Time to start developing a new Quarterback.

Are you referring to NFL draft rankings? There are enough differences between the two games that those rankings may not be indicative. Also, as in any such ranking, the further down the list the greater the “margin of error”, by which I mean #45 may be an arbitrary parsing of a large group from 25 to ???

Either or, based on pre-season play alone (in itself not fully indicative of success either, I know) I liked Carder way more than O'Brien. Jsut appeared to be more mobile and to make things happen when the play broke down.

Nous avons vu à Montréal que l’intangible est parfois plus important que le tangible. Troy Smith avait le talent, la puissance du bras, la mobilité, mais pas l’éthique de travail. Brink avait plus d’exéprience comme partant que Crompton, mais il y a quelque chose dans le leadership de Brink qui ne collait pas. Crompton lance des ballons flottants, n’a pas un bras si puissant, mais son travail et son attitude font que l’équipe gagne.

Je ne dis pas que Carder ne sera pas un meilleur candidat qu’O’Brien, mais seulement que je crois que Cambell n’est pas un incompétent, et que s’il donne une chance à O’Brien d’aller faire un tour sur le terrain, c’est probablement parce qu’il est plus prêt à le faire que Carder.

Fair enough, and of course my impression of O'Brien is also based on very limited playing time. It could be that he's got a better of grasp of things (he was in camp before Carder, if I recall correctly) and maybe he's more mobile than I'm able to give him credit for at the moment.

He can fling it coast to coast though, I know that much. Unless there was a wicked wind helping him, in pre-season he looked like he had a hell of an arm on him.

Desjardins will have some interesting decisions to make at QB during the off season. My guess is he gave Burris a big chunk of his money in advance and his receivers dropped so many balls in the first dozen games that it killed Ottawa's season but I see him playing at least another season in Ottawa. There will be some QB movement in the off season (not as much as last year) but Tate, Lefevour,Smith will likely find new homes and that may impact what happens in Ottawa also.

If I was Desjardins, I would go for all three, Tate, Lefevour & Smith.

They start Hank next year but if they go 1 - 5 again, then DiMarco and O'Brien are rotated in.
There are a lot of positives this year despite the record. Too many close games that were lost, considering they only have 2 wins, there are 2 other teams with more points scored against them. The defense looks set.
The two new running backs are going to battle CW next year and McConnel looks like he could be another Fantuz. Hopefully, the "O" line comes together and they can pick up an experienced Canadian but there are slim pickings out there. Hopefully the kicking game can improve, he's an excellent punter but they should bring in a guy to solely do the kicking.

If I’m Desjardins, I don’t touch a single one of them. I work towards improving the supporting cast around the guys I already have.

I’m with you CRF. Burris/O’Brien/Elliott/DeMarco is good enough for now, rather than throwing money at other QBs, the supporting cast, particularly the receiving corps, is in far more need of an upgrade.

Exactly!!

The thing is, those other QB’s have flaws of their own, but they don’t seem so bad when we’re not the ones dealing with them. Then when we are, they drive us nuts.

Smith is the best example. We complain about Burris’ accuracy, but we’d bring that guy in? Dude can’t hit the broad side of a barn. How is that improving the position? :?

Scott Macdonnell admitted post-game last week that he “screwed up his depth” on one play and cost us a first down. He was off by about two yards, but he wasn’t where Burris was expecting him to be when the ball was thrown. So Burris looks like an idiot for throwing to him at all and the OC looks like an incompetent for calling a short pattern. It was the receiver’s fault, but we don’t see that very well from the stands.

When guys stop doing that, or those that don’t stop doing it get sent packing (right, Carlton Mitchell?), suddenly Burris might not be quite as finished as people say he is. :wink:

We have seats in the upper deck and see a lot of the plays develop and most of the time we see where Burris is throwing to, but the receiver went the other way, or slowed down a tad or plain not catching catchable balls. :thdn:

The best receivers of all time will say “you touch it, you catch it” !!
Oh and don’t get me started with our receivers who think the numbers on their jerseys have Velcro or stickum applied so they don’t have to actually grab the ball to make a completion. :roll:

Oh yeah, THAT drives me friggin’ nuts. :x It’s happened a few times, too.

You guys may not agree with me, but Tate, Lefevour or Smith might flourish under a different offensive coordinator. One example I can give you is Anthony Calvillo. While he was with Hamilton and Las Vegas he was crap, but he flourished with Montreal when he was given the chance to develop under a new system. One guy I think would fit in great is Lefevour. He is very much like Calleros, and he would come cheap. I would definitely give Smith another shot it may pay off.

I think Hank has to be the mentor QB at this point. He's overthrowing a lot of balls, he's having trouble escaping from the pocket when he's under pressure. I think at this point you tandem him with O'Brien who has shown some flashes and run with that.

More importantly though, you guys need some better receivers. Marcus Henry is the only jewel the team has at that position, as there have been far too many dropped passes that were completely catch-able, far too many passes that a little more hustle gets the ball, and far too many tips for ints. Yes tips are often a QB's fault, but some of these tips are not beyond reach.

Has not Tate’s issue been saying healthy? Not really an OC issue.

Smith’s issue in Mtl seems to have been his willingness to be coached and do extra work; again not necessarily an OC issue. Plus he apparently commanded a big salary to come north, not appropriate for a work in progress. But I agree he might be worth a look at the right price.

I have not seen Lefevour enough to comment on his play, but he would seem the most logical “new OC” candidate.

Both Tate and Nicols will likely want out of their present situations in Cal and Ed. Either would be big improvement over Burris or anything else on the RBs roster.

Actually, among the guys no named, he’s probably the one I’d be most interested in.

I struggle between the benefits of continuity and the definition of insanity (doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results). In other words, can we get better by improving the cast around Burris and continuing with the same playbook, or do we start with a whole new offense next year? Everyone assumes a coaching change is a good thing, but there’s no guarantee of that. “It can’t get any worse” is a pretty strong argument, until things do.

Agreed on the cast around Burris is n need of BIG improvements. We need MORE quality receivers and time will tell how the young ones develop.

What about DeMarco? He was to be the no.2 guy pushing Burris but got injured early. He will back next year with the rest of them wont he?

I do not know his contract status, however BB Robert Marve would appear to be a very good candidate from the little action he has had.
Definitely a gunslinger and good on his feet as well.