Argos need an upgrade at rb

[paulwoods13]

While Kackert ended up working out well, Boyd IMO was still the better back and I'd much rather see a guy like Boyd or John White than a scatback that blocks marginally well.

Boyd was only a better back in one of the three areas of responsibility: running the ball. Kackert was a better receiver/route-runner and an exponentially better pass-blocker. Of course, the fact he actually made an effort to pass-block put him ahead of Boyd on that score.

[Wobbler]

I think the best way to improve our running game would be to upgrade the O-Line, not to worry about employing a different type of RB. It's a more challenging task, since it will require replacing or demoting a few different guys, but far more rewarding.

I don't remember too many times last season where I thought "Damn - a stronger back would have broken that tackle" but there were plenty of cases where I thought "It sure would have been nice if the O-Line had created the lane the RB was looking for".

[OV Argo]

I agree Whitaker was the Argos best RB last year, but I also agree with OV about the need for a big back that can do the same things as Whitaker. Most of the other teams in the League seem to be able to find those 215-220 lb RB's that have decent speed, can pass block and catch the ball out of the back field. Barker and Milanovich keep bring in these scat back type guys and expect them to block defensive linemen out weighing them by 50 lbs or more. The have been a few small RB's in the pas who were tough enough to do that but they are few and far between IMO. If they really want to protect Ricky Ray quit blaming the Offensive Line all the time and bring in a stud RB who can take on the DE's in the League.

Dupuis is something like 6-34, 245 and IMO a very strong blocker; I understand he is not a threat to carry the ball, nor likely to make tacklers miss in the open field if he catches a pass (but he has shown he can catch and is a big load to bring down / could punish some small LBs & DBs when he gets the ball); however, if the thinking is blocking is the first and best thing the RB can do, why not have your biggest, best blocking back in a lot of the times when it's going to be a pass play call anyways? Why do you need a smaller scat back type in when you have no intention to establish a run game anyways? - do they really think that the defence fears or respects the run game much with that offence? I get a smaller back who is a good blocker and can catch a lot of swing or screen passes for good gainers, but I don\t see enough of those type of designed plays from that offence to merit a small back in the offence most of the time. A diverse offence means, IMO, having lots of looks and different play calls; could have a Whitaker mulit-purpose type back in some, a big fullback like Dupuis in some, plus find a more pure, powerful tailback type (a healthy Kackert for example) to get lots of reps in the offence, and establish a run game.

One standard look, 80% pass play calls, one simple run play, and lots of check-down stuff = boring, predictable, limited thinking offence IMO. But it is the go, er, CFL way now.

[R.J]

Boyd was only a better back in one of the three areas of responsibility: running the ball. Kackert was a better receiver/route-runner and an exponentially better pass-blocker. Of course, the fact he actually made an effort to pass-block put him ahead of Boyd on that score.

For me that that most important duty for a running back (running the ball). Had Boyd actually tried to block or learn how to block, I think he would've stuck around a bit longer.

[Argo57]

I agree Whitaker was the Argos best RB last year, but I also agree with OV about the need for a big back that can do the same things as Whitaker. Most of the other teams in the League seem to be able to find those 215-220 lb RB's that have decent speed, can pass block and catch the ball out of the back field. Barker and Milanovich keep bring in these scat back type guys and expect them to block defensive linemen out weighing them by 50 lbs or more. The have been a few small RB's in the pas who were tough enough to do that but they are few and far between IMO. If they really want to protect Ricky Ray quit blaming the Offensive Line all the time and bring in a stud RB who can take on the DE's in the League.

It all starts with the O-Line, even a "stud" RB won't be effective if there is no running lane to hit when he gets the ball.

[paulwoods13]

For me that that most important duty for a running back (running the ball). Had Boyd actually tried to block or learn how to block, I think he would've stuck around a bit longer.

I agree with the latter -- he had only himself to blame for being cut as he was a superb ball carrier. The most important duty for a RB, tho, is relative to the offensive design. In some offences (not in the CFL, obviously) it is to run the ball 20-25 times a game and gain 75-125 yards. In others it is to catch passes out the backfield. In ours it is to protect the QB. That's the offence SM has designed so it makes sense he would look for RBs who can do that first and foremost.

[AngeloV]

I'd think it's a bit overblown here the statement that a RB's most important function in SM's schemes is to block. Kind of sounds like tht is all that is important the way I'm reading some of these posts. Personally, I think he wants more of a back that can do it all...run, block and catch.

[OV Argo]

I'd think it's a bit overblown here the statement that a Ron's most important function in SM's schemes is to block. Kind of sounds like tht is all that is important the way I'm reading some of these posts. Personally, I think he wants more of a back that can do it all...run, block and catch.

Yep - agreed - and Whitaker fits that bill.

[R.J]

I'd think it's a bit overblown here the statement that a Ron's most important function in SM's schemes is to block. Kind of sounds like tht is all that is important the way I'm reading some of these posts. Personally, I think he wants more of a back that can do it all...run, block and catch.

Not disagreeing, while I've sarcastically stated that blocking is the only thing that matters to Milanovich, I've also stated that it's the most important in the offense (which Milanovich has stated), and Milanovich likes a jack of all trades type of scatback, if you will. I would much rather see fullbacks used as blocking backs and running backs run the ball and catch out of the back field when called upon. Boyd wasn't as bad at receiving as some make him out to be and someone like John White is also decent catching the ball. I don't want to see the Argonauts drop Whitaker, I think I been quite clear that he was the best Argonaut in 2015 IMO and absolutely loved his lunch box/blue collar style of professionalism. I do however miss seeing a dominant running back in the Argonauts offense getting more than 15 carries a game and averaging over 100 yards a game. I would like to see a lot of different things from our offense, but c'est la vie.

[AngeloV]

Boyd wasn't as bad at receiving as some make him out to be and someone like John White is also decent catching the ball.

Boyd had good hands, but as a receiver he was slow to make his first move after catching the ball. As a down field receiver running wheel routes, he was very good. As a check down, not so much.

[paulwoods13]

I'd think it's a bit overblown here the statement that a RB's most important function in SM's schemes is to block. Kind of sounds like tht is all that is important the way I'm reading some of these posts. Personally, I think he wants more of a back that can do it all...run, block and catch.

Yes, but not in that order: it's block, catch, run IMO.

[paulwoods13]

Boyd had good hands, but as a receiver he was slow to make his first move after catching the ball. As a down field receiver running wheel routes, he was very good. As a check down, not so much.

I agree with this analysis. And Kackert was all-around a much better receiver.

[AngeloV]

I agree with this analysis. And Kackert was all-around a much better receiver.

Kackert is a threat to make plays as a receiver, but I wouldn't call him a good receiver. He sure isn't a fluid route runner like Whitaker, and has problems reaching to catch the ball (might be because he has big, but short arms). The ball has to be thrown perfectly to him, but he is very good at taking short passes and getting yards. Much better than Boyd was.

[Will]

I'd think it's a bit overblown here the statement that a RB's most important function in SM's schemes is to block. Kind of sounds like that is all that is important the way I'm reading some of these posts. Personally, I think he wants more of a back that can do it all...run, block and catch.

It is a little bit overblown, but I'd place the ability to block and catch above the rushing ability especially as the CFL continues to phase out the FB position. The RB provides (i) pass protection in lieu of the FB and (ii) provides that safety valve for the QB because there might be a steady pass rush. Of course, you want to keep the defense honest with a competent RB.

[AngeloV]

It is a little bit overblown, but I'd place the ability to block and catch above the rushing ability especially as the CFL continues to phase out the FB position. The RB provides (i) pass protection in lieu of the FB and (ii) provides that safety valve for the QB because there might be a steady pass rush. Of course, you want to keep the defense honest with a competent RB.

Don't disagree. It's just that in reading some of the posts, it sounds like the Argos want someone that can block and don't give a damn if he can do anything else. I think they really want a good all around back.

[Will]

Don't disagree. It's just that in reading some of the posts, it sounds like the Argos want someone that can block and don't give a damn if he can do anything else. I think they really want a good all around back.

Shouldn't the ability to block be a pre-requisite for any starting running back?

[AngeloV]

Shouldn't the ability to block be a pre-requisite for any starting running back?

Yes, if they have any desire to be an every down back.

[doubleblue]

Shouldn't the ability to block be a pre-requisite for any starting running back?

It is, but the problem is also, just like the OLine, some guys are better at blocking than others. It is important for Milanovich's backs to have the smarts and timing to pick up those late blitzing LB's or Safeties. That's why Milo like's Whitaker, he can do it all. But he is a 31 year old RB with more than a few miles on him.
Reading a clip by Jim Barker, it sounds like they are willing to go into the season with Whitaker backed up by Steele. Some new guys would be needed for depth and training camp. If they are be better than Kackert and Josey that would be a plus.

[R.J]

Guys like White, Cornish, Powell and Gable are much better runners than receiving and especially blocking backs and they seem to be doing alright.
Boyd essentially not being able to or unwilling to block or learn how to block ultimately lead to his release in Toronto and Edmonton. Sad really, because IMO he was the best running back in the League for 2 seasons, on an offense that had Cleo Lemon and called by Jaime Elizondo.

[AngeloV]

Guys like White, Cornish, Powell and Gable are much better runners than receiving and especially blocking backs and they seem to be doing alright.
Boyd essentially not being able to or unwilling to block or learn how to block ultimately lead to his release in Toronto and Edmonton. Sad really, because IMO he was the best running back in the League for 2 seasons, on an offense that had Cleo Lemon and called by Jaime Elizondo.

Yeah, but in Canadian football, you have to do more than just be able to run the ball. That is why Robert Drummond and Sean Millington were both so good.