2018 Matt Nichols

[Stickem]

18 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

That's what we call being full of **** trying to push an agenda. 

I didn't realize the agenda was confusion... But now I'm confused

[17to85]

10 minutes ago, Stickem said:

…..Don't be....Goalie is the one who brought up the qb.s from other clubs...not this guy...Does that alleviate your confusion...I was merely commenting on his take on other gm's and their qb's and I'm still not interested in their internal ops.….capish

You are the one that said no other coach had to deal with a qb playing poorly and then turn around and say you don't care about other teams qbs, don't spin too hard or you'll fly right off the face of the earth. 

[Guest J5V]

On 2018-08-23 at 9:53 AM, Tracker said:

I do not see anyone calling for Nichols to be permanently benched in favour of Streveler, but rather that we want to see that if the game is not going well for Nichols, Streveler will be put in to give the team and fans hope. As a fan, it is very frustrating to see Nichols coming out again and again when clearly he is struggling. Streveler ought to have had a lot more reps and time to adapt to the CFL, so ought to be more effective now. Nichols does not seem to be getting better, and Saturday will tell us a lot.

I'll be very surprised to not see just more of the same from Nichols. Teams know what he brings and are well prepared to deal with him. A guy like Streveler, not so much. Just the simple fact that Streveler can move the ball with his legs would give opposing Ds nightmares. Watching Nichols run the ball last game was akin to watching ...

 

[Stickem]

2 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

You are the one that said no other coach had to deal with a qb playing poorly and then turn around and say you don't care about other teams qbs, don't spin too hard or you'll fly right off the face of the earth. 

I said I was commenting on another posters take...NOT because I'm interested in an another clubs internal workings....He brought it up the qb.s from other clubs….look it up

[17to85]

3 minutes ago, Stickem said:

I said I was commenting on another posters take...NOT because I'm interested in an another clubs internal workings....He brought it up the qb.s from other clubs….look it up

this is what you said:

Firstly Dickenson has not removed Bo...cuz he didn't have to ...Maas didn't remove Riley because he didn't have to....They didn't have to because those teams haven't experienced the same poor play as our quarterback has shown...And that's where we differ...

And then you said you weren't that interested in what other teams do with their qbs....

Those two comments are incompatible with each other because by making the first comment you show you are as a matter of fact interested in what those other teams do with their qbs, albeit incorrect in your assessment. So you can't then turn around and pretend like you don't really care. 

[Fatty Liver]

12 minutes ago, J5V said:

I'll be very surprised to not see just more of the same from Nichols. Teams know what he brings and are well prepared to deal with him. A guy like Streveler, not so much. Just the simple fact that Streveler can move the ball with his legs would give opposing Ds nightmares. Watching Nichols run the ball last game was akin to watching ...

 

Alright, now we're in to "run shaming"?  At least he's not a fat bastard!

[Stickem]

1 minute ago, 17to85 said:

this is what you said:

Firstly Dickenson has not removed Bo...cuz he didn't have to ...Maas didn't remove Riley because he didn't have to....They didn't have to because those teams haven't experienced the same poor play as our quarterback has shown...And that's where we differ...

And then you said you weren't that interested in what other teams do with their qbs....

Those two comments are incompatible with each other because by making the first comment you show you are as a matter of fact interested in what those other teams do with their qbs, albeit incorrect in your assessment. So you can't then turn around and pretend like you don't really care. 

Do you not understand English...I said ….now read my post (lips)...I commented on them ONLY because another poster used them as an example...How hard is that to understand...Another poster used them as an example I merely followed with my comment ….Still no interest in what other clubs do with their quarterbacking...BUT I am interested in what happens to our quarterback...good or bad and you should be as well

[Stickem]

3 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Alright, now we're in to "run shaming"?  At least he's not a fat bastard!

Matt is definitely faster than this guy.....I won't wait for him to tear up the field in Cal. though...he'll most likely be running for his life in our backfield..../4 sacks last game...c'mon hogs

[Guest J5V]

5 hours ago, trueBlue83 said:

tough to run a hurry up when you're 2 and out.... that said, would be nice to see LaPo mix some of that in on Saturday!  keep the D on their toes, especially if their DC isn't at the game!

Tough to run a hurry up when you're 2 and out and you can't move, pivot, scramble, or run because you're injured and your legs are shot all to hell. If Nichols had the legs to do this it'd be different. Sadly he doesn't.

 

[JCon]

3 minutes ago, Stickem said:

Matt is definitely faster than this guy.....I won't wait for him to tear up the field in Cal. though...he'll most likely be running for his life in our backfield..../4 sacks last game...c'mon hogs

Based on every other game, I would say that Nichols is pretty safe back there. 

[Bigblue204]

1 hour ago, Stickem said:

Not that interested in what other teams do with their qbs.....maybe your friend goalie would be though as he seems to think there's a need...Other than both of those clubs have better records than us....what's your point 

Calm ur **** sticky. I'm just pointing out that Bo and Harris looked like hot garbage that game. And an arguement could be made that they should have been pulled. But they weren't, they were left in. Given more rope and able to work through it. Exactly what I except Nichols to do.

[blue_gold_84]

13 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Alright, now we're in to "run shaming"?

Good gravy... LOL

To suggest Streveler is some mystery commodity to the point he'd be a "nightmare" for opposing defences because of his running ability is highly debatable. The Ti-Cats easily held him in check the last time he started a game. Teams have film on him now and are well aware of what he brings to be table.

Does Nichols need to be better? Yes, absolutely. Along with several others on both sides of the ball (the hogs had an awful game last week and it's time to part ways with Lankford). Does Streveler starting give this team a better chance to win? No, and especially if the gameplan on offense stays the same.

[Stickem]

8 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

Calm ur **** sticky. I'm just pointing out that Bo and Harris looked like hot garbage that game. And an arguement could be made that they should have been pulled. But they weren't, they were left in. Given more rope and able to work through it. Exactly what I except Nichols to do.

Now don't get all 17 to 85 on me.....Everyone heard the boos last game....now unless I was dreaming OUR quarterback should have been pulled...firstly because he was nic'd....secondly the game was out of hand...thirdly he didn't play that well....You don't agree ...your prerogative

[17to85]

34 minutes ago, Stickem said:

Do you not understand English...I said ….now read my post (lips)...I commented on them ONLY because another poster used them as an example...How hard is that to understand...Another poster used them as an example I merely followed with my comment ….Still no interest in what other clubs do with their quarterbacking...BUT I am interested in what happens to our quarterback...good or bad and you should be as well

I don't care why you commented, the simple fact is that by commenting for any reason you clearly do care. 

[Bigblue204]

50 minutes ago, Stickem said:

Now don't get all 17 to 85 on me.....Everyone heard the boos last game....now unless I was dreaming OUR quarterback should have been pulled...firstly because he was nic'd....secondly the game was out of hand...thirdly he didn't play that well....You don't agree ...your prerogative

I do agree actually! I just don't think Streveler should start going forward.

I didn't boo, but I thought it was a stupid decision to let him back in there. One thing I often don't hear about that situation is the RT. Hardrick was out. So, poor play, already beat up, game out of hand AND a new RT....recipe for disaster.

[Stickem]

44 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

I don't care why you commented, the simple fact is that by commenting for any reason you clearly do care. 

I care how it relates to the Winnipeg Blue Bomber quarterbacks yes....I really don't give a sweet patootie how Cal. or Edm. handles theirs...why as a Bomber fan would I....Look I'm tired of going around the mulberry bush....You obviously have concerns for Matt....so do I...but in the end I think we would both agree that we want what's best for the team AND that's winning starting with Cal...no matter who ends up quarterbacking...Is that fair??

Edited August 24, 2018 by Stickem

[wbbfan]

Offense is under performing. defense is under performing. play call is lack luster. qb play too. many facets causing the poorer play. just like how it takes many facets of a team to win a game. they all better be atleast some what better against calgary tomorrow. 

[pigseye]

5 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Offense is under performing. defense is under performing. play call is lack luster. qb play too. many facets causing the poorer play. just like how it takes many facets of a team to win a game. they all better be atleast some what better against calgary tomorrow. 

They had won 3 in a row, maybe they just got a little lax reading their own press clippings, it happens. They are now starring down a potential 3 game losing streak so I think you might see a little more compete from everyone. 

Edited August 24, 2018 by pigseye
q

[wbbfan]

11 minutes ago, pigseye said:

They had won 3 in a row, maybe they just got a little lax reading their own press clippings, it happens. They are now starring down a potential 3 game losing streak so I think you might see a little more compete from everyone. 

2 against the argos, 1 against hamilton and lost to bc before that. All our wins are against montreal, toronto, bc and 1 against hamilton. Our best win is against the second best team in the east.

Combined record of the teams weve beaten this year 14-23. 4 teams that beat us 23-22 (ham twice). 

We dont need to get back to how we were playing then, we need to get to playing good consistent football in general. 

Edited August 24, 2018 by wbbfan

[17to85]

55 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

Combined record of the teams weve beaten this year 14-23. 4 teams that beat us 23-22 (ham twice). 

I hate this argument. Every team has more wins against shitty teams than good ones. That's why they are shitty teams. There are only 4 teams with winning records and we are one of them.

[NorthernSkunk]

5 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Good gravy... LOL

To suggest Streveler is some mystery commodity to the point he'd be a "nightmare" for opposing defences because of his running ability is highly debatable. The Ti-Cats easily held him in check the last time he started a game. Teams have film on him now and are well aware of what he brings to be table.

Does Nichols need to be better? Yes, absolutely. Along with several others on both sides of the ball (the hogs had an awful game last week and it's time to part ways with Lankford). Does Streveler starting give this team a better chance to win? No, and especially if the gameplan on offense stays the same.

I don't think the gameplan would be 100% the same for Streveler as for Nichols........what pro coaches/ co-ordinators would ever do that ?....... 

[SpeedFlex27]

41 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

I don't think the gameplan would be 100% the same for Streveler as for Nichols........what pro coaches/ co-ordinators would ever do that ?....... 

The offense is geared to Nichols strengths & not Streveler. 

[NorthernSkunk]

1 minute ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

The offense is geared to Nichols strengths & not Streveler. 

Duh........ but if we were to switch QB's I would totally assume that the people in charge would change the offence to best help the QB going in..........  

[SpeedFlex27]

7 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

Duh........ but if we were to switch QB's I would totally assume that the people in charge would change the offence to best help the QB going in..........  

Sure lickety split because offensive playbooks are so easy to do. 

[USABomberfan]

19 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

The offense is geared to Nichols strengths & not Streveler. 

Even though many might not agree with this, I'm going to say Lapolice is adaptable enough to turn his offense to be Streveler-centric.  I think what he needs to do more of is Demski trick plays to get attention off of Harris.  Defenses are honing in on Andrew again.