GDT: Edmonton @ Winnipeg June 27, 2019

[JuranBoldenRules]

18 minutes ago, J5V said:

Where would you rate him among all CFL QBs? I have him 4th behind Bo, Mike, and Jeremiah. 

BLM and Reilly have won a Grey Cup, Grey Cups for BLM.

Harris and Collaros have played in Grey Cups, but Collaros is a shell of his prime.

Nichols 1-4 in playoff games career.  He's out of runway in terms of excuses, or the "but if we had this we'd win."  We have a ridiculously great D, great RB, great receivers, OL that has performed well through 2 games, I'd say great vs BC, average vs EDM, but certainly not a problem and will only get better as guys play more together.  Nichols needs to win this year, and by that probably win the Grey Cup or at least get there, or he's done here.  Very much like Glenn in 2008.  Nichols is the guy completely under the microscope because everything else is in place.

[johnzo]

7 hours ago, JCon said:

Exume with only one special teams tackle. He peaked early and his career is on the decline. 

The one tackle he had was pure motor tho -- he was the first guy downfield, he got picked up by the blocking and was pushed well out of the play, then he giddied up and ran down the returner from behind. 

Love seeing guys make plays like that, it's like watching a DT make a tackle on a pass 20 yards downfield.

[Geebrr]

10 minutes ago, johnzo said:

The one tackle he had was pure motor tho -- he was the first guy downfield, he got picked up by the blocking and was pushed well out of the play, then he giddied up and ran down the returner from behind. 

Love seeing guys make plays like that, it's like watching a DT make a tackle on a pass 20 yards downfield.

It was also when Medlock kicked from our 5 and Jackson was that tackle from going way further up field with a minute left in the 4th 

[johnzo]

5 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

It was also when Medlock kicked from our 5 and Jackson was that tackle from going way further up field with a minute left in the 4th  

yup, that's the one.  total clutch play, bringing it when it matters.

[Geebrr]

Willie Jefferson is taking heat for the lack of sacks I guess? 

Re-watching the game, particularly the 4th, he was killing his guy.

He will get better and better for us

[17to85]

1 hour ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

BLM and Reilly have won a Grey Cup, Grey Cups for BLM.

Harris and Collaros have played in Grey Cups, but Collaros is a shell of his prime.

Nichols 1-4 in playoff games career.  He's out of runway in terms of excuses, or the "but if we had this we'd win."  We have a ridiculously great D, great RB, great receivers, OL that has performed well through 2 games, I'd say great vs BC, average vs EDM, but certainly not a problem and will only get better as guys play more together.  Nichols needs to win this year, and by that probably win the Grey Cup or at least get there, or he's done here.  Very much like Glenn in 2008.  Nichols is the guy completely under the microscope because everything else is in place.

But of the 4 playoff games he's had here he has 1 loss to BLM and one to Reilly and 2 of the losses can be pinned on shoddy defense.... he also came closer to beating BLM last year than Harris did. I think Nichols gets undersold a lot. Yeah last night was tough but overall he is a guy you can win with.

[Jpan85]

 

[davidjh141]

1 hour ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

Less that 5 times out of 100 according to an expected win formula I ran that includes net offense, turnovers and TOP based on last night's game.

It was created for American Football but I think it transfers to Canadian Football.

It's actually incredible the Bombers didn't give up a TD last night.  3 Edmonton drives started on the Bombers side of midfield and one started at the Bombers 20.

Dont worry though, all Nichols does is win!

[Nickthesizz]

3 hours ago, Yourface said:

You make me laugh. Trevor Harris is so much better than Nichols it's not even a debate.

Lol waste some more time with your 10 yard out patterns while down by 2 scores.

 

Also would be nice if all the TBURGESS alt accounts would leave the site.

[Tracker]

43 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

 

We will look for you and root for you in 2020, Brady. What doesn't break us makes us stronger.

[SpeedFlex27]

4 hours ago, Yourface said:

You make me laugh. Trevor Harris is so much better than Nichols it's not even a debate.

And he lost. 

[Mr Dee]

14 hours ago, Mark F said:

Edmonton receivers didn't look very good. too many drops.

 

All part of the master plan. Give them oodles of time possession and let them get super tired running all those routes.

Tired hands.

Its a thing.

Called the overly handsome defence.

[SpeedFlex27]

10 hours ago, AKAChip said:

Love the team, love the win, hate Nichols. 

How would you feel to be the Als or the Argos with those train wreck qbs at the controls? Will Fajardo soar with the Eagles or crash to the ground & be rolling around with the worms?

[AKAChip]

9 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

How would you feel to be the Als or the Argos with those train wreck qbs at the controls? Will Fajardo soar with the Eagles or crash to the ground & be rolling around with the worms?

Very bad. Don’t confuse reasonable skepticism with a desire to be a fan of a bad team. But those teams are going nowhere and they know it. If they had the roster we have with their current QBs, it would be a different story. And great, Nichols is better than Antonio Pipkin and Vern Adams. Talk about a low bar. 

Edited June 29, 2019 by AKAChip

[Floyd]

Seriously - Kevin Glenn is needed on either of those teams...

[SpeedFlex27]

1 minute ago, AKAChip said:

Very bad. Don’t confuse reasonable skepticism with a desire to be a fan of a bad team. But those teams are going nowhere and they know it. If they had the roster we have with their current QBs, it would be a different story. And forgive me for aiming higher than Pipkin-level QBing. 

You've missed my point entirely. My point is that the era we're in is not the Golden Days for qbs. We have 3 or 4 guys who are legit starters & the rest are replaceable or will soo be replaced. We know Matt Nichols isn't Reilly or BLM. We also know Bethel-Thompson & Pipkin aren't as good as Matt Nichols. Matt's good enough to win a Grey Cup with his surrounding cast. Tom Burgess won a Grey Cup for us & Nichols is very similar.

[AKAChip]

11 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

You've missed my point entirely. My point is that the era we're in is not the Golden Days for qbs. We have 3 or 4 guys who are legit starters & the rest are replaceable or will soo be replaced. We know Matt Nichols isn't Reilly or BLM. We also know Bethel-Thompson & Pipkin aren't as good as Matt Nichols. Matt's good enough to win a Grey Cup with his surrounding cast. Tom Burgess won a Grey Cup for us & Nichols is very similar.

That was your point? Sure as hell didn’t seem like it. 

Like I said earlier, this isn’t going to be productive. I completely agree this is a terrible era for CFL QBing. I suppose with a good enough team, any QB no matter how bad is capable of winning a championship. That doesn’t make me comfortable that Nichols won’t blow it. The Bombers had four(!) first downs last night that weren’t caused by an Edmonton penalty. Nichols completed five passes in the first half. It’s not sustainable in the CFL to have your defence not allow a single touchdown. 

Do not misconstrue this as being unhappy with winning a game. But Nichols isn’t even good enough to be considered a “game manager”, a term he clearly takes offence to. For every game where he’s unspectacular but good enough, there’s at least one where the team literally wins in spite of him or loses because of him. That’s what happened at the Banjo Bowl, it’s what happened in the WSF and it will certainly happen again. It wouldn’t be as big a big deal if we didn’t have a 29 year drought and a roster that is likely the best in the league at nearly every other position. We’re 2-0 and I’m very happy, but yesterday’s game is a blow out with competent QB play. Even with the two Harris fumbles. You lose that game 9 out of 10 times but because the D was amazing and we hung on for dear life Nichols can’t be criticized for a terrible performance? 

Edited June 29, 2019 by AKAChip

[SpeedFlex27]

15 minutes ago, AKAChip said:

That was your point? Sure as hell didn’t seem like it. 

Like I said earlier, this isn’t going to be productive. I completely agree this is a terrible era for CFL QBing. I suppose with a good enough team, any QB no matter how bad is capable of winning a championship. That doesn’t make me comfortable that Nichols won’t blow it. The Bombers had four(!) first downs last night that weren’t caused by an Edmonton penalty. Nichols completed five passes in the first half. It’s not sustainable in the CFL to have your defence not allow a single touchdown. 

Do not misconstrue this as being unhappy with winning a game. But Nichols isn’t even good enough to be considered a “game manager”, a term he clearly takes offence to. For every game where he’s unspectacular but good enough, there’s at least one where the team literally wins in spite of him. That’s what happened at the Banjo Bowl, it’s what happened in the WSF and it will certainly happen again. It wouldn’t be as big a big deal if we didn’t have a 29 year drought and a roster that is likely the best in the league at nearly every other position. We’re 2-0 and I’m very happy, but yesterday’s game is a blow out with competent QB play. Even with the two Harris fumbles. You lose that game 9 out of 10 times and because the D was amazing and we hung on for dear life Nichols can’t be criticized for a terrible performance? 

The same thing was said about Tom Burgess in 1990. That he was a journeyman. That he was a crappy qb. That he couldn't win games without a great defense backing him up.  We were a low scoring team. We had talent offensively surrounding Burgess but we had trouble finding the end zone. The Eskimos were massive favourites to beat us in the GC that year & We. Kicked. Their.  Ass.  I see huge parallels to that team.

Edited June 29, 2019 by SpeedFlex27

[AKAChip]

Okay, and how many great teams have been brought down by mediocre or worse QB play since 1990? For every Burgess or Crandell, there are a ton of Drew Tates, Jon Jennings, Nealon Greenes, etc. That’s the whole point. Just because crappy QBs very occasionally win Grey Cups doesn’t mean you should count on it to happen. I recognize there’s a shortage of great QBs in this league but when it counts, the better QB usually wins. Nichols at his worst is as bad as any terrible QB in the league. And his best is light years worse than the best QBs. 

Edited June 29, 2019 by AKAChip

[Mr Dee]

We only had one game that Edmonton used to base a game plan on..and they followed it. 15 targets at Fenner. New expression. We’re Fenerable. Work on it D.

 

[Bigblue204]

10 hours ago, AKAChip said:

That was your point? Sure as hell didn’t seem like it. 

Like I said earlier, this isn’t going to be productive. I completely agree this is a terrible era for CFL QBing. I suppose with a good enough team, any QB no matter how bad is capable of winning a championship. That doesn’t make me comfortable that Nichols won’t blow it. The Bombers had four(!) first downs last night that weren’t caused by an Edmonton penalty. Nichols completed five passes in the first half. It’s not sustainable in the CFL to have your defence not allow a single touchdown. 

Do not misconstrue this as being unhappy with winning a game. But Nichols isn’t even good enough to be considered a “game manager”, a term he clearly takes offence to. For every game where he’s unspectacular but good enough, there’s at least one where the team literally wins in spite of him. That’s what happened at the Banjo Bowl, it’s what happened in the WSF and it will certainly happen again. It wouldn’t be as big a big deal if we didn’t have a 29 year drought and a roster that is likely the best in the league at nearly every other position. We’re 2-0 and I’m very happy, but yesterday’s game is a blow out with competent QB play. Even with the two Harris fumbles. You lose that game 9 out of 10 times and because the D was amazing and we hung on for dear life Nichols can’t be criticized for a terrible performance? 

So here's the thing, people a nitpicking stats. Nichols has a history of being a game manager who doesnt take chances....sure, I agree.  He also has a history of LEADING an offence that scores more points then any other team....by a large margin.

So while completing 5 passes a half isnt the greatest strategy, there is literally nothing in the past that suggests it will continue. His past performances suggest, for the majority of time anyways, that he will put points on the board more effectively than other teams. Can someone show me a stat that's more important?

[Mr Dee]

“It’s kind of an inside thing between me and Strev (Chris Streveler),” said Nichols afterward. “We always talk about how nice it is when you watch other guys get freebie touchdowns and how we haven’t had many of those here in the past. I kinda just looked right at him and ‘Yeah, there was one.’ It’s something that you don’t expect that to end up as a touchdown. He’s a difference maker to be able to turn something like that into a touchdown.”                                        *EdTait

He’s referring to this:

 

 

[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.

[Fatty Liver]

19 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

We only had one game that Edmonton used to base a game plan on..and they followed it. 15 targets at Fenner. New expression. We’re Fenerable. Work on it D.

 

Thar's some brutal evidence, I'd be amazed if Fenner lines up on the corner for their next game.

[Bigblue204]

2 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Thar's some brutal evidence, I'd be amazed if Fenner lines up on the corner for their next game.

Yeah might be time to see what Rios can do