Matt Nichols, Elite quarterback?

[Fatty Liver]

Nichols may never be a thoroughbred but he's a darn good mudder.   I believe if the D can keep the Bombers in the game Nichols can find a way to beat any team.

Edited August 11, 2017 by Throw Long Bannatyne

[MOBomberFan]

7 hours ago, Jesse said:

Whoa whoa Whoa. I also like the Buck comparison for the "grit" factor, but Nichols ain't in the same league as Buck as far as his rushing abilities. Buck was an actual runner. Matt just picks his spots.

I think that's basically what I said. "Nichols picks his runs with better vision." By that I mean he takes off at smart times. He also slides when it's the smart thing to do and lowers the shoulder when he has to. Buck lowered the shoulder 99% of the time. Gotta love him for it but he might have had a longer, healthier career if he would have picked his spots a bit better, too (only a specualtion). I do agree that Matt isn't the pure runner Buck the college  track and field star was.

[bearpants]

Without reading the thread... I just want to say that "elite" is such a subjective term and completely useless when analyzing athletes, especially QBs...

Is Matt Nichols a good QB? Is he capable of leading our team to the Grey Cup? I say yes to both... so whether you want to call him "elite" or a "game manager" or a "gun-slinger" or "insert generic sports term"... all these terms are irrelevant... just win baby 

[blue_gold_84]

6 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Nichols may never be a thoroughbred but he's a darn good mudder.   I believe if the D can keep the Bombers in the game Nichols can find a way to beat any team.

 

[GCn20]

My definition of elite includes demonstrating the ability to put the team on your back and win, and also, to win in the playoffs. Once he has accomplished that I would include him among the elite. Not yet though.

[JCon]

I voted not quite yet but almost. But I don't see why he wouldn't be considered elite at this moment. This, of course, assumes you can be elite one-day and then not elite the next, like Collaros and Ray.

 

 

[do or die]

Elite?  Hell no.   But can certainly settle for a .......consistent winner.

[Arnold_Palmer]

ELITE AT WINNING! 14-5 as a starter since coming in for Drew Willy, and sure he doesn't put up as many yards as the other elite QB's in the league, but he protects the ball, and he will do whatever it takes to win. His game winning drives against Montreal and Ottawa prove how big how balls are when push comes to shove. 

[yogi]

8 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Nichols may never be a thoroughbred but he's a darn good mudder.

Exactly, this guy loves the slop. It's in his bloodlines.

[SPuDS]

17 hours ago, AKAChip said:

This is really crazy. Why do we feel the need to lump him into the group of elites? He's fine and we're winning. Put his numbers against Mitchell and Reilly and it's no contest. Watch Mitchell and Reilly play against him and it's no contest. 

its not crazy, I've seen countless discussions about his ascension to the upper tier of QB's in the league.. wanted to get a gauge on what the board felt about it..

 

and I mean, really, is there an argument to be made that hes not vastly improved and becoming one of the better QBs in the league? His stats are very good, hes winning games that we would have easily lost in seasons past..

[JCon]

Everyone is working from their own definition of elite. Define 'elite' first.

[JCon]

Mentioned earlier: playoff wins.

BLM was 1-1 in playoffs last year.

Jennings was 1-1.

 

If BLM is elite, so is Jennings?

[Brandon]

I don't like pointing to his record as a reason why he is good....   one could always reference the Mike Bishop  in Toronto time where he had a near perfect record..

[Booch]

Thats different tho...The defense in T.O orchestrated those wins, and here Nichols has orchestrated a lot of these wins personally and many would say despite of the defense...big difference

[Blueandgold]

He's had some big games, there's no doubt about it. The comeback against Montreal was a thing of beauty. But, we've also had the second half against Calgary and the fourth Quarter against BC when he was downright awful. He's slightly above the Darian Durant, Trevor Harris and Zach Collaros level IMO, but he's also slightly below the Mike Reilly & BLM(although he hasn't been overly impressive this year) level.

[blue_gold_84]

Pretty damn talented... Effective in the right system with solid personnel around him... Just not quite at the "elite" level just yet, even though his ceiling could very well be at that level.

Dare I say he's the Alex Smith of the CFL...? Is that a reasonable parallel?

[SpeedFlex27]

19 hours ago, Atomic said:

I don't think so.  Jennings passed for over 5000 yards and had 27 TDs against 15 INT.  He is legit.  Michael Bishop couldn't go ten passes without turning the ball over.  Great arm though.

Reminder:  Kevin Glenn has passed for over 50,000 yards. Yardage has nothing to do with how great you are or if a qb is elite. Glenn chokes constantly. 

[Atomic]

20 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Reminder:  Kevin Glenn has passed for over 50,000 yards. Yardage has nothing to do with how great you are or if a qb is elite. Glenn chokes constantly. 

Two very different scenarios and very different QBs.  Glenn's yardage totals come from his longevity.  He is a career .500 QB.  Jennings went over 5000 in his third season, won 12 games, put the team on his back and willed them to a playoff win.  I know it sucks to see Wally unearth another star QB but it is what it is.  He is a top talent, miles above Kevin Glenn.

[mbrg]

Don't care, don't see any need to come up with the perfect category for everything that happens everywhere.

Internet and 24 hour sports channels have turned have made hyperbole commonplace and routine to the point where no one even thinks to call it out anymore.

Game 1 of the CFL season, Rod Black already anointed something as the catch of the year.  Game freaking 1.

Every QB in this league has some strengths and weaknesses.  Different coaches, different systems, different receivers, different Olines.  Swap them out to different teams and you will get different results.

Nichols is playing well and we don't need to actively be seeking a replacement.  Can't say that every year.  So among Bomber QBs this decade, he's definitely elite.

[mbrg]

And as for Riderfans thinking he's a scrub, we already knew that board is filled with morons.

[SpeedFlex27]

5 minutes ago, Atomic said:

Two very different scenarios and very different QBs.  Glenn's yardage totals come from his longevity.  He is a career .500 QB.  Jennings went over 5000 in his third season, won 12 games, put the team on his back and willed them to a playoff win.  I know it sucks to see Wally unearth another star QB but it is what it is.  He is a top talent, miles above Kevin Glenn.

Based on 2 1/2 seasons? LOL! No, he is a turnover machine. Not the sharpest tool in the toolbox. 

[SpeedFlex27]

1 hour ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Pretty damn talented... Effective in the right system with solid personnel around him... Just not quite at the "elite" level just yet, even though his ceiling could very well be at that level.

Dare I say he's the Alex Smith of the CFL...? Is that a reasonable parallel?

Yeah, I'd say. But that's not a bad thing necessarily. 

[JCon]

1 minute ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Based on 2 1/2 seasons? LOL! No, he is a turnover machine. Not the sharpest tool in the toolbox. 

But Nichols used to have lots of turnovers but doesn't anymore and now he's elite!

 

[SpeedFlex27]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

But Nichols used to have lots of turnovers but doesn't anymore and now he's elite!

 

When did he have lots of turnovers? Give examples. 

[17to85]

I think Jennings still has to prove himself a bit too. Yeah he's had early success but what happens if he is in a situation without the best group of receivers in the league (in my opinion) coming down with all those bombs he tosses up.