Q: Whitlock Or Porter? A: Both!

We know these two will be working for the #1 position, but I don't see how Whitlock's experience and size advantage would not give him the edge all other things even being equal if that were the case.

And so what to do with the talented player who does not with the #1 job? In fact overlooked in any such competition is that both these guys will only make the other better, so in my opinion there is no "loser" when it comes to the superior cause of the team.

And so what to do with the other guy other than allow him to spell in garbage time and keep him on to keep the #1 guy honest and provide insurance for otherwise common injuries for any back?

Well I propose how good are Porter's hands too? Why waste talent as hard as it is to find not to neglect to mention risking a mistake in selecting a replacement?

Any chance on some sets with Whitlock in back that Porter could be split out to the near-slot or motioned out of the backfield as an additional deterrent or decoy and/or check-down option for Ray?

Why or why not? Is there some restriction via the import ratio of which I am not aware?

When Ray engages in play-action to Whitlock to keep the linebackers and some DB's honest, why not have a solid athlete other than Whitlock for another check-down option especially on a screen pass?

I like Whitlock, a proven ball carrier. But then again Tillman has said there is the trade route. (The O-line comes to mind). But who is anyones guess. Porter can get the job done as well.

I'd like to see us keep both, as they are both on their cheap entry level contracts. Both are top 5 backs running backs statistically(maybe even better!) in this league. Although Porter has only started 4 or 5 games, he rushed for over 100 yards in all of them and had a 7. something yards per carry average. Bottom line is that he was a huge difference maker, especially in the OT games vs. Win and BC late in the season. Whitlock was third in rushing his rookie season, and was in 2nd in rushing yards before his injury this past season IIRC.

Problem is that it is difficult to keep two import backs in the CFL, especially considering that most teams rely on the pass. Whitlock has done some kick returning too the past few seasons, so he could contribute there, in addition to splitting time with Porter. Personally, I feel that Porter is the better option if we were forced to keep only one of them. However, if he keeps up the pace he did in the few games he got into last season, there's no way he is not in the NFL the year after, as he is still only 23 or something. I think both Whitlock and Porter are heading into the last year of their contracts.

I think it's a great call to hold off on Whitlock if his healing is marginal, as it is a long season anyway and a hamstring is very easy to re-injure to a greater degree as well.

Perhaps some of you like me have had such an injury and know it all too well too.

But when Whitlock returns, what happens to the roster? Who will be the "odd man out"?

My guess is perhaps some DB if not Schiavone.

Could be Ward or an O-Lineman, but your guess is as good as mine. However, I'm impressed so far with Porter.

Well yes of course I am impressed with Porter too, but check out our line now! :cry:

Also we would not move an OL off the active roster because only five are on the active roster now, for apparently just now I noticed that Jeremy Parquet is listed as also hurt along with two others who were there previously.

It appears we have rookie Scott Mitchell at tackle? :?

If anything we would need an offensive lineman moved onto the active roster from the practise roster to provide some backup and special teams play.

Such a move of another OL on active roster now means that when Whitlock is back that TWO players now on the roster will be dropping off including likely one of the DBs and/or Schiavone.

And why would it be Ward? It's not hard for a QB to get hurt, and Joseph as the backup is anything but steady.

In the CFL if a QB or any player is moved to the practice roster, does he become fair game for all teams if they want to have that player on an active roster? Or does a CFL team still retain some limited claim to said player including first right of refusal?

Now that you've expanded your view with further explaination; I see the picture more clearly. I wasn't thinking :oops: on the Questions you pointed out.

I say keep them both and run both of them out of the backfield at the same time .

Good point oilerrocker; however Bertrand is too valuable and we need him to block. But yea, the depth the Esks have for the backfield ranks right up there I figure.

The Colts did it in 06. :thup:

On the otherhand Poalo X; when import DL Julius Williams (Esks think highly about him) comes back into the picture along with Whitlock, that will change things up. Any thoughts?

Well now we might have even tougher decisions to include NOT sitting JC Sherritt back on the practise roster.

This is a good problem to have you know when before this game we had basically a defensive shortage along with an offensive line with all the players playing out of position not to mention short of guys altogether!

Prophetic words by Oilerrocker, as we are now running back by committee and the only team with that advantage in the CFL.

We didn't even mention Macarty, and now we have Nessem If our O-line plays like they did tonight we could dominate this year in the running game.

It's amazing with those three backs we did not even gain 100 yards between them, but hey we had no turnovers in the running game too.

With Whitlock back, I see us being able to use all four of them on the committee including in various two-back play action sets using one of the fullbacks.

Whitlock also has better hands than does Porter I think.

There was one notable play in which McCarty and Bertrand crossed on short passing routes to give Ray an almost guaranteed and easy option, which in that case was McCarty going for 11 yards.

We can run so many plays to confound even good defences in the front seven out of the two-back set, for defences have to stay true to the run with that old school set in the backfield.

Here's a pair of some successful plays broken down on film to keep an eye out for the next few games. Let's see how we use such plays to exploit the quick front seven for Hamilton too.

These two plays are basically akin to running plays though not strictly running plays.

I'd bet a load of drinks that the defensive coordinator for Hamilton will be watching this film a lot this week.

Basically early in the game, the strategy of our offensive coordinator was masterful such that we were able to get the Riders to overcommit to the run and short game and then enable Ray to exploit the mismatches in the secondary on a subsequent play as well.

And with our stable of fine backs including three who are starter material, the defence HAS to take the run and short game seriously too.

Note in addition how gaps in defensive coverage of the short game are exploited effectively on these two plays with the use of Bowman in the slot just as if were a running back.

Mind you we have not even used Whitlock and also the tall Marcus Henry yet!

The time indicated is approximately a second or less after the snap and a good time to freeze the frame so you can see what's going on overall.


Ray makes a good play fake for the run right to the weak side, with the defence already lined up with seven guys in short yardage to the right and centre and only one guy in short yardage to the strong side left. Look at all that space to the strong side!

Bowman motions in the slot to strong side for the screen pass and the defence, frozen by the play fake and with too many guys reading weak side, and at 0:43 are thus behind trying to catch Bowman who also has beaten with his speed the one guy on the defensive strong side who elected to attempt to pressure Ray with no backup for the strong side contain at all.

Bowman with all that space and speed goes for first down, and then right on cue on the next play Ray exploits the secondary with the mismatch on Barnes for the TD.

Note a full six men on defence right who end up on the line in rush mode here. No one on the defence is left to cover the screen or short pass again, which goes to Bowman on the weak side who remains in the backfield akin to a running back to go for another first down.

At 1:44 note all the space to the weak side and TWO options for Ray. Note also the great cut block on SK #95 by ED#66.

Then SK #95 is such a fine athlete with supreme balance that he holds his ground even after that great block and is alert and in position enough almost to make the play on Bowman!

Porter's short route to the far weak side throws off and lures the single DB to commit to him and open up the space for Bowman.

Basically one key to our offence seems to be is to create enough diversion to get Bowman in space as a playmaker when the defence is unbalanced to the running game and/or with too many guys on the line.

In two more plays, Ray again exploits another mismatch on Barnes for the TD.

At some point we'll have back all the following import players:

RB Whitlock
DL Williams
OLs Coston, Parquet, or Washburn

And I think three of following imports would have to be off the active roster in exchange:

DB Bonner
DB Bradley
DT Sewell
DB Pittman

Having 2 backs that can easily rip off a 40 yard run,it should help give Ray more time and nothing but a bonus for our receivers.

I just checked the transactions and saw this for today not realising that also imports Coston and Bradley were added to the active roster for the last game along with Sherritt who should have his spot secure as well as Coston based on their performances.


I don't understand what "REM SGD" means though. Any help?

The shuffling has begun to make room for Parquet, Williams, Henry, and Whitlock too, but more imports have to be dropped off.


REM - SGD means; player is "removed signed" from the PR and is added to the 46 man roster.