TBURGESS

Can we win a GC with Nichols? As long as the rest of the team plays great, yes. If we have to rely on Nichols to do something special, no. Tom Burgess wasn't a great QB who won a GC. He was an average, journeyman, game manager on a great team that won the GC.

Nope. You kept repeating that ad nauseam. I kept trying to correct you, but you wouldn't listen, so I gave up.

Nichols is a good QB cuz wins? 🤣 That's the dumbest thing I've read all week and yet it gets repeated over and over and over and over again. Nichols played well in week 1 for 3 out of 4 quarters. He didn't play well last night. He was simply the QB of record when we won. We are 2-0 and that's good. Doesn't mean the same thing as Nichols was good.

Our offence was 3 big plays and a big penalty. 1 of the big plays was a good throw by Nichols, the other 2 were all Whitehead and Demski. Nichols got more than half his yards on 2 throws, only one of which was a good throw. Passing yards aren't meaningless. What you're really saying is it's OK because we won. Folks are comparing QB play, not who won. If Nichols was on Edmonton last night, they would have still lost, had less yards passing and wouldn't have even been as close as they were. If Harris was on Winnipeg last night, we'd have won anyway, likely by more.

I don't understand your fixation on 300 yards.

I'd rather win than lose and ugly wins count as much as pretty wins, but that doesn't mean that Nichols played well.

That's only part of what folks said. They also said 300 wasn't that hard to get when you get 100 in 2 throws. Nichols 200 yards wasn't a big reason that we won the game. His first TD to Lucky was a good throw. His second TD to lucky was a poor throw followed by a great play by Whitehead to turn a 3 yard gain into a big TD. Demski's TD had nothing to do with Nichols. Our last TD was because of a penalty on the 5 yard line on a short throw. Nichols gets the win again, but he was just the QB of record again last night. IMO and Dunigan's he caught the ball, hit the ground with both feet, and then had the ball popped out by a hit. That's a catch and a fumble in my book and it would have been a catch/fumble in most folks around here's book if we had recovered the fumble.

In week 1 folks told me it was easy to get 300 yards if you get close to 100 on 2 throws. Nichols got 115 on two throws and just barely managed 200 yards.

Don't bring me into this. I didn't drop any. 😎

Lucky - The two biggest plays of the game Demski - Big play #3 Jeffcoat - Had to go with someone on the DL. HH - The Challenge refs back at head office for getting the PI right after the challenge and getting the catch and fumble wrong after Edmonton's challenge.

It was about a 5 yard play and IIRC Collins took a step before he dropped the ball, so it could have been ruled a catch and fumble. Then again, that's not how they ruled the Edmonton catch and fumble in the 4th, so who knows.

My problem isn't with TSN showing food or interviewing folks. It's that they do it when the game is going on in the background.

Harris - Andrew

Funny thing is that I thought I'd picked Hamilton not Toronto. I checked my picks on that other site.. "Hamilton @ Toronto - Ticats didn't look good last week but managed win anyway. Toronto will struggle early." I should have left the 'early' off completely. 🤣 I guess I clicked on the wrong team so no worries.

One more thing... TSN's coverage sucks. Spent 20 minutes hanging off every word that Ricky Ray said, while the game went on in the background, often in a split screen so we could watch Ricky Ray. Too much yammering about Hotdogs, Burgers and drinking from a shoe. Tell me about the freaking game. Tell me which players are coming in and going out. You know actual football stuff.

BC's OL was beaten up last night and it started on the first play. Jackson needs to go back to OC 101. When a team is blitzing and smacking your QB around, screen, draw, quick hitters. Run the ball outside and inside and stop handing it off deep, cuz that's just another way to let their DL take shots in the back field. I thought that player safety, especially for QB's, was supposed to be the focus this year. Why did BC have to use both their challenges on obvious roughing penalties? Couldn't the eye in the sky call them if the refs on the field didn't like they did after BC ran out of challenges? BTW: What turns a 15 into a 25 yard penalty? Edmonton owned the Lions in all facets of the game last night from the 2nd quarter on. BC's only TD came directly from Eskimos penalties. Reilly took more hits than a pinata. I thought he might have been concussed early in the game. Camera showed him breathing very hard on the sidelines well after he got there. Looked like he might lose his cookies to me. Why'd they leave him in at the end of the game? Gotta say I didn't think Edmonton would do much this year, but their looking very dangerous early in the season.

Looks like this one will be an ugly game. Neither team has a starting level QB and both teams have pretty good defences. I'm going with Ottawa, but a big defensive play could win this one.

Regina... the only place where wins aren't a QB stat. 🤣

There you go again. Restating you premise to keep the stupid argument going. Talk about exhausting. 🙄 My argument wasn't and isn't the 300 yard barrier. Reilly had a good game because he was putting the ball where it needed to me most of the time despite a complete lack of a running game and constant pressure. Pro Tip: All Int's aren't the QB's fault. His first int was a good ball and a better defensive play. His second was a bad ball thrown when they were down by 10 with 4ish minutes left on the clock. Without a running game, what's he supposed to do other than pass? Did Nichols, who we all agree had a good game, throw for more than 100 yards in the second half?

And yet... you keep it going.

I like the way you think.

You got the 300+ yards right, but he went 2-0, not 1-2, and it doesn't prove Mike's point unless I didn't give Nichols his due that day. IIRC I doubt that I said he played a bad game that day, but go back and check if you want. Stats are just a starting point, not the end of the argument. That being said, throwing for 300+ yards isn't easy. QB's who are 'off' or playing badly don't throw for 300 yards very often. Sometimes it's a function of being behind and having no choice but to throw deep often. Garbage time yards. Sometimes it's because the defence is playing like crap. That wasn't the case in the Bomber game. Mostly it's cuz the QB is throwing the ball where it needs to be. I'd suggest that when a QB throws for 300+ yards and his team lost, that the loss wasn't because the QB played badly that game. Why do folks keep bringing up wins when they aren't a QB only stat? QB's often play average or below average and still win games. Dominic Davis threw 0 TD's and 4 ints and 275 yards last week and won. That doesn't make him a good QB that day. BLM threw for the same number of yards with 1 TD and 1 INT. That doesn't make him a good QB that day either.

Nichols made reads. Extended plays with his feet. Threw some nice deep balls. Took advantage of what they gave him. Played his best game since 2017. You get no argument from me on any of that. I said all that in my first post after the game. Reilly threw for more yards. Threw some nice deep balls. Took advantage of what we gave him. Played an average game for him. He did it without any running game at all, against a far better defence than Nichols faced. Anyone who actually believes that Nichols would have gone 3 TD's to 0 Int's against our defence, behind their O Line without Andrew Harris to rush for 150ish yards is fooling themselves IMO. Me disagreeing that Reilly didn't play well has somehow morphed into people pretending that I'm saying Nichols didn't play well. Mike... I can't remember a game where Nichols threw for 300+ yards and went 1-2 against any defence, let alone against a good defence. Maybe I'm miss remembering, but your million dollar bet isn't worth the time it took you to type it, so I'm not going to go through the stats and try to find one then cross reference that against what I typed around here.

It's funny, that's not what I said at all. Tells me all I need to know about your reading competence. FTR: "Both QB's played well. Nichols performance didn't win us the game and Reilly's performance didn't lose them the game". To add... The level of defence each QB played against are quite different. Switch the QB's to the other team wouldn't have made any difference to the outcome. Bombers still win.

I'd flip BC and Ottawa around. Beating the Stamps at home > losing to the Bombers.