Bombers acquire Zach Collaros

[66 Chevelle]

20 hours ago, Noeller said:

The Nichols that went 9-2 this year is not the guy you're describing.....now, is he gonna be the same guy following this injury? That's the question...

wow, now he's winning games that he didn't even play in! that's pretty remarkable! lol...

[bearpants]

22 hours ago, CodyT said:

As for Collaros.. if he comes in and wins Winnipeg a Grey cup it's hard not to give the guy another chance at a job. Winnipeg waits 29 years and it's potentially ZC who wins it... straight out of a movie. 1st round pick is hard to swallow though and as a tough business might be too big an asset to give up 

A lot of people seem to forget that Collaros also needs to want to come back... he may already have his mind made up that he's going back to S Ont... 

5 hours ago, The Ghost of Mike Kelly said:

Prior to Nichols, do people remember the QB situation? Or the coaching situation prior to the MOS stability era?

this is kind of the argument I made about Nichols even when he was going through rough patches... Winnipeg was a desolate wasteland for QBs from 2009 to 2015... Matt Nichols at his worst is better than anything we had in that time frame... not spectacular, but efficient and good enough to lead the team to victories... should the team strive for better? of course... but you don't throw away a good QB just because he's not a "great" QB...

[instigater]

2 minutes ago, bearpants said:

A lot of people seem to forget that Collaros also needs to want to come back... he may already have his mind made up that he's going back to S Ont... 

this is kind of the argument I made about Nichols even when he was going through rough patches... Winnipeg was a desolate wasteland for QBs from 2009 to 2015... Matt Nichols at his worst is better than anything we had in that time frame... not spectacular, but efficient and good enough to lead the team to victories... should the team strive for better? of course... but you don't throw away a good QB just because he's not a "great" QB...

Like some genius did in 2008 with Kevin Glenn 

[Pigskin]

I think matt is okay, but ZC8 has given the bomber fans a look at what are receivers can do when the QB can bye some time with his legs, and doesn't just check down or throw the ball away the first sign of trouble. ZC8 also looks like he has a stronger arm then Matt. A little more zip on the ball. 

[Arnold_Palmer]

I just went through the first page and had a good laugh! 👀

[MOBomberFan]

1 minute ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

I just went through the first page and had a good laugh! 👀

Yep hindsight makes this thread and the western semi GDT pretty funny reads

[JCon]

1 minute ago, Arnold_Palmer said:

I just went through the first page and had a good laugh! 👀

I stand by my statement! 

 

[Blueandgold]

Everyone using Nichol's record as an indicator that he's a great QB need a reminder that Michael Bishop once went 11-1. 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Blueandgold

[Jpan85]

Just now, Blueandgold said:

Everyone using Nichol's record as an indicator that he's a great QB need a reminder that Michael Bishop once went 11-1. 

Nichols has done it over 4 yrs not one that's not a fair comparison

[Blueandgold]

3 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

Nichols has done it over 4 yrs not one that's not a fair comparison

Sure it is, I'd argue that Bishop had more to do with the Argos 2007 record than Nichols did with the Bombers 2019. Nichols is a classic game manager who can keep a team afloat, but he's not a needle mover.

[blue_gold_84]

2 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

Sure it is, I'd argue that Bishop had more to do with the Argos 2007 record than Nichols did with the Bombers 2019. Nichols is a classic game manager who can keep a team afloat, but he's not a needle mover.

Sure... if you want to use a single season as a means to justify whatever weak point it is you're trying to make, that's your prerogative. But looking at an entire body of work is probably more reasonable than what you're doing.

And it's not just the record he has as a starter. His personal stats since he joined this team give him a 97.4 QB rating (and his QB rating this season was 107.2). Saying he isn't a needle mover is absolutely, unequivocally incorrect. Just because he doesn't light up the field the same way Reilly or Harris does doesn't change that.

[The Ghost of Mike Kelly]

If LaPo leaves this offseason, I wouldn’t mind seeing what Nichols can do under a Buck Pierce offence. Or Collaros for that matter. So long as Buck starts every team meeting with the words “Slide Feet first.” 

[66 Chevelle]

when this is where you are throwing the ball you had better have a high QB rating...

[trueBlue83]

22 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

Nichols has done it over 4 yrs not one that's not a fair comparison

on the back of Andrew Harris...to think Nichols would have had the success he did with a mediocre running back, is an argument I'd love to hear!

[The Ghost of Mike Kelly]

3 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said:

on the back of Andrew Harris...to think Nichols would have had the success he did with a mediocre running back, is an argument I'd love to hear!

Augustine looked fine while Harris was suspended. I think our success on the ground goes beyond him. Although PED or not, I do think Harris is a great back. 

[Blueandgold]

9 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said:

Sure... if you want to use a single season as a means to justify whatever weak point it is you're trying to make, that's your prerogative. But looking at an entire body of work is probably more reasonable than what you're doing.

And it's not just the record he has as a starter. His personal stats since he joined this team give him a 97.4 QB rating (and his QB rating this season was 107.2). Saying he isn't a needle mover is absolutely, unequivocally incorrect. Just because he doesn't light up the field the same way Reilly or Harris does doesn't change that.

The fact that Zach Collaros in one year has won more playoff games than Matt Nichols in three years might change that. If we had a QB who was a needle mover, we easily beat Calgary in the Western Final last year. 

Are we in the Grey Cup if Nichols is still our starting QB? I highly doubt it.

[The Ghost of Mike Kelly]

2 minutes ago, Blueandgold said:

The fact that Zach Collaros in one year has won more playoff games than Matt Nichols in three years might change that. If we had a QB who was a needle mover, we easily beat Calgary in the Western Final last year. 

Are we in the Grey Cup if Nichols is still our starting QB? I highly doubt it.

Probably not. But Collaros looked pretty flat in Riderville. Could he sustain his current form over a whole season and then into Playoffs? Or would he end up being Nichols 2.0? 

[Tiny759]

20 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

when this is where you are throwing the ball you had better have a high QB rating...

Isn’t this where we get to blame Lapo? 

[66 Chevelle]

Just now, Tiny759 said:

Isn’t this where we get to blame Lapo? 

oh, they go hand in hand for sure... but to achieve the rating you have to be the one throwing the ball... so to use a QB rating to say someone is good you have to take into consideration where he throwing the ball... though the location is more on Lapo than Nichols, it's about completing passes to get the rating... when you're throwing on avg shorter that 3 yds you had better have a high rating....

[66 Chevelle]

3 minutes ago, Tiny759 said:

Isn’t this where we get to blame Lapo? 

but all of those red and blue dots beyond the 10 yd line, that's all Nichols...

[Tiny759]

3 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

oh, they go hand in hand for sure... but to achieve the rating you have to be the one throwing the ball... so to use a QB rating to say someone is good you have to take into consideration where he throwing the ball... though the location is more on Lapo than Nichols, it's about completing passes to get the rating... when you're throwing on avg shorter that 3 yds you had better have a high rating....

Yes I know what a qb efficiency rating is. Probably should have made it clearer that my comment was meant as a joke. More to point out the hypocrisy that when Nichols throws for low numbers it’s all on him, but when someone else does it, it’s all in Lapo.

[Tiny759]

4 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

but all of those red and blue dots beyond the 10 yd line, that's all Nichols...

All the green and yellow ones must be due to him too? Or is that a case of Lapo being brilliant 

[trueBlue83]

Just now, Tiny759 said:

Yes I know what a qb efficiency rating is. Probably should have made it clearer that my comment was meant as a joke. More to point out the hypocrisy that when Nichols throws for low numbers it’s all on him, but when someone else does it, it’s all in Lapo.

Streveler put up numbers similar to Nichols, but had rushing yards stacked on top of that.  Passing game was limited, probably from a lack of trust to take shots down field.  It seems pretty clear that LaPo has a lot of trust in Collaros' arm+brain combination!

[trueBlue83]

20 minutes ago, The Ghost of Mike Kelly said:

Probably not. But Collaros looked pretty flat in Riderville. Could he sustain his current form over a whole season and then into Playoffs? Or would he end up being Nichols 2.0? 

you just want LeFors back!!  

[66 Chevelle]

here's the thing that kills me about Lapo and Nichols... it's relying on Harris to be out in the flat to catch that screen pass... oh, it's great for keeping Nichols numbers up but they suck as a play... you know why he's always open there? because the defense is giving us that play because it sucks... we'd be better off having Harris stay in the back field and block and have Nichols try to complete a play down field because...  getting 3 yds on a screen pass when it's 2nd and 8 still equals a punt... that play is not better than throwing the ball out of bounds...