Matt Nichols Discredited Too Much? Passing Yards Are Meaningless

[Bigblue204]

1 hour ago, J5V said:

Two QBs were playing against two good defenses. You would expect the seasoned veteran QB to outperform the backup from the other team.

An argument could be made that he did.

[Guest J5V]

5 hours ago, 17to85 said:

So here is where professional athletes are different than Joe blow athlete... they do this for a living, part of that pay cheque comes from the ability to overcome adversity and overcome poor play. It doesn't happen every time, but that is what they get paid to do. 

True, but not all players are the same. Coaches need to learn how their players handle situations like that. If a player shows an inability to overcome adversity the coach needs to know this and get him out of there for his sake and the team's.

[Tracker]

8 minutes ago, Bigblue204 said:

An argument could be made that he did.

Not a strong argument- the second half stats do not flatter Nichols. Each team scored 6 points.

[Guest J5V]

5 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Not a strong argument- the second half stats do not flatter Nichols. Each team scored 6 points.

Frankly I would rather O'Shea had let the backups battle it out than to see Nichols struggle the way he did in that game. It would have been a great development opportunity for Streveler and would have given Nichols a chance to relax, sit and watch, and support his team mate. 

[Goalie]

Just now, J5V said:

Frankly I would rather O'Shea had let the backups battle it out than to see Nichols struggle the way he did in that game. It would have been a great development opportunity for Streveler and would have given Nichols a chance to relax, sit and watch, and support his team mate. 

Why? We we were down by like a TD and 2 point convert. Lost by 11. We weren't out of the game. 

[Guest J5V]

2 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Why? We we were down by like a TD and 2 point convert. Lost by 11. We weren't out of the game. 

I guess we were watching a different Nichols. To me he looked uncomfortable for most of the game. At no point did it look like he had found his mojo. But you're right, that game was there for the taking. 

[Doublezero]

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time Nichols engineered a come from behind win?

[Doublezero]

36 minutes ago, Tracker said:

Not a strong argument- the second half stats do not flatter Nichols. Each team scored 6 points.

The Bombers didn't play great but I blame Nichols for the loss mostly.  His turnovers resulted in 10 points for Hamilton.  We lost by 8. 

[TrueBlue4ever]

4 minutes ago, Doublezero said:

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time Nichols engineered a come from behind win?

Last year at home to Calgary in game 17, which got us into the playoffs,

[Mark H.]

In my opinion, our OTs Bryant and Hardrick have had amazing durability. However, Hardrick was clearly struggling last game.  They really need to find someone who can competently replace Manase Foketi, so our OTs can get time off when they need it.  That was the biggest factor in Friday’s loss. 

[Fatty Liver]

3 minutes ago, J5V said:

True, but not all players are the same. Coaches need to learn how their players handle situations like that. If a player shows an inability to overcome adversity the coach needs to know this and get him out of there for his sake and the team's.

I think Nichols weakness may lie in balancing his emotions, and that's not an easy or a quick fix.  I believe that was one of the keys to Ricky Ray's game, he was a great technician who never got too high or too low, no matter how it was going, rarely smiled, rarely cried.  

Nancy Greene once said that she didn't win a World Cup ski race until she stopped worrying about the results and learned to detach herself from the stress that trying to win created, after that change in attitude she won two World Cup Championships, two Olympic medals and retired at 24.   

[Guest J5V]

2 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

I think Nichols weakness may lie in balancing his emotions, and that's not an easy or a quick fix.  I believe that was one of the keys to Ricky Ray's game, he was a great technician who never got too high or too low, no matter how it was going, rarely smiled, rarely cried.  

Nancy Greene once said that she didn't win a World Cup ski race until she stopped worrying about the results and learned to detach herself from the stress that trying to win created, after that change in attitude she won two World Cup Championships, two Olympic medals and retired at 24.   

Ricky Ray always looked like he had been there before and that nothing was a big deal. 

I'm not surprised to hear that about Nancy Greene. I'll bet she'd also say that winning the second championship was much easier than winning the first for the same reasons you have cited. 

NHL goalies get pulled. MLB pitchers get pulled. Sure they don't like it, but they support the guy coming in to replace them and they understand its about the team and winning. They don't lose their jobs and the coach or manager always gives them an encouraging word and a pat on the back and thanks them for putting the team first. I don't see why it can't be the same in football. 

[trueBlue83]

9 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

Last year at home to Calgary in game 17, which got us into the playoffs,

just re-watched the highlights from that game... the Bombers took the lead with 4 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.  Hardly a clutch come from behind game winning drive.  Thinking back though, if Nichols has generated such a drive at all, it was maybe in his first season as a Bomber??  I don't recall it ever happening.

They just had Stegall on TSN Radio this morning, and he was commenting about how himself & Henry Burris both need to see Nichols have an outstanding game where he throws for 300+ and wins one through the air when the running game isn't working "because that's what great QB's can do", and went on to say that they have yet to see this out of Nichols.

The Calgary game... seems to be a 1 / 15 kind of performance for Nichols.  He's capable of doing it, yes. But the stars have to align, and he doesn't seem to be capable of doing it consistently.  That's the most frustrating thing about his game to me.  Consistently showing that he can be a threat downfield and break a game open at any moment.  Opposing defences aren't worried that Nichols is going to get in there and drive the field with his arm when it's needed.

[Mark H.]

17 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said:

just re-watched the highlights from that game... the Bombers took the lead with 4 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.  Hardly a clutch come from behind game winning drive.  Thinking back though, if Nichols has generated such a drive at all, it was maybe in his first season as a Bomber??  I don't recall it ever happening.

They just had Stegall on TSN Radio this morning, and he was commenting about how himself & Henry Burris both need to see Nichols have an outstanding game where he throws for 300+ and wins one through the air when the running game isn't working "because that's what great QB's can do", and went on to say that they have yet to see this out of Nichols.

The Montreal 2 TD comeback - of course. 

[TBURGESS]

I think Nichols is a streaky QB. When things are going good, he can be lights out. When 1 thing goes bad it tends to snowball.

In the Hamilton game, Nichols badly wanted to continue his completion streak and they called the easiest ball to complete, the sweep dressed up as a pass. That one was dropped. Next play Nichols overthrows his receiver big time for a pick, almost a pick 6. Once he threw his 3rd pick, it was time to give Streveler a chance while we still had time to win the game.

[JCon]

2 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

I think Nichols is a streaky QB. When things are going good, he can be lights out. When 1 thing goes bad it tends to snowball.

In the Hamilton game, Nichols badly wanted to continue his completion streak and they called the easiest ball to complete, the sweep dressed up as a pass. That one was dropped. Next play Nichols overthrows his receiver big time for a pick, almost a pick 6. Once he threw his 3rd pick, it was time to give Streveler a chance while we still had time to win the game.

We still had a chance to tie it with a minute left. So, what's your point? 

[TBURGESS]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

We still had a chance to tie it with a minute left. So, what's your point? 

That Nichols 'didn't have it' in the game so he wasn't going to get the big comeback. That's the perfect time to give Streveler a chance, especially against a defence that doesn't defend the run consistently.

[JCon]

Just now, TBURGESS said:

That Nichols 'didn't have it' in the game so he wasn't going to get the big comeback. That's the perfect time to give Streveler a chance, especially against a defence that doesn't defend the run consistently.

Marched the team down the field to score. Dropped a perfect pass in for Demski who drops it. 

 

"Didn't have it" is the stupidest argument based on nothing but your bias. We have a chance to tie it late in the game and you want to pull our starting QB who had a perfect record this season and is probably the MOP leader? Wow, you truly hate Nichols and will say anything to get him out of the game. 

[TBURGESS]

Just now, JCon said:

Marched the team down the field to score. Dropped a perfect pass in for Demski who drops it.

"Didn't have it" is the stupidest argument based on nothing but your bias. We have a chance to tie it late in the game and you want to pull our starting QB who had a perfect record this season and is probably the MOP leader? Wow, you truly hate Nichols and will say anything to get him out of the game. 

Threw 3 picks. Wasn't seeing the field properly. Was taking big chances like throwing into double coverage. Played his worst game since last years Banjo bowl.

I don't hate Nichols but even you have to admit that was his worst game of the season. If you don't it's your bias showing, not mine.

Yah. I'd have pulled him after the 3rd pick because he wasn't playing well. The perfect record and MOP don't trump the fact that he wasn't playing well in the game.

[Wanna-B-Fanboy]

23 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

 Once he threw his 3rd pick, it was time to give Streveler a chance while we still had time to win the game.

No way- keep him in there and let him either work through the adversity and get a win or own the loss. Putting Strevs in there is not a good move- he loses, he shares the blame. He wins, it glosses over the ugliness of the game and fails to underscore the work that needs to be done to get better. I can honestly envision some posters coming on here after the win complaining about how "we didn't deserve the win", "strevs bailed out Nichols", "the other team played better", "we are not as good as our record", "ham and egger" and the list goes on... 

So yeah- I think it was the right call to leave Nichols in there. 

[Jpan85]

14 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Threw 3 picks. Wasn't seeing the field properly. Was taking big chances like throwing into double coverage. Played his worst game since last years Banjo bowl.

I don't hate Nichols but even you have to admit that was his worst game of the season. If you don't it's your bias showing, not mine.

Yah. I'd have pulled him after the 3rd pick because he wasn't playing well. The perfect record and MOP don't trump the fact that he wasn't playing well in the game.

That is false he made the right read but threw a bad ball. Those guys were open the ball just sailed on him.

[do or die]

Both the OC and the QB, seemed to have a bad case of the yips, when we fell behind early.   Poor game plan, (Lapo) executed poorly (Nichols)

[Noeller]

I'm not going to do the digging to find it, but a few weeks ago, there was an article about Nichols...I want to say it was a Tait piece......where MN talked about how the biggest thing he did in the off-season was get more into the psychological aspect of the game. He said he's really learned how to not get too high and not get too low and just keep an even keel throughout the game and immediately following. He says all QBs talk about "flush this one and move on" immediately after a game, but admits that it's easier said than done. But said he had some help in the offseason with the mental part of things and feels a lot better equipped this year, in that regard. 

It was an interesting piece, anyhow...

[Fatty Liver]

29 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I'm not going to do the digging to find it, but a few weeks ago, there was an article about Nichols...I want to say it was a Tait piece......where MN talked about how the biggest thing he did in the off-season was get more into the psychological aspect of the game. He said he's really learned how to not get too high and not get too low and just keep an even keel throughout the game and immediately following. He says all QBs talk about "flush this one and move on" immediately after a game, but admits that it's easier said than done. But said he had some help in the offseason with the mental part of things and feels a lot better equipped this year, in that regard. 

It was an interesting piece, anyhow...

So he says, but thank gawd that loss occurred in Hamilton and not at home, it seems Nichols can't buy an ounce of slack from a Wpg, audience.  There always seems to a segment of the crowd primed to boo at his first sign of failure.

[JCon]

Just now, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

So he says, but thank gawd that loss occurred in Hamilton and not at home, it seems Nichols can't buy an ounce of slack from a Wpg, audience.  There always seems to a segment of the crowd primed to boo at his first sign of failure.

They boo him when he succeeds too.