 100% predictable, but it is not a criticism of Tillman per se.
Tillman has his loyalties, players have theirs. It is a reality of the game. I don't understand why you think this is not true? When Roy and Danny arrived, they to released vets they had no connection to, and brought in players from Calgary. It is always the case.
Of course some vets with big contracts were going to be released.
But when every single vet, or free agent that is gone has one thing in common...well I do not believe it is coincidence. I am not trying to editorialize here.
But if I were to, I would say that I believe a GM needs to bring in his coaches, his players, make it his team.
That is why, while I am leery of making Austin head coach, I absolutely supported the dismissal of Danny Barret.
And while I will go to my grave believing that firing our GM midseason was stupid, showed no class as an organization, and was 95% motivated by a power play by Hopson, I actually believe Roy should have been fired at the end of 2005...or the end of 2006...just not in the middle...
And for the record, I do not believe in any team firing a GM (or even a coach) midseason.
I am philosophically opposed to such actions.
For example, the firing of Greg Marshall was also a stupid move.....

And, while I feel like I am banging my head against a wall, I repeat, Tillman gets a solid C thus far, which I believe is a pretty good grade.....or as you seem to not quite grasp what I mean, I think he is doing a good job.
Some good, some bad but overall.....Roy was only a B- for godsake....

Here we go again, Roy should not have been fired in midseason, blah, blah, blah.... I agree Tillman is doing a good job, better than you might think... just for the fact that he released Hakim Hill at the first sign of trouble he gets a better grade than Roy. Remember, Roy was SECOND choice for GM behind Tillman... which should tell you Hopson settled for second best to begin with, because Tillman turned down the job. Just a thought to leave you with , since you seem to want to bring up the past.

Actually, as Hopson was busy being a high school administrator and had zero to do with the club in 1999, I doubt he had much to do with the decision to hire Roy.
And Tillman was not the first choice of the club in 1999 either, or second, but third, which actually means Roy was the 4th choice. But I could care less if Roy was the BoDs 63rd choice.
He did a good job.
Roy wasn't necessarily my first choice in 1999 either.

As for Hakim hill, the guy has more criminal charges and convictions by himself than the entire Rider team did in Roy's 7 years, so big suprise there, huh?
Good thing he at least has "good character".
Of course I supported Tillman in giving the kid a second chance. To bad the kid wasn't bright enough to take it....
Of course given your position on Trevis Smith, to be consistant, you must have opposed Tillman's signing of Hill in the first place....

But Hill is in the past. Aren't we supposed to move on?

I here Shiv is still on the pay roll and is scouting out a camp at Huntsville Pen in Texas. :lol: :lol:

the Stamps re-hired Shivers again, 05?

Good one Sambo you have me speechless

I think Sambo kinda got you on this one...