We all understand that people have different opinions and we at CFL Daily Dose are no different, which is why we started CFL Point/Counterpoint. For each CFL Point/Counterpoint, two authors will present their cases and you decide who’s right.

Every time preseason rolls around in the CFL, people always seem to question whether the length is appropriate. With that being said, we decided to tackle the question: is two preseason games enough?

Two is enough

by Chris Powell

CFL fans don't care about the preseason. In Toronto, there were only 12,514 fans on hand to witness the team's 13-10 victory over Hamilton during the first week preseason play.

Every year, in both the NFL and CFL, coaches, players and pundits rant about the preseason being too long, while in the CFL people go on and on about it being too short.

The NFL plays four preseason games and the CFL plays two, so does that mean that they should both play three preseason games? To be honest, I don’t care what they do in the NFL, but the CFL’s preseason is perfect at two games.

Extending the preseason would become very risky to the player’s health. The reason players, and coaches/owners in the NFL want a shorter preseason is to protect the players. With an 18 game schedule in the CFL, adding any games to the preseason increases the risk that a team’s season could end before it even begins. There are risks of injury with only two games, of course, but they are minimized by the fact that coaches rarely play their starters, opting to use the games to evaluate their newer talent in real game situations.

Adding more games does nothing for the league. It does nothing for the players. It does nothing for the fans. Why extend something that is meaningless to the outcome of the season?

It also doesn’t make much sense for the league to put on any more preseason games. With only four games per week, none of those selling out, the league’s income from the preseason doesn’t make it viable to extend the preseason.

The icing on the cake is that fans just don’t care about the preseason games, with only a few fans even showing up. The games count for nothing, so what’s the point to delay the inevitable. Just bring on the games that count.

Three preseason games would help teams shed the off-season rust

by Jonathan Hamelin

Teams in the CFL are often rusty when the regular season starts. Adding an extra preseason game could help them prepare better.

Adding one extra game onto the CFL preseason schedule would help teams be better prepared for the start of the regular season.

During Week 1 of the CFL regular season, we often see teams play very rusty. This is because the starting unit does not see much live action time during the preseason. If anything, the opening week of the season can seem like a preseason game at times.

The solution to this problem? Add one more preseason game for a grand total of three.

With only two preseason games, coaches have to try to get their recruits some playing time, while also making sure their starters get some time to shake off the rust. This is not always an easy task. It often means that a) rookies don’t get enough time to prove themselves and b) the starting unit doesn’t get enough time.

With three preseason games, the first one could almost serve as a rookie game. There might be a few starters thrown in, but for the most part, it would be the young players and new recruits that would see the most playing time. The players that stood out to the coaching staff could move onto the next preseason game, which would have a mix of starters and rookie playing in it.

Then, the final preseason game could basically be the entire starting unit playing for the whole game. The game might not count for anything, but it would give the starters a chance to work together for a whole game and they would be better prepared for the regular season.

Of course, a counter argument would be that preseason games are boring and just delay the start of the regular season.

This may be true, but the preseason games could always start a week earlier if a third was added. In accordance, training camp could also open a week earlier. This way, the games would not push the start of the regular season back any further.

With three preseason games, it would also mean that some teams would play more away games then home games.

To solve this problem, teams could switch off each year or the third game could be hosted at a neutral location. This would help the CFL expand their market and give cities that don’t have a CFL franchise the chance to see a game, even if it is preseason.

Adding another preseason game would not significantly increase the risk of injury. The veterans might not even play much in the added preseason game. Besides, it is just as likely that a player will get injured during the regular season as in the preseason.

Love them or hate them, preseason games are important for coaches because it helps them evaluate their roster. Adding an extra game would ensure that they have a proper chance to do so.

And, hopefully, it would lead to less rusty play in the regular season.

CFL Daily Dose can be followed on Facebook and Twitter. If you are a fan of the CFL, and would be interested in writing about the Montreal Alouettes, Toronto Argonauts, Winnipeg Blue Bombers, B.C. Lions, or the CFL in general, contact Chris.

We all understand that people have different opinions and we at CFL Daily Dose are no different, which is why we started CFL Point/Counterpoint. For each CFL Point/Counterpoint, two authors will present their cases and you decide who’s right.

This week we tackle an issue that has been the subject of much debate: Who will the Argos sign: Kenton Keith or Jesse Lumsden?

Kenton Keith is the man

by Chris Powell

To me the choice here is obvious. The Argos need a running back and Kenton Keith is the man they need. Keith has been in the CFL for the same amount of time that Lumsden has and has two times the yards and touchdowns that Lumsden has. The choice is clear, the Argos need Kenton Keith.

Kenton Keith is the obvious choice for a team, especially the Argonauts, looking for a starting running back.

Keith would go in as the obvious starter and would also be an excellent mentor for the Argos young RB corp. His presence immediately upgrades the offence by giving them a 1,000 yard back to take the pressure off of the passing game.

Currently the Argos best (most prolific) running back is Jeff Johnson who has 771 yards over his 10 year career, for an average of a whopping 77.1 yards per season. Stats aside, Johnson is 33 years old, which for a running back is practically ancient. Their other five backs combined have 9 years of experience between them and a total of 138 yards. The Argos NEED a starting running back. They can’t afford not to sign Keith.

Keith is also an asset in the passing game with over 1200 yards receiving (averaging 250.4 receiving yards per season).

Keith’s quickness and speed have allowed him to burn past defenders rather than powering through them as Lumsden has done in his career, leaving him in good shape to rack up several more solid seasons before Toronto needs to start shopping for a replacement, if one of their rookie RB’s doesn’t stand out as a solid starter.

Keith’s downside is that he wants to play in the NFL, and has signed with both the Jets (cut before the season in 2004) and with the Colts (where he was the third back in a talented backfield in 2007). This could cause the Argos to look to Lumsden but that would be a mistake.

Kenton has also worked up a bit of a reputation as a bad boy, with rumors of a bad attitude while he was in Saskatchewan, and his arrest in Indianapolis, but over the course of his career those tendencies have been the exception rather than the rule and shouldn’t factor much in Toronto’s choice to sign him.

Durability is also a factor in this choice. Why would you pay someone to be your starting running back when they can’t finish a season? Granted, Keith missed most of last season due to injury, but what football player doesn’t get hurt. I would rather have a running back that has missed a season once rather than a running back that has yet to finish a season in his entire career.

Who would you choose, a two-time West Division All-Star, and the 2006 West Division Most Outstanding Player, or a one time East Division All-Star coming off shoulder surgery?

I’ll take Keith, and the wins he brings, over Lumsden, and the hospital bills he’ll rack up.

Jesse Lumsden is worth the risk, Kenton Keith is not

by Jonathan Hamelin

Kenton Keith may have had more success in the CFL in the past, but Jesse Lumsden offers the Toronto Argonauts the greatest hope for the future.

With both running backs released recently, many wonder who the Argonauts, who need a star running back, will sign. I believe this running back should be Lumsden.

Though he has been through a lot of injuries, Lumsden clearly still has the will to play, as evident in his comments here. This means that Lumsden would not cost a lot of money to sign, and with his NFL aspirations all but dead, he would be dedicated to helping Toronto win ball games. Can the same be said about Keith?

It has been speculated that Keith wasn’t exactly a team player in Saskatchewan. Furthermore, Keith was arrested outside an Indianapolis nightclub in 2008. When the police told him to quite down, Keith reportedly said that he would not be quite because he played for the Colts. For an Argos squad looking to develop a team mentality, is Keith really the type of player they want to bring in?

Of course, the hardest argument to face when defending Lumsden is his injury problem. Thanks to injuries, Lumsden has struggled to play a whole season. But, Keith has done no better recently. After returning from the NFL in 2008, Keith only rushed for 102 yards for the Hamilton Tiger Cats in 2008, and then sat out most of the 2009 season due to injury. Lumsden, in contrast, had 584 yards and five touchdowns in 2008 for Hamilton.

Yes, Keith does have an advantage in career numbers. Keith has 3,913 and 21 touchdowns compared to Lumsden’s 1,802 yards and nine touchdowns. However, Keith’s great success came in Saskatchewan, who at that time relied greatly on the run. Keith was running behind lineman like Gene Makowsky, Andrew Greene and Jeremy O’Day. Lumsden was stuck behind Hamilton’s horrid offensive line, yet still managed an impressive 6.3 yard average. Lumsden is better suited for what Toronto is looking for. Keith would struggle running behind Toronto’s average offensive line, while Lumsden’s power would help him shed tacklers.

Toronto has seen first hand what Lumsden can do when healthy. In 2008, Hamilton won two out of three games against Toronto. Lumsden rushed for 293 and two touchdowns in the two games he played in, racking up 189 yards in the week two win. He averaged over eight yards a carry in these games. If Lumsden can get back to this form, he could do great things in Toronto.

The great thing about Lumsden is Toronto does not need to rush him. They are clearly going nowhere this season. If Lumsden is not 100 percent ready, he can spend the year as a backup. If he is never 100 percent, the Argos still will not have wasted a lot of money. If he does get to 100 percent, he will offer Toronto a bigger threat than Keith.

I guess the big question is, what kind of running back does Toronto want? Keith, a running back with a bad attitude whose best success was in the past? Or Lumsden, a running back who wants to play and is one injury-free season away from achieving great success in the league?

It’s got to be Lumsden.

The Riders drafted plenty of home-grown talent on Sunday during the CFL draft. Was this the best move?

We all understand that people have different opinions and we at CFL Daily Dose are no different, which is why we are starting a new series called CFL Point/Counterpoint. For each CFL Point/Counterpoint, two authors will present their cases and you decide who’s right.

This week we tackle an issue that came up a few times in the draft earlier this week concerning the Saskatchewan Roughriders: Did the Riders compromise talent by picking home-grown players?

Home-grown talent doesn’t always lead to great results

by Chris Powell

I love football and I have for as long as I can remember, whether it’s CFL, NFL, NCAA, or Arena League, I love football. And, as anyone who loves football knows, it takes more than talented players to win a game. It takes a good coaching staff, good team chemistry, good players, and enthusiastic fans. Luckily for the Roughriders they have all four, but they run the risk of drafting themselves out of the playoffs if they continue to have drafts like they did this week.

I know, I know, I gave Saskatchewan a B for their draft choices. But, hear me out. The reason they didn’t get an A is because two of their four picks could have been better by selecting someone from out of the province. Their second and third picks (Jordan Sisco and Patrick Neufield) both came with more talented guys at their positions still available. However, the Riders went with the local guy. Not to take away anything from Sisco or Neufield, they are both talented football players, but the Riders propensity to draft (or sign as free agents) guys from Saskatchewan rather than more talented players from out of the province could be their demise.

Saskatchewan isn’t the only team guilty of this, but it came up quite a bit in this weeks draft, making them the most recent example. Drafting home-grown players happens all the time and not just in football, but it can have serious consequences, especially if the team doing it has struggled recently. Going after a good player rather than a great player should never become the practice for teams who intend to win.

A great player can lift a team from bad to good, but a good player will rarely stand out on a bad team excluding the rare occasions when the stars align and they make a brilliant play.

All in all, it is in a team’s best interests to take the best player at a position rather than a local guy just because he grew up three blocks from the stadium.

Home-grown products Sisco and Neufeld will shine for the Green and White

by Jonathan Hamelin

Sometimes, home can be where the best draft picks come from.

This was a point the Riders proved during the CFL draft on Sunday. With their second pick, eighth overall, the Riders selected Regina’s Jordan Sisco, a receiver for the University of Regina Rams. With their third pick, 33rd overall, the team grabbed Regina’s Patrick Neufeld, an offensive tackle for the University of Saskatchewan Huskies.

While selecting a home-grown player in the draft may not always be the best decision for a team, I believe the Riders made the right decision in drafting Sisco and Neufeld.

When it came to the Sisco pick, the Riders realized they were selecting one of the most talented receivers in the draft. Sisco’s numbers speak for themselves. He is currently sixth on Canada West’s all-time receptions list with 141 and is 11^th on the career receiving yardage list with 2,051. In the draft, he was one of the receivers with the most potential.

Sisco provides further Canadian depth to one of the most dangerous receiving cores in the CFL. While the Riders receiving core, with targets like Rob Bagg, Andy Fantuz and Weston Dressler, is already loaded, Sisco provides insurance in case a player gets injured or eventually leaves the team via free agency of trade.

Neufeld, a 6-foot-6, 300-pound lineman, was a solid offensive lineman for the Huskies. An offensive lineman is always a solid pick in the CFL draft, especially when you can pick up a quality lineman so late in the draft.

Many have stated that instead of drafting local, the Riders should have focused on more pressing needs, particularly the defensive line and linebacking core. I disagree.

The Riders had already drafted a defensive lineman, Shomari Williams, with their first pick in the draft. With defensive tackles Marcus Adams and Keith Shologan, plus five others coming into training camp, the Riders brass obviously felt safe at the defensive line position. As for the linebacking core, the Riders already have starting linebackers Tad Kornegay (74 tackles and three interceptions in 2009), Barrin Simpson (84 tackles and two sacks) and Sean Lucas (81 tackles and four sacks), as well as solid back-ups like veteran Mike McCullough and rising star Jerrell Freeman.

While some people may think most home-grown players aren’t “talented” enough, history says otherwise. Saskatchewan, for example, has plenty of local talent on their team. Gene Makowsky, Kelly Bates, Jason Clermont, Chris Getzlaf and Neal Hughes, are all Saskatchewan products, some of whom were drafted by the Riders. They have all had great careers.

The Riders did not simply pick Sisco and Neufeld because they are local boys, they picked them because they believe they can have a great impact on their team. Furthermore, they were arguably the best player available at the time. Sisco will be a solid receiver for the Riders if he does not stick in the NFL. Neufeld, who might not make an immediate impact, could still develop into a solid offensive lineman for the Riders. When it comes to talented home-grown players, you can never have too much of a good thing.