TBURGESS

If they already reached out to Glenn... It's not just a couple of games for Nichols.

FWIW: Bob Irving @BobIrvingCJOB· 14h Chris Streveler, who will be quarterbacking the Bombers for a while, was 1-3 in 4 starts for the Bombers last year but he threw 8 td passes and only 2 interceptions. What a challenging start he’ll have in Ed. Vs the ferocious Eskimo defence next Friday.

If Nichols is out long term, I'd go with 2 QB's. Going to have to do that next year anyway.

The team can carry Streveler the same way they carry Nichols when he's having a bad game.

I don't think Streveler could have thrown the ball away even if he tried. It was eat it or throw it and Streveler made the wrong decision. That being said, 1 pass doesn't define a QB.

Now you've jinxed them. 🤣

BC does suck this year. They are a tire fire. Reilly hasn't been all that mobile this year anyway, but the injury will reduce his mobility even more. The only shot BC has is to beat us long a few times for TD's AND to limit Harris' YAC yards. I doubt they can do both.

Toronto is a bottom team with a crap defence. Same goes for BC. Ottawa has the worst yards against in the league.

First time. It's more likely it's because Neufeld isn't able to even practice yet.

Exactly what everyone told me in the off season. Now they want to say it's a stupid opinion.

Changing out coaching staffs and huge portions of teams is way more disruptive than changing out 3 OL who already know the system.

In part the offence is trending down because: We were ahead of most teams at the beginning of they year because we didn't have as many changes to make. They've caught up now. It's way easier to score against the bottom teams in the league than it is against top half teams like Calgary. We got a few huge plays early in games that put us way out in front. Nichols is streaky and when things go well he usually plays well.

'If we' and 'what if' are the same thing. You know that when folks bring up 'what ifs' that aren't Bomber positive.

Or, you could admit that what if's aren't real arguments.

This week or last week or the week before... it's the same 'argument'. It's a moot point. The only difference is the tense of the statement.

You're using a 'What if' that didn't happen then saying it makes sense. It doesn't. FTR: If we scored 2 more TD's, the trend would be upwards. Because we didn't happen, it doesn't matter. It's Moo Point as they say. 😎

We didn't score 2 more offensive TD's so the question doesn't make any sense. The long term data shows we are currently on top. If we continue the downward trend then we will soon lose the lead.

Aannd trending downward.

I'm less risk adverse than most folks around here. I have no problems upping the risk factor. I know that means more potential picks and I'm fine with that as long as it also means more yards and more points which I think it would.

It's not just the number of rushes. It's the combined total of rushes and passes.

Maybe they just corrected the mistake they made against the Argos.

The offence has scored a lot of TD's, but only 4 in the last 3 weeks and 3 of those were in 1 half against the lowly Argos.

Someone on my twitter feed said Nichols should sign his paycheck over to Grant this week. I LOL'd.

No, but some folks want to say he's a good QB because we won even tho it was because of 2 kick returns.

Must have sounded better in the stadium than it did on TV.