66 Chevelle

actually it doesn't... the data you provided would indicate to me that Nichols has 4 INTs and Streveler has 2 INTs... 4 is more than 2 and in this case the provided information would indicate that Nichols has actually turned the ball over more than Streveler has...

and not to mention that neither of those you mentioned, Gable or Powell, have been able to play a complete season since coming to the league... Gable is averaging a little over 10 games a season since 2013 and Powell a little over 11 games a season since 2015... there is no reason to think that they won't suffer the same fate this year based upon history alone... I know you can't predict injuries but I can only anticipate future actions based upon past actions... theirs's tell me that there is an injury in both of their futures...

but, even if he is able to carry that type of work load, why should he? we've shown that our production in yards and points are better when his use is managed and the ball is distributed to other play makers... Harris is a beast and if anyone can do it, he can... but the reality is, it isn't really what's best for him or the team...

how many receiving, or overall combined touches do those players have in comparison to Harris though? after this last game Harris is on track to have 370 touches for the year, 50 more than either of those other two you mentioned... for most players that's the equivalent to playing 3 or maybe 4 more games than others...

exactly…. and the numbers prove out that when Harris is our most targeted receiver we are less effective as an offense... I'm not suggesting that we don't use him, just that we also use our other skill players as well and in an effective manner, not just running short routes in the box with few targets or attempting to block for Harris...

true, but... 1984 was a different era and a different game... defensive players are so much bigger and so much stronger these days and the amount of punishment one receives takes it toll, I don't care who you are... the number of touches coupled with Harris' age show tell us that it isn't a matter of 'if', but 'when' it happens...

and who do we have that has shown the ability to run the ball for us, especially in an offense that is dependent on the run as we have been lately? and we don't need that versatility from that position, at least not at the level we are currently requiring of it... the numbers prove out that when we actually target receivers as our primary throwing targets instead of Harris we are significantly better in production, both yards and scoring...

Harris is on track to have 340 touches this year, that's unheard of by any other player in the league... and even though he had touches of over 300 last year and 295 in 2017, at his age it's only a matter of time before his body says 'screw it, I quit', especially at his age and the aggressive manner in which he plays... Harris accounts for 38% of our total offensive yards and 33% of our TDs, production that would be hard to replicate when you consider we would be reduced to no running threat to replace him... no run, no balance... no balance, defense keys on the pass and we're shut down... Yes, continue to use Harris, but manage that use... we've shown that even when Harris isn't required to carry the entire load, that the ball is distributed among all our players, we are a better team... in games 3, 4, and 5 when we had better ball distribution among receivers, and Harris was the primary target, we average 430 yards of offense... in the other games we've average 312 yards of offense... only 239 yards of offense on average over the last 3 games when Harris has been the most targeted receiver... Lapo has to trust Nichols to execute and give him something else to work with in regards to a game plan...

I'm pretty sure that the question was posed as a hypothetical and regardless of what you chose in the poll it resulted in somebody being gone... I'd be willing to bet cash money that had it been presented differently, as in something that the team should actually pursue at this point and time in the season, that the responses would be completely different... but if you want to play the 'stat' game I can give you all kinds of numbers that would show you that our offense is hardly the juggernaut that you are trying to paint them to be, if that's what you want to do... for instance, over the last 3 games, games that resulted in a win-loss record of 1-2, the offense has only scored on average 9 pts a game... in that same span, the lone game we won, our offense scored exactly ZERO pts... a situation that is hardly sustainable if we plan on winning more than we lose... also, in that same game, the offense was only able to move the ball into the red zone TWICE the entire game... and when gifted with a turnover on their 18 yard line we had to settle for a field goal... that the backbone of our offense, Harris, is on track to have 340 touches by year's end, if he is actually able to endure that type of workload injury free or not worn to a frazzle... that if Harris does go down his loss of production would account for 38% of our total offensive yards and 33% of our touchdowns... that your TOP numbers are actually misleading and not a fair representation of what could be expected routinely because in 3 of our games that we won handily, BC and the 2 Ottawa games, we had a 110:47 to 69:13 TOP advantage... that in fact, in one of our wins we actually lose in the TOP battle, Edmonton where we had on 23:40 TOP to their 36:20 TOP... yet another game, our last lost to Toronto, we lost that TOP battle as well, to the then winless Argos, 31:06 to 28:54... also, Ottawa does NOT have more 2 and outs than we do, we are tied, at least we were prior to the last game and last published stats by the league... not to mention that your "argument" as to why they would have more 2 and outs than the Bombers actually makes us look worse as you say that have more because they play with more risk... basically saying that if they didn't suck and weren't constantly playing from behind we'd have more than every team in the league... that 4 of our 6 wins are against teams with a combined record of 5-18... one of our losses is against a previously winless 1-6 team, our other loss was against a back up QB that probably few had heard of before and was held to only 9 pts in 3 and 1/2 quarters... that the first 5 games of the year we scored 168 pt, or 33.8 pts per game as opposed to our opponent scoring 80 pts, or 16 pts per game... over the last 3 games we have scored 68 pts, or 22.6 pts per game as opposed to our opponent who has scored 75 pts (only 5 pts less than allowed in the previous 5 games) or 25 pts. per game... in summary, we are scoring 11.2 pts per less game while our opponents are scoring 9 pts more per game and on average 2.4 pts less than our opponent per game... as you can see, we are trending in the wrong direction... I could go on and on...

doesn't change the fact that he made this statement: "Give credit where it's due, it may be a boring conservative strategy but it does move the ball effectively and consistently which produces a majority of wins, even if some fans don't like it." regardless of wins, if as a team you have the second most 2 and outs you have to wonder if that is the case, which in turn begged the question... not to mention, our inability to actually move the ball effectively and consistently is directly responsible for 1 of our 2 losses... so, if that statement were actually true, we'd be 7-1 right now, 2 games up in the West, instead of 6-2 with 3 other teams only 1 loss behind and breathing down our necks...

well that's odd then, they had the same situation the week before against Toronto and Nichols got the call... hmm, I guess all situations aren't the same, even when they look the same...

are you sure? the only team with more 2 and outs than the Bombers going into this week was Toronto...

I say Lapo as Nichols showed in games 3, 4, and 5 that he is actually capable of something other than the dink and dunk Lapo continues to call...

well then, color me crazy then for thinking that with the game on the line that the person considered to be the best option for moving the offense should be QB1, not a back up...

honestly not trying to be difficult or argumentative, just looking for perspective from those that feel differently than I do... that's all...

well then that's pretty sad then, if your best shot of securing victory doesn't include your highest paid player, not only on offense but the entire team, and you would rather have a back up out there getting it done... don't care why the reason...

so nobody believes that it had anything to do with Nichols not being able to get a first down in like situations in games past? ok, lol...

I don't believe you will find anywhere here that I've suggested that Nichols should be benched in favor of anyone... but, don't you find it a little suspect when the game is on the line that the coach send Streveler out to secure the game instead of Nichols?

ok, I'm good with that then... at least someone willing to be reasonable and objective as to why there is concern... it when the others try to say we're crazy that makes it intolerable, at least to me...

is it not reasonable to be concerned about our offense moving forward when you consider that almost half, 8 of 18, completions were to our running back? that our running back was the most targeted receiver and had twice as many targets than the any of our receivers (8 Harris, 4 Matthews)? that half, 9 of 18, completions resulting in 67 of his 177 total passing yards were passes thrown on average 1 foot, (12"), each?

do we blame him for only being able to get the offense into the opponents red zone twice during the entire game? And one of those times was due to a penalty being called on Calgary and if not, would have been another punt as the pass was complete yet short of the first down...

that's a pretty bold comment given the fact that the offense actually scored 0 points... again, what did Nichols do to earn his pay check, the biggest one of the team in a TEAM win?

I wonder why some find it so unreasonable for others to expect the highest paid person on the team to actually earn his pay check...

I agree… it would be one thing if we were 2-5, but, we still have a chance of winning the West... plus, they haven't brought Streveler along far enough yet... the packages they have given him when he does play don't translate to what he would need to do as QB1... I love Streveler, but I have to admit, it's still a little early to pull Nichols... but they need to get a different game plan for Nichols, something similar to what we saw in games 3-5... otherwise, whether its Nichols or Streveler it won't much matter...

in all fairness, and as much as I hate to admit this... Nichols isn't a lost cause, not yet anyway, IF Lapo were to go back to game planning like he did in games 3-5... first and foremost, they weren't so predictable with the play calling and use of personnel, that helps... but the bigger thing for me was the routes that Lapo had the receivers running... they were running routes at all levels which created space for the receivers and much larger throwing windows, something that Nichols needs... Nichols was uncharacteristically throwing balls to a spot and had enough space in single coverage for the receiver to make the necessary adjustment to make the play. In one of those games he had 6 receivers, not counting Harris, that all had between 4 to 6 targets apiece... Nichols didn't throw great but had a few nice balls mixed in with acceptable ones... the big thing though is that the offense was balanced between the pass and the run, about a 2 to 1 ration in yards... Nichols seems to be a momentum QB, meaning if things start out good, they tend to stay good and can get better... if they start out bad... well... plus, these play, at least some of them, didn't take any longer to execute than those short ones... if you recall that Demski TD down the middle, Nichols was decisive at the snap of the ball, dropped back 5 steps, I believe and let it rip... Demski was still covered at the time he threw it and the ball was almost there before he turned to look for it, made the adjustment, and scored... Lapo actually had some running plays with different formations and lots of motion... receivers actually running routes that cleared space for other to gain favorable match ups, space, and larger throwing windows... it actually worked and kept the defense off balance... then just like that, it was all gone and we returned to the dink and dunk... I'm afraid though, if Lapo doesn't do something to pick Nichols up he will just keep getting worse... because he gets to be a bit of a head case when things start to go bad... he'll never be an elite QB but he could very well turn himself into an above average QB that is very serviceable under the right conditions...