WSF

[J5V]

CONGRATS to the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for making the post season for the 4th straight season. While a first place finish and a bye to the WF is not possible this year a berth in the WSF is guaranteed. To be determined is our opponent and whether or not we will be hosting the game. Since we have a bye the last week of the season we can only be interested spectators.

THE POSSIBILITIES

If BC beats Calgary then Sask's game against Edmonton is meaningless as the Riders will have locked up first place and will host the WF. We would host the WSF against Calgary.

If Calgary beats BC and Sask beats Edmonton then the Riders secure first place and host the WF and we will be going to McMann to play the Stamps in the WSF.

If Calgary beats BC and Edmonton beats Sask then Calgary gets first place and will host the WF and we would be going to Mosaic to play the Riders in the WSF. 

We could be playing this WSF in Winnipeg, Regina, or Calgary. I hope I got that right.

WHO STARTS?

I don't think Zach Collaros is our starting QB by default. If Streveler is healthy he may get the nod. The concern with Zach is his ability to withstand a nasty blow to the head. In a playoff game I don't think it's a reach to suggest that, given the opportunity, someone is likely to risk it and test Collaros' melon if it means they can get him out of the game. The stakes are high.

Depending on weather conditions, Streveler and his running ability may be the determining factor in who starts. Streveler's durability is not to be understated however, if he is unable to move the ball, he may be on a short leash. I can easily see a scenario where Zach takes the 1st and 2nd down snaps and Chris comes in to run the 3rd down conversions and perhaps run a few plays out of the hurry-up. Lots of possibilities here.

I don't think there's any chance that McGuire starts. He is strictly an insurance policy. 

There's a lot to be decided yet and even once we know who we are playing and where we are playing them, I don't think it's a for-sure thing as to who starts, and how long the leash is.

THIS IS IT!

Not since this regime took control of this football team has there been this level of expectation to win and win now. A one-and-done and some fans will be looking to clean house. Even a WSF win and another loss in the WF may not be enough to save everyone. Expectations are definitely high. The future of this regime and it's supporting cast hang in the balance.

HOW THE OPPOSITION MEASURES UP

Calgary has not shown themselves to be the powerhouse they have been in previous years. Sask has surprised but they have had some good fortune with the schedule and the timing of when they have faced their opponents. They are a good team with a fortunate record. The Bombers are certainly capable of beating both these teams.

OUR CHANCES

The only real negative for the Blue and Gold is that they are going into this playoff season without their veteran leader and #1 QB, Matt Nichols. But with a bye the last week of the season the Bombers are going to be rested and should be well prepared for a strong playoff run. Collaros played very well in beating Calgary last week. Streveler has had a chance to develop and has shown flashes. The Bombers are staring at a golden opportunity to finally make it out of the West. This might be the year it all comes together.

[Mr Dee]

Well, Zach has won in Calgary before...

[Noeller]

I'm confused by Irving's tweet....is Couture in a walking boot? What exactly is his injury?

[Mr Dee]

59 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I'm confused by Irving's tweet....is Couture in a walking boot? What exactly is his injury?

I took it to mean, he’s likely to play in the semi-final..

[Fatty Liver]

6 hours ago, J5V said:

CONGRATS to the Winnipeg Blue Bombers for making the post season for the 4th straight season. While a first place finish and a bye to the WF is not possible this year a berth in the WSF is guaranteed. To be determined is our opponent and whether or not we will be hosting the game. Since we have a bye the last week of the season we can only be interested spectators.

THE POSSIBILITIES

If BC beats Calgary then Sask's game against Edmonton is meaningless as the Riders will have locked up first place and will host the WF. We would host the WSF against Calgary.

If Calgary beats BC and Sask beats Edmonton then the Riders secure first place and host the WF and we will be going to McMann to play the Stamps in the WSF.

If Calgary beats BC and Edmonton beats Sask then Calgary gets first place and will host the WF and we would be going to Mosaic to play the Riders in the WSF. 

We could be playing this WSF in Winnipeg, Regina, or Calgary. I hope I got that right.

WHO STARTS?

I don't think Zach Collaros is our starting QB by default. If Streveler is healthy he may get the nod. The concern with Zach is his ability to withstand a nasty blow to the head. In a playoff game I don't think it's a reach to suggest that, given the opportunity, someone is likely to risk it and test Collaros' melon if it means they can get him out of the game. The stakes are high.

Depending on weather conditions, Streveler and his running ability may be the determining factor in who starts. Streveler's durability is not to be understated however, if he is unable to move the ball, he may be on a short leash. I can easily see a scenario where Zach takes the 1st and 2nd down snaps and Chris comes in to run the 3rd down conversions and perhaps run a few plays out of the hurry-up. Lots of possibilities here.

I don't think there's any chance that McGuire starts. He is strictly an insurance policy. 

There's a lot to be decided yet and even once we know who we are playing and where we are playing them, I don't think it's a for-sure thing as to who starts, and how long the leash is.

THIS IS IT!

Not since this regime took control of this football team has there been this level of expectation to win and win now. A one-and-done and some fans will be looking to clean house. Even a WSF win and another loss in the WF may not be enough to save everyone. Expectations are definitely high. The future of this regime and it's supporting cast hang in the balance.

HOW THE OPPOSITION MEASURES UP

Calgary has not shown themselves to be the powerhouse they have been in previous years. Sask has surprised but they have had some good fortune with the schedule and the timing of when they have faced their opponents. They are a good team with a fortunate record. The Bombers are certainly capable of beating both these teams.

OUR CHANCES

The only real negative for the Blue and Gold is that they are going into this playoff season without their veteran leader and #1 QB, Matt Nichols. But with a bye the last week of the season the Bombers are going to be rested and should be well prepared for a strong playoff run. Collaros played very well in beating Calgary last week. Streveler has had a chance to develop and has shown flashes. The Bombers are staring at a golden opportunity to finally make it out of the West. This might be the year it all comes together.

The Edm./Sask. game will be over before the Stamps/Lions game begins this Saturday, so that may alter the Stamps roster and their interest in winning the game.

[TBURGESS]

8 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

The Edm./Sask. game will be over before the Stamps/Lions game begins this Saturday, so that may alter the Stamps roster and their interest in winning the game.

They still need to win to get a home playoff game, so I doubt it changes their roster or their interest in winning the game. 

[Mark F]

After what we saw with Collaros, and streveller last few games, I think Collaros will be the QB.

[JCon]

Just now, Mark F said:

After what we saw with Collaros, and streveller last few games, I think Collaros will be the QB.

I can see Lapo trying some sort of scheme to get both them many plays. 

[Mark F]

1 minute ago, JCon said:

I can see Lapo trying some sort of scheme to get both them many plays. 

why not both in there at once? seriously.

Would that not significantly confuse a  defence ?

[JCon]

Just now, Mark F said:

why not both in there at once? seriously.

Would that not significantly confuse a  defence ?

You can't have 2 QBs on the field at the same time. 

[Mark F]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

You can't have 2 QBs on the field at the same time. 

didn't know that rule.

[JCon]

Just now, Mark F said:

didn't know that rule.

Neither did I until MOS said so last night on the Coach's Show. 

[Mark F]

could you pull a receiver, say Adams, and put Streveller in as a receiver? then line up in backfield?

[Jpan85]

No you cant here is the rule:

Article 4 — Designated Quarterback

Prior to the game, a team is required to designate three players who shall be permitted to alternate for each other during the game at the Quarterback position exclusively. Not more than one such player may be in the game at any time and none of the three can enter the game as a member of Team B.

PENALTY: L25 PLS DR or L25 PBD or option.

NOTE: For the purposes of this Article 4, the duties of the Quarterback position may include punting, place kicking and kicking off. If a team designates three Quarterbacks for a game, the player designated as the third Quarterback shall not be eligible for kicking duties.

NOTE: A team is required to have one designated quarterback or kicker on the field for each of its offensive plays.

[Sard]

21 minutes ago, Jpan85 said:

No you cant here is the rule:

Article 4 — Designated Quarterback

Prior to the game, a team is required to designate three players who shall be permitted to alternate for each other during the game at the Quarterback position exclusively. Not more than one such player may be in the game at any time and none of the three can enter the game as a member of Team B.

PENALTY: L25 PLS DR or L25 PBD or option.

NOTE: For the purposes of this Article 4, the duties of the Quarterback position may include punting, place kicking and kicking off. If a team designates three Quarterbacks for a game, the player designated as the third Quarterback shall not be eligible for kicking duties.

NOTE: A team is required to have one designated quarterback or kicker on the field for each of its offensive plays.

Thanks for this Jpan, that's great info.  It raises another question (that likely would never come up in a game).  I wonder if a Quarterback was ever put in as a place kicker, would that mean that one of the other QBs wouldn't be allowed to hold for him?

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, TBURGESS said:

They still need to win to get a home playoff game, so I doubt it changes their roster or their interest in winning the game. 

Right, I forgot about them potentially ending up in 3rd, still it would not be a surprise if they choose to rest some starters.

[MC]

16 minutes ago, Sard said:

Thanks for this Jpan, that's great info.  It raises another question (that likely would never come up in a game).  I wonder if a Quarterback was ever put in as a place kicker, would that mean that one of the other QBs wouldn't be allowed to hold for him?

The only regular QB/kicker that I remember was Sonny Wade.  But I think he was just a punter.

No, wait - Don Jonas.  No idea who held for him.  I think it might have be the person who was then known as Ralph Brock.

[bearpants]

13 minutes ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Right, I forgot about them potentially ending up in 3rd, still it would not be a surprise if they choose to rest some starters.

Maybe in the fourth quarter when they're up by 30... but I doubt they'd put any risk in this game...

[J5V]

2 hours ago, Jpan85 said:

No you cant here is the rule:

Article 4 — Designated Quarterback

Prior to the game, a team is required to designate three players who shall be permitted to alternate for each other during the game at the Quarterback position exclusively. Not more than one such player may be in the game at any time and none of the three can enter the game as a member of Team B.

PENALTY: L25 PLS DR or L25 PBD or option.

NOTE: For the purposes of this Article 4, the duties of the Quarterback position may include punting, place kicking and kicking off. If a team designates three Quarterbacks for a game, the player designated as the third Quarterback shall not be eligible for kicking duties.

NOTE: A team is required to have one designated quarterback or kicker on the field for each of its offensive plays.

I read this to mean that there is nothing stopping Streveler from going in as a running back/tight end/receiver while Zach is the designated QB. If Chris happens to pull up and throw the ball before he crosses the line of scrimmage so be it. I wouldn't want to be a DC trying to deal with something like that. Would give a D fits.

[Fatty Liver]

1 hour ago, bearpants said:

Maybe in the fourth quarter when they're up by 30... but I doubt they'd put any risk in this game...

Perhaps Shawn Lemon can break on through.....one...last....time, and drop a 250 lb anvil on BLM's throwin elbowt.

[JCon]

2 minutes ago, J5V said:

I read this to mean that there is nothing stopping Streveler from going in as a running back/tight end/receiver while Zach is the designated QB. If Chris happens to pull up and throw the ball before he crosses the line of scrimmage so be it. I wouldn't want to be a DC trying to deal with something like that. Would give a D fits.

But they take the players normal position. You can't, all-of-a-sudden, claim Streveler is WR or RB. Won't fly. 

[JCon]

Just now, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Perhaps Shawn Lemon can break on through.....one...last....time, and drop a 250 lb anvil on BLM's throwin elbowt.

Right on the elephant! 

[J5V]

2 hours ago, Mark F said:

After what we saw with Collaros, and streveller last few games, I think Collaros will be the QB.

Agree. My concern is that we have all seen Streveler takes some late, dirty, hellacious head shots, especially while he was defenseless at the bottom of a scrum. Defenses will take liberties with a QB to try to get him out of the game. The Simoni Lawrence hit on Zach being a perfect example. I don't see Zach surviving many of those. 

[J5V]

2 minutes ago, JCon said:

But they take the players normal position. You can't, all-of-a-sudden, claim Streveler is WR or RB. Won't fly. 

True. I'm suggesting you don't use Streveler as a QB. Designate Collaros as the QB and use Strev as a psuedo-QB. 

[JCon]

Just now, J5V said:

True. I'm suggesting you don't use Streveler as a QB. Designate Collaros as the QB and use Strev as a psuedo-QB. 

Steveler will be designated a QB, regardless of where you want to play him. Effectively, he can't be called a RB or WR or CB.