Matt Nichols, Elite quarterback?

[Mr Dee]

Well, that settles it. I want to thank bbking for that he info, and for all the great music and for showing me all I have to do is send stuff to Rich...and he'll figure out what to do with it. ?

[Guest J5V]

6 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

For what its worth since somebody mentioned Milt, he was the game's leading receiver in both Grey Cups that he played in.

It sucks he didn't win a cup with us. 

[SPuDS]

17 hours ago, Goalie said:

Would you prefer him to be like Jon Jennings and throw pick after pick after pick? Or would you prefer the points cuz points win you games and picks help you lose

exactly.   why risk it when we have 3 on the board almost everytime we pass the 45 yard line..  its asinine to believe we should be forcing things JUST to get a TD and risk either an INT or turnover.   if we get down into the endzone, awesome.  if not, don't force it.. take the 3 and come down and score again once the defense gets the ball back.

[Rod Black]

17 hours ago, do or die said:

That bloody spin move......

Almost.."savardian". 

[Fan Boy]

16 hours ago, Mr Dee said:

Well, that settles it. I want to thank bbking for that he info, and for all the great music and for showing me all I have to do is send stuff to Rich...and he'll figure out what to do with it. ?

The whole being on the board after being being dead for over 2 years is even more impressive.  Most of the dead guys I know just stink. 

[bearpants]

On 8/12/2017 at 2:42 PM, Atomic said:

There was a period of time when Calvillo, Ray, and Burris were the elite QBs in the CFL. 

 

On 8/12/2017 at 4:08 PM, Blueandgold said:

Even if people want to discount Burris, I'd say in 2003 Calvillo, Ray and Dickenson were all elite and guys like Jones and Maas were still good as well.

Little late to the party on this... but when I thought of "3 elite QBs in the league at one time" my mind immediately went to the late 90s with Flutie in Toronto, Garcia in Calgary and McManus in Hamilton... even throw in Damon Allen in BC and Tracy Ham in Montreal... I guess those last two are debatable... I also might be off on my timelines...

[Mark F]

18 hours ago, tracker said:

The video clip reminded me of how unique he was and how he ran like he had the centre of gravity of a manhole cover.

 

Yeah.  Very strong, amazing balance, deceptive speed. He was one of a kind in the CFL.

The one I remember clearly isn't on there..... a guy tried to tackle him in the open field, Charles put a few moves on him, and the guy literally just fell over to the ground, never touched Charlie.

This video clip also reminded me why I would like to see more running in the CFL.  I really like a good running game.

 

[Arnold_Palmer]

No one uses the spin move quite like Roberts. I was a young kid playing running back back when Sir Charles was in his prime. I remember one game where i used the spin move on the first play from scrimmage on an outside pitch and took it 80-90 yards for a touchdown. That was a fun game. Me and our QB probably used that move successfully several times that afternoon. 

[Mark F]

1 hour ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

No one uses the spin move quite like Roberts. I was a young kid playing running back back when Sir Charles was in his prime. I remember one game where i used the spin move on the first play from scrimmage on an outside pitch and took it 80-90 yards for a touchdown. That was a fun game. Me and our QB probably used that move successfully several times that afternoon. 

hard for me to imagine, since I did not play football, but that must be a huge thrill for a kid.

Edited August 15, 2017 by Mark F

[SpeedFlex27]

4 hours ago, SPuDS said:

exactly.   why risk it when we have 3 on the board almost everytime we pass the 45 yard line..  its asinine to believe we should be forcing things JUST to get a TD and risk either an INT or turnover.   if we get down into the endzone, awesome.  if not, don't force it.. take the 3 and come down and score again once the defense gets the ball back.

I absolutely agree. However, LaPo does have a habit of calling too many "safe" plays resulting in 3 points when they may have turned into touchdowns. Like dumping a pass off of 2nd & 7 on an opponents 25 yard line & getting 3 yards. Or some actually head scratching calls like on 2nd & 4 & running a sweep that's tackled for a gain of one or for a loss. When pushing down the field thru the air was working.  LaPo gets conservative & the drive stalls. That's the criticism I see & drives me crazy at times watching it.  

[SPuDS]

Just now, SpeedFlex27 said:

I absolutely agree. However, LaPo does have a habit of calling too many "safe" plays resulting in 3 points when they may have turned into touchdowns. Like dumping a pass off of 2nd & 7 on an opponents 25 yard line & getting 3 yards. Or some actually head scratching calls like on 2nd & 4 & running a sweep that's tackled for a gain of one or for a loss. When pushing down the field thru the air was working.  LaPo gets conservative & the drive stalls. That's the criticism I see & drives me crazy at times watching it.  

 I agree with that.  He does get very hyper conservative at times and it can get frustrating.   I also agree that he pins the hopes on those plays on the players making plays.. breaking tackles, grinding for the extra 2-3, etc etc.    I can't be too bothered by it tho as we are scoring at a pretty great pace.   Could he gamble a bit more, make medium to long toss on those short dink dunks instead?  Sure.   Is it something that could end up costing us dearly tho?  Not particularly unless we keep scoring FGs and our opposition scores TDs.   The drawback to Lapos game plan is that we NEED our defense to play very well to off-set the lack of 6's over 3's.   I also think that if we start hitting those deep shots and scoring on "big plays" then it negates the issues of the dink dunk when close to the red zone.  

 

we rarely see TD's like we saw Lankford score 2 weeks ago.  we need more of those almost as much as we need less "conservative" plays..

[Arnold_Palmer]

40 minutes ago, Mark F said:

hard for me to imagine, since I did not play football, but that must be a huge thrill for a kid.

It was one of the most light hearted football games I've ever been a part of. I think we were up 40-0 at half time. I had around 10 carries in the first half but probably close to 300 yards rushing. Every play seemed to go for a long gain. I played QB the second half and only attempted two passes. I was handing the ball off to kids who never even played running back by the 4th quarter. 

Edited August 15, 2017 by Arnold_Palmer

[Tracker]

1 hour ago, SPuDS said:

 I agree with that.  He does get very hyper conservative at times and it can get frustrating.   I also agree that he pins the hopes on those plays on the players making plays.. breaking tackles, grinding for the extra 2-3, etc etc.    I can't be too bothered by it tho as we are scoring at a pretty great pace.   Could he gamble a bit more, make medium to long toss on those short dink dunks instead?  Sure.   Is it something that could end up costing us dearly tho?  Not particularly unless we keep scoring FGs and our opposition scores TDs.   The drawback to Lapos game plan is that we NEED our defense to play very well to off-set the lack of 6's over 3's.   I also think that if we start hitting those deep shots and scoring on "big plays" then it negates the issues of the dink dunk when close to the red zone. 

we rarely see TD's like we saw Lankford score 2 weeks ago.  we need more of those almost as much as we need less "conservative" plays..

I think the key is not become predictable- something we've seen too much of.  If the defence thinks the QB might run (even if he doesn't), it adds another dimension to the offence, and the defence has to respect that. If the offence keeps playing the short game, unless the QB is another Cavillo, the defence will key on that. Etc Etc.

[SpeedFlex27]

3 hours ago, SPuDS said:

 I agree with that.  He does get very hyper conservative at times and it can get frustrating.   I also agree that he pins the hopes on those plays on the players making plays.. breaking tackles, grinding for the extra 2-3, etc etc.    I can't be too bothered by it tho as we are scoring at a pretty great pace.   Could he gamble a bit more, make medium to long toss on those short dink dunks instead?  Sure.   Is it something that could end up costing us dearly tho?  Not particularly unless we keep scoring FGs and our opposition scores TDs.   The drawback to Lapos game plan is that we NEED our defense to play very well to off-set the lack of 6's over 3's.   I also think that if we start hitting those deep shots and scoring on "big plays" then it negates the issues of the dink dunk when close to the red zone.  

 

we rarely see TD's like we saw Lankford score 2 weeks ago.  we need more of those almost as much as we need less "conservative" plays..

Totally agree with everything you said.  

[JuranBoldenRules]

5 hours ago, SPuDS said:

 I agree with that.  He does get very hyper conservative at times and it can get frustrating.   I also agree that he pins the hopes on those plays on the players making plays.. breaking tackles, grinding for the extra 2-3, etc etc.    I can't be too bothered by it tho as we are scoring at a pretty great pace.   Could he gamble a bit more, make medium to long toss on those short dink dunks instead?  Sure.   Is it something that could end up costing us dearly tho?  Not particularly unless we keep scoring FGs and our opposition scores TDs.   The drawback to Lapos game plan is that we NEED our defense to play very well to off-set the lack of 6's over 3's.   I also think that if we start hitting those deep shots and scoring on "big plays" then it negates the issues of the dink dunk when close to the red zone.  

 

we rarely see TD's like we saw Lankford score 2 weeks ago.  we need more of those almost as much as we need less "conservative" plays..

The big plays are nice.  If we get first downs and score points I could care less about how they happen or how many plays it takes.  Most teams are dropping 3-4 DB's into deep zones every play.  Those deep shots are pretty risky and ending up in 2nd and long is a bad outcome.  I don't believe Nichols is shy to take the shot when his reads take him there.

[SPuDS]

13 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

The big plays are nice.  If we get first downs and score points I could care less about how they happen or how many plays it takes.  Most teams are dropping 3-4 DB's into deep zones every play.  Those deep shots are pretty risky and ending up in 2nd and long is a bad outcome.  I don't believe Nichols is shy to take the shot when his reads take him there.

No and I agree with this as well.. we ought to be taking what the defense gives us and not force stuff.  I think that the deep bomb into the endzone isn't something we often look to and im ok with that as it usually is into double-triple coverage... but taking a shot when they are midfield..

[SpeedFlex27]

5 hours ago, SPuDS said:

No and I agree with this as well.. we ought to be taking what the defense gives us and not force stuff.  I think that the deep bomb into the endzone isn't something we often look to and im ok with that as it usually is into double-triple coverage... but taking a shot when they are midfield..

All I want to see is an offense that, if we need 6 yards we throw for 7 but not 3. 

[JCon]

3 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

All I want to see is an offense that, if we need 6 yards we throw for 7 but not 3. 

I want first downs.

[SpeedFlex27]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

I want first downs.

Throwing short doesn't get first downs which is why we kick so many field goals. 

[Noeller]

7 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Throwing short doesn't get first downs which is why we kick so many field goals. 

Sure it does...if you've got guys who can get YAC. The key is, not everything works all the time....

[JCon]

9 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Throwing short doesn't get first downs which is why we kick so many field goals. 

And when they're not getting first downs, I'm heavily critical. But I also see that when they run under the coverage, they can get open and still get first downs.

So, as long as they are getting first downs, I don't care if they're throwing short.

Edited August 16, 2017 by JCon

[SpeedFlex27]

3 minutes ago, Noeller said:

Sure it does...if you've got guys who can get YAC. The key is, not everything works all the time....

If you look at the throws, a lot of them are in situations where the receiver can't get YAC yards as he has defenders around him who tackle him immediately.  That's why we need to throw to receivers at  the first down marker then make the catch & YAC after. 

[Noeller]

I would guess the defensive tendency in that situation is to sit defenders down on the 1st down marker, and take that away...so a lot of the time, only the underneath routes are available. Now, again, nothing is ever 100% the same all the time, but.....

[SpeedFlex27]

17 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I would guess the defensive tendency in that situation is to sit defenders down on the 1st down marker, and take that away...so a lot of the time, only the underneath routes are available. Now, again, nothing is ever 100% the same all the time, but.....

All I know is that receivers have been taught to always get to the first down marker when the pass is short. Especially if we need 10 yards. Critical if under ten. Guys like Marquay McDaniel, Duke Williams,  Vidal Hazelton, Manny Arceneaux, Brian Burnam, SJ Green, Brandon Zylstra & Weston Dressler can make YAC yards but most of our receivers don't seem to be able to do that. Darvin Adams can create space running his routes  but he isn't the kind of physical  receiver who can fight for extra yards like the other guys can. I haven't seen enough of Lankford & Thorpe to make a real good assessment as they are rookies but they look promising for sure to be the physical receivers we need.

Edited August 16, 2017 by SpeedFlex27

[Mr Dee]

38 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

All I want to see is an offense that, if we need 6 yards we throw for 7 but not 3. 

All I want is an offence that gets the yardage we need. I don't care how we get it. We have guys that can do that. Harris, Thorpe, Lankford. Heck, any of our receivers. Even QB Nichols wants to run that. 

Its frustrating to see those short throws but @Noeller, is right, we're going to get defended for that yardage, but that doesn't stop us from trying..