and seeing as you put so much stock in pre-season gamesā¦i wonder after last nights Riders win against the mighty leosā¦whether youāll be able to stay ahead of the roughies in your divisionā¦Austin and his gang are looking pretty goodā¦lol lol :lol:
Yes they did look good no doubt about it. They have some good players trying to make the squad. Their team showed up. What happened to your bombers.
You want to see how guys play for a job see
Just because they lost, means they didnāt show up and compete ? Thatās even a little too simplistic for you 05. The Bombers have some holes to fill in the secondary (lost Samuals and Evans) and at linebacker (lost Charleton and Carter). You do realize that not one starter from last year played defence for the Bombers in the second half of the game donāt you ?
I am only going by your brilliant fan barnes has stated. He said none of the starters played in the game. Of course I was not at the game and rely on the news that is protrayed by sports casters. The point is that the guys that are fighting for jobs did not do a good enough job if the team loses in preseason. Now if the game was close then fine that is understandable. But the coaches need to compare the players they have to the new ones fighting for jobs. If these games are not important then why play them. Preseason or not the name of the game is to win. Yes some guys in a losing cause may have doen enough to win a job. But you go into a game thinking this team will win games for us not this team is going to lose for us right!
You see, that is where you are wrong. The point for the Bombers, of playing this game was to evaluate players put into certain situations firstly, winning would have been a secondary result of that. Even though they lost the game, several players were successful in doing what was asked of them by the coaches, which may give them another chance. For the Bombers, and most clubs in preseason, your looking for guys that execute their assignments, running proper routes, picking up blocks, etc. These are not starting caliber players yet, most are raw rookies with no CFL experience.
You see, that is where you are wrong. The point for the Bombers, of playing this game was to evaluate players put into certain situations firstly, winning would have been a secondary result of that. Even though they lost the game, several players were successful in doing what was asked of them by the coaches, which may give them another chance. For the Bombers, and most clubs in preseason, your looking for guys that execute their assignments, running proper routes, picking up blocks, etc. These are not starting caliber players yet, most are raw rookies with no CFL experience.
Well said. I think that is the point for all CFL teams, in the preseason.
Anyone who says differently, is just trolling. :P
Indeed, the pre-season especially game one is about evaluating individual players in a game situation, specificly the Rooks/Sophomores or new players(guys brought in by a Trade or FA)
Thus exactly why Berry didnāt Scheme at all on offence or Defence, just kept everything Vanilla.
Is this not what I have said all along. Barnes is the guy that said you do not need to play your starters in preseason not me. The fact I have stated yet again that the preseason is important to look at what you have and what guys can replace the problem areas your team has. Winning is secondary but it is an indicator of how well your team did recruiting is it not. Because most of the preseason you are playing guys that might win a job. If they win a game they must have played well right!
AH yes vanilla ice cream love it. I think Barnes you and I are reading into this a bit different but not far off. You stated that the Stamps played veterans right. Yes they did to compare the new guys tryingto beat out the veterans from their jobs plus to get the vets playing time which is important. Now the Bombers on the other now tell me if I am right here or wrong you stated they left out most of their vets. If the bombers choose to do this is smart or dumb only you the bomber fan can answer that. I feel the Stamps do it right allowing to look at all their players through preseason. If a vet is not better then a newcomer it will show up in these games K Abdulah is a prime example. He got cut after the mock game at McMahon. So right now your disagreement is just on the fact that the bombers choose not to play their vets in their first preseason game which they lost. Not a problem there is another game in which I am sure Berry will play more vets much like Calgary will do as well.
AH yes vanilla ice cream love it. I think Barnes you and I are reading into this a bit different but not far off. You stated that the Stamps played veterans right. Yes they did to compare the new guys tryingto beat out the veterans from their jobs plus to get the vets playing time which is important. Now the Bombers on the other now tell me if I am right here or wrong you stated they left out most of their vets. If the bombers choose to do this is smart or dumb only you the bomber fan can answer that. I feel the Stamps do it right allowing to look at all their players through preseason. If a vet is not better then a newcomer it will show up in these games K Abdulah is a prime example. He got cut after the mock game at McMahon. So right now your disagreement is just on the fact that the bombers choose not to play their vets in their first preseason game which they lost. Not a problem there is another game in which I am sure Berry will play more.
With the exception of a LB spot and safety, there really are no starting jobs up for grabs on the Bomber roster. The battles were for back up spots, practice roster and developmental roster spots.
I think you will see a very different Bomber team this weekend in Hammer than last week. Will they win ? Who cares, itās preseason, doesnāt mean squat, except for the guys on the bubble.
As long as they kick the crap out of the Esks next weekend and Nugent gets 2 or 3 picks at safety, is all that really matters. Right larry ?
Exactly my point piggy. Preseason is about accessing talent. You need to compare the new guys with what you have. Really it is no big deal to lose in preseason but it could be an indicator of what kind of talent was recruited for camp. But do not kid yourself these games are important to the player and the coaches. Some fans could care less of this importance and that is very apparent. But it is true that coaches will tell the game is to be won regardless if it is preseason or not.
āItās not whether you win or lose, itās how you play the game.ā This is true only in pre-season, of course. Yes, they try to win, but the important thing is that players get an opportunity to show the coaches what they can do. Theyāll be evaluated and either make the team or be cut based largely on how they play, regardless of the score.
I am watching you Dave! Do not repeat do not make a mistake! :lol: :lol: Kanga really I did not say anything about the single point did I or the war between the Alaskans and the Hawaiians? I corrected it just for you.
A war between Alaska and Hawaii... shakes my head at that... I hope a tidal wave doesnt prevent the Hawaiin natives from kayaking all the way to the Aleutian Islands to start its all out offensive. Maybe the Alaskans can count on a freak cold wave to allow them to dogsled all the way to Kona, and attack from there.
On to the topic at hand, pre season is to evaluate talent and get ready for the season. The second game is more important than the first game, because you want some momentum heading into the 1st week of the regular season. Most teams will play their "A" players, so it will be interesting to see where most teams stand as they head into the first week when the games count.