Whats the word on Derek Armstrong for the Lions?

[MisterJones]

Do we have any interest in him has anyone heard?

[Don Miller]

Agreed, Armstrong is a good receiver with good speed and hands. RGM has speed but has yet to show he can catch consistantly. He has been given the starting job, lets see him bring it. I would bring Armstrong in for a look at least providing he is medically fit.

[SammyGreene]

I would love to see Armstrong in BC — outstanding speed, size and he is already a proven commodity.

IMHO ... between Armstrong, Edwards, Franklin and Bryant the Bombers have had the best receivers in the league but no QB to get them the ball.

[Rammer]

I would love to see Armstrong in BC — outstanding speed, size and he is already a proven commodity.

IMHO ... between Armstrong, Edwards, Franklin and Bryant the Bombers have had the best receivers in the league but no QB to get them the ball.

No worries about his pout? My largest concern would be his knee, even if it was just a nagging injury, it would hamper his production.

[LFITQ]

Let's see, we have RGM who can't catch; we have Skillern still on the PR who can't catch. We had a NI who could catch but wasn't cracking the lineup walk out; or rather "leave due to personal issues".

But we aren't interested in Derrick Armstrong who can catch, but may not be able to run?

[Tighthead]

I wouldn't worry too much about his pout. It doesn't seem to be a pattern, we don't know if he was being jerked around, and what is the risk?

[Rammer]

Let's see, we have RGM who can't catch; we have Skillern still on the PR who can't catch. We had a NI who could catch but wasn't cracking the lineup walk out; or rather "leave due to personal issues".

But we aren't interested in Derrick Armstrong who can catch, but may not be able to run?

RGM can catch, I can't believe how down the fans are on him given that they did get to see his play against the Stamps last season.

Funny concept here, but with the release of Rodgers and Armstrong, does it seem plausible that both clubs did so in order to restructure their respective contracts for SMS purposes? Of course that is assuming that both end up in opposite colours soon.

[LFITQ]

Rammer, I bet that is exactly what each team is thinking. Restructure so it works within their own cap restrictions. In fact it was exactly what I was thinking when I heard about it. Why do a trade? Both players get released and the respective teams pick them up and rework their contracts.

Now of course the only snag in that plan is if another team comes along and snatches up one or both of the receivers...

[zark]

http://blog.rogersbroadcasting.com/argo ... e-is-back/
If the Lions want Armstrong they better act fast. There might even be a bidding war?

[Lions4ever]

The Esks seem to have an unlimited budget for any excess players...and now that Tucker and K. Campbell are gone, who does Ricky Ray have to throw to? Fred Stamps and...umm...umm?? :

Maurice Mann, who looks pretty good IMO.

[Blue In BC]

Rammer, I bet that is exactly what each team is thinking. Restructure so it works within their own cap restrictions. In fact it was exactly what I was thinking when I heard about it. Why do a trade? Both players get released and the respective teams pick them up and rework their contracts.

Now of course the only snag in that plan is if another team comes along and snatches up one or both of the receivers...

There is a problem with that. It's sets a horrible precedent.

Now any player unhappy with his role or his team just refuses to play. That in effect forces a team to cut him because everybody knows that is going to happen. No team is going to accept a player refusing to play.

Call it a loophole for a player to obtain free agency.

IMHO, the league should intervene and set the table stating that any team picking up Armstrong would have to give up a draft pick and potentially pay back the $40K the Bombers paid Armstrong this season as bonus money.

How is it fair to any team that has to release a player because of this kind of unprofessional response from a player?

And yes, I would say the same thing if this happened to another team besides the Bombers.

If you think about it, what's to stop a player elsewhere from deciding he wants to be somewhere else or can get more money ( especially if he's received a big chunk of bonus money ).

Refuse to play = Free agency.

[Rammer]

Rammer, I bet that is exactly what each team is thinking. Restructure so it works within their own cap restrictions. In fact it was exactly what I was thinking when I heard about it. Why do a trade? Both players get released and the respective teams pick them up and rework their contracts.

Now of course the only snag in that plan is if another team comes along and snatches up one or both of the receivers...

There is a problem with that. It's sets a horrible precedent.

Now any player unhappy with his role or his team just refuses to play. That in effect forces a team to cut him because everybody knows that is going to happen. No team is going to accept a player refusing to play.

Call it a loophole for a player to obtain free agency.

IMHO, the league should intervene and set the table stating that any team picking up Armstrong would have to give up a draft pick and potentially pay back the $40K the Bombers paid Armstrong this season as bonus money.

How is it fair to any team that has to release a player because of this kind of unprofessional response from a player?

And yes, I would say the same thing if this happened to another team besides the Bombers.

If you think about it, what's to stop a player elsewhere from deciding he wants to be somewhere else or can get more money ( especially if he's received a big chunk of bonus money ).

Refuse to play = Free agency.

I don't know if that is right Dale, if the player had conditions set properly to his calibre/health, he gets a trade as more teams are interested. Perhaps at this point Armstrong's salary scared off a few suitors. IMO, it is more indicative of the times and SMS, vs having an issue to become a FA. He really didn't know if he was getting traded and to whom, why risk that. Lions have lost players or let them go as they are all replaceable.

Where the root of the problem lies or seems to at this juncture is on the HC's shoulders, as he has to be more aware of each players needs in this day and age. I do believe this won't be a 'one of' either in Winnipeg, as Kelly seems to have more a 50's coaching approach to the game. It is going to be interesting to see how this all unfolds, at least from an outsiders PoV.

[Blue In BC]

Sure. Injuries, age and current salary all came into play . The time of the season when teams are generally healthy having just set their roster.

I think my point is still valid though conceptually.

As a player about to be a free agent, why trade to get him. Not every team will be interested and they won't have to give up a player to get him.

However, the Bombers are reported to have paid him $40K bonus up front. Is Armstrong worth $60 - $70K for 2009 to the Lions , Toronto or Hamilton for example? It's different than trading him during TC, one starter for another starter.

I have to assume he would have had some trade value.

Now the Bombers get squat and are also out the bonus money and 1/2 a game check ( not sure why they bothered paying him anything for that game ).