TBURGESS

FTR: It wasn't me.

No, I didn't berate jcon. I simply repeated what I've said about MOS and Nichols. As for 17.. he has a history of saying that MOS is on the right track, of supporting Nichols and of making stuff up that I don't say or mean then complaining about it. Go Bombers!

7 wins vs 3 wins. Riders win without their offense scoring much, so TO's D won't be the difference maker.

It might be that he goes with his first read no matter what. When it's the right read, he looks great. When it's not, he looks bad. Someone (Mr Dee?) posted that Nichols hasn't had a 300 yard game for the last 14 games in a row. That's a long time for a starting CFL QB.

and you'd find a way to turn it into 'proof' that we have always been on the right track with MOS and Nichols and how it means we are now destined for a Grey Cup appearance.

Thanks.

It's because the game is against Montreal. The worst team in the league. A team we beat 56-10 last time we played them and we had to start our rookie QB. Doesn't look like they will win any more games this year. They are starting a QB who has 2 games of CFL experience and who hasn't looked good in either of them. We need to beat a +.500 team before it means anything. FTR: I haven't called MOS an "Expletive" or Nichols the worst QB in the league. I have said that MOS isn't even an average HC and that Nichols is playing like crap this year. Both are true statements.

Nope, we say we just beat Montreal... I guess we're not the worst team in the league.

Check.

You're still not getting it. Because BC has a game in hand, they control their own destiny and we don't control ours. They need to win the extra game AND win as many games as we do. As long as they do that, no matter how many games are won, they get 4th place or better in the west. In short, us having the head to head series doesn't mean as much as them having the game in hand.

Check your facts. They have a game in hand. If they win it, they go ahead by 2 and the tie breaker doesn't matter.

We don't actually control our destiny. BC does. They have a game in hand. If they win the extra game and match our win total, they get the the last playoff spot unless Montreal or Toronto gets it.

No surprise that O'Shea is starting Nichols again, even tho he's already had several chances to work out his problems. Montreal provides the best chance for Nichols to get a win. When he does, O'Shea and a bunch of folks around here, can do the Itoldyasos. The real test comes the week afterwards when we play Edmonton.

At the beginning of the year most people thought that we had a great team on paper. Backup QB after double-doosh took the money and ran was the only weak spot personal wise. Turns out that backup QB is the least of our problems. I still think we have the players to win more games than we have. I don't think the coaches are getting the most out of the players we have.

Isn't Toronto the team we always dump our under performing QB's on?

No it won't. Win or lose, it doesn't tell us anything more than we won or lost.

If we lose to Montreal, trade Nichols to Toronto for Franklin straight up. If we're going to lose, we might as well do it with young QB's with an upside.

The games against the +.500 teams revealed who our team is. The game against Montreal won't reveal anything.

How much more? 1 year? 2? 3?

You're suggesting that we keep everyone except some scouts? You think that's enough to turn this around?

If Nichols can't pull out a win against Montreal, then he's no good to us anyway.

That doesn't surprise me. You're willing to overlook pretty much everything that O'Shea does wrong. Lets try this another way... Hall is done no matter what, so we need a new DC. GM's get to choose their HC's, so replacing Walters means replacing O'Shea unless you want to give him the GM/HC job which is ridiculous because he's a below average HC with zero GM experience. Replacing the GM equals blowing everything up, which I know you are against. Keep Walters and O'Shea means more of the same and the same means no playoff wins in 4 years and a team that is regressing badly at this point. That's a pretty hard sell.The only thing it has going for it is consistency, which is only a good thing if your team is playing well. Consistently mediocre isn't a good thing.

Edmonton's defense isn't much better than ours, but their offense is way better.

I don't care about salvaging Nichols season or career. I care about salvaging the Bombers season. The $400K has already been spent. It's now about is next year's $450K worth it considering how Nichols has been playing. If you want to give Streveler the best chance at success, you start him against Montreal, a team that he's already done well against. Boost his confidence and get him some more valuable game reps. If he's losing, then you can put Nichols back in to be the savior. He'd love that role and it would get the fans back on his side.

Using the same logic... O'Shea is in charge of the team. He hires the coordinators, makes the final player decisions like who the starting QB is, and the big in game decisions like going for 60+ yard FG's. It all goes back to O'Shea if the guys he hires can't do their jobs or his decisions aren't very good.