Argos sign Corey Watman

[Will]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Meanwhile...OL Corey Watman is about to sign with the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Argos?src=hash">#Argos</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CFL?src=hash">#CFL</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/CFLFA?src=hash">#CFLFA</a></p>&mdash; Matthew Scianitti (@TSNScianitti) <a href="https://twitter.com/TSNScianitti/status/697172181093117952">February 9, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[paulwoods13]

@JDunk12

Canadian OL Corey Watman (@69_watman) - 2013 first-round pick - signs 2-year deal with #Argos. #Toronto #CFL #CFLA

Looks as if this is happening. Rider fans don't think much of his progress to date but this is at least a decent depth move.

[gilthethrill]

He is a G or C? Good young player with room to mature.....

[doubleblue]

Does this mean Argos have given up on McEwen for the immediate future, or are they just looking at Watman as a depth guy. Watman was a starting C in the Div I but has never showed he was capable of starting his two years in Regina.

[R.J]

Very good depth signing.

[ArgoRavi]

Keeping has signed with Winnipeg so Watman could be a potential starter in Toronto. I don't think that the Argos have given up on McEwen but they certainly have to have a Plan B in case he doesn't show up in Toronto anytime soon.

[Will]

Keeping has signed with Winnipeg so Watman could be a potential starter in Toronto. I don't think that the Argos have given up on McEwen but they certainly have to have a Plan B in case he doesn't show up in Toronto anytime soon.

I think Van Roten starts at Centre to start the year

[R.J]

I think Van Roten starts at Centre to start the year
Most likely, but Barker has continually brought up starting 5 Canadian linemen.

[Wobbler]

I don't remember him saying that for quite a while. When was the last time? I think it was before we began regularly starting four NATs on defense.

Lots can and will change before the season opener, but I think GVR is the best center on our current roster.

[R.J]

I don't remember him saying that for quite a while. When was the last time? I think it was before we began regularly starting four NATs on defense.

Lots can and will change before the season opener, but I think GVR is the best center on our current roster.
IIRC, the last time I heard Barker talk about it was 2 years ago during training camp.

[OV Argo]

IF McEwen shows up, or Van Roten is considered for a starting interior O-line job, I'm not sure where Watman fits in on the Argo O-line? They just re-signed vet Wayne Smith, and Sewell is still around; Bourke starting for sure at OT and Holmes a fixture too; is Van Zeyl going to get traded or cut?

Nice to have lots of TC competition and depth, (and let's even assume McEwen does not show for TC) but i can't see them carrying 7 NI O-Linemen on the roster, unless they pencil-in an all NI O-line - one of those above mentioned NI O-linemen is not going to make the team?

[Jon Gonzo]

Cory Watman comes home. Remember him as a kid around the neighborhood up in Holland Landing when I lived there.

[Wobbler]

I hadn't noticed this quote (http://m.yorkregion.com/sports-story/6273784-toronto-argos-ink-huron-heights-grad-corey-watman), where Barker specifically describes him as a center. I guess there's a chance he *will* start there, with CVZ at G and GVR at tackle (barring further drafting/recruitment, obviously).

[R.J]

I hadn't noticed this quote (http://m.yorkregion.com/sports-story/6273784-toronto-argos-ink-huron-heights-grad-corey-watman), where Barker specifically describes him as a center. I guess there's a chance he *will* start there, with CVZ at G and GVZ at tackle (barring further drafting/recruitment, obviously).
It sounds more and more likely that the team wants to go all Canadian.

[Wobbler]

I still think that's unlikely, but obviously it's possible. We'll see how many INT linemen Barker recruits this Spring...

[OV Argo]

It sounds more and more likely that the team wants to go all Canadian.


Maybe, but what is the big need there? - they could easily start 4 if not 5 NIs on D: Foley, Gabriel, a DT, an OLB and maybe MLB too.

Instead of the pencilled-in b$, why not bring in a couple of import OTs to compete there, along with looking at Sewell or Van Zeyl there again + maybe a draft pick like St John or that big Laval OT- and let the best player win that OT job to book-end with Bourke; instead of ASSuming it has to be a NI or an import ?

[paulwoods13]

Maybe, but what is the big need there? - they could easily start 4 if not 5 NIs on D: Foley, Gabriel, a DT, an OLB and maybe MLB too.

Instead of the pencilled-in b$, why not bring in a couple of import OTs to compete there, along with looking at Sewell or Van Zeyl there again + maybe a draft pick like St John or that big Laval OT- and let the best player win that OT job to book-end with Bourke; instead of ASSuming it has to be a NI or an import ?


I agree. No reason we can't start at least three NATs on defence (d-line, LB and S) and one receiver, which means we need only three or four on the o-line. Add a fourth on defence or a second receiver and we can play even fewer on the o-line.

[R.J]

Maybe, but what is the big need there? - they could easily start 4 if not 5 NIs on D: Foley, Gabriel, a DT, an OLB and maybe MLB too.

Instead of the pencilled-in b$, why not bring in a couple of import OTs to compete there, along with looking at Sewell or Van Zeyl there again + maybe a draft pick like St John or that big Laval OT- and let the best player win that OT job to book-end with Bourke; instead of ASSuming it has to be a NI or an import ?
I'd have no issue if the Argos were to go INT at RT........... so long as it's not Van Roten. Van Zeyl is not a RT anymore; RG or bust for him IMO. Sewell may not be ready and if he isn't IMO it's time to cut him loose. I would love to see the team draft St. John as Bourke's potneital replacement when Bourke decides to hang em up, but I don't see St. John or Vaillancourt winning an Ot tackle job in their rookie season.

[OV Argo]

I agree. No reason we can't start at least three NATs on defence (d-line, LB and S) and one receiver, which means we need only three or four on the o-line. Add a fourth on defence or a second receiver and we can play even fewer on the o-line.


Bulcke now signed, with Waud = at least one NI spot at DT and possibly 2 if Laing is re-signed; Foley at DE; Gabriel at safety, Greenwood at OLB (or maybe MLB); Miles or try to get Muamba at MLB; give Matt Black a shot to play corner = they could easily play 6 NIs on D if not for gob aversion to more than 7/8 NIs in total starting; then they could play 3 or 4 imports on the O-line, or all import receivers if that turns their cranks.

GOBs afraid of real competition with NIs in the mix all over the place, plus thinking imports can't play a few NI only positions (like interior O-line) ?

[R.J]

3-4 internationals on the oline ?