Cusp

[Atomic]

Buck has more yards per completion and a higher completion percentage.  The numbers don't lie, sorry guys.  I know you all hate Buck Pierce but Pierce being bad doesn't equal Goltz being good.  Sorry, doesn't work that way.

[Mike]

Buck has more yards per completion and a higher completion percentage.  The numbers don't lie, sorry guys.  I know you all hate Buck Pierce but Pierce being bad doesn't equal Goltz being good.  Sorry, doesn't work that way.

 

He's also throwing an interception almost once every 20 pass attempts compared to a touchdown once every 50+, which is absolutely horrendous for a QB of any level.

[Mr Dee]

Well now that you've explained it, and backed it up with facts no less, the next game's starter should definitely be............

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Justin Goltz.

[Atomic]

He's also throwing an interception almost once every 20 pass attempts compared to a touchdown once every 50+, which is absolutely horrendous for a QB of any level.

 

Tough to throw TDs when the offence calls for a running play any time we're within ten yards of the endzone.  There's a reason the Bombers lead the league in rushing TD's.  And it's not because we have a deadly running game.

 

His TD numbers would obviously be higher if they had him throw in that area.

[Atomic]

Well now that you've explained it, and backed it up with facts no less, the next game's starter should definitely be............

 

Justin Goltz.

 

Agreed.  Just trying to throw some cold water on the people who think Goltz is suddenly a better QB than Pierce.  Goltz is a better option because he's not a band-aid and he has upside.  Not because he's a better QB right now.

[AKAChip]

Now you're changing the argument.  I'm talking about right now, not how he projects in the future (which you and I have no way of knowing).

Fair to a degree, but the difference between a seven year veteran and a player in their second career start should be a little larger to warrant not giving the younger player playing time. Buck wasn't winning games and he wasn't playing well. Goltz hasn't won a game and isn't playing all that well but to say Buck would have won these games is preposterous and does nothing but set the franchise in the wrong direction.

[Atomic]

Fair to a degree, but the difference between a seven year veteran and a player in their second career start should be a little larger to warrant not giving the younger player playing time. Buck wasn't winning games and he wasn't playing well. Goltz hasn't won a game and isn't playing all that well but to say Buck would have won these games is preposterous and does nothing but set the franchise in the wrong direction.

 

Sure.

 

But people might be wise not to get too excited about Goltz.  I remember watching him in training camp a couple years ago thinking "Wow, this guy has a lot of tools, I bet he could be good if he can ever hone his accuracy."  Because he was overthrowing guys as often as he was hitting them.  A couple years later, he still looks pretty much the same as he did then.  I'm sure he's improved in other areas, especially mentally, but if anyone thinks he's going to shake his accuracy issues any time soon... well don't hold your breath.

[voodoochylde]

Try watching him in warmups before a game .. one thing I've noticed is that he tends to throw behind his receivers a fair bit .. granted it's only pregame but those same tendencies were on display in both the Calgary and BC game ..

[iso_55]

Goltz is a young guy who is going to make mistakes & learn from it. But, still a long way from being a long term starter. The Bombers want to give him a chance to see what he can do right now. He either runs with it or he fails. Time will tell.

[Mark H.]

Outside of Calvillo and Ray, none of the CFL starters are always accurate. Certainly not Glenn, Burris, or Durant.

[voodoochylde]

Outside of Calvillo and Ray, none of the CFL starters are always accurate. Certainly not Glenn, Burris, or Durant.

 

In the clutch, nobody can hit a wide open defender for a pick six like Glenn.  He's money. 

[Atomic]

Outside of Calvillo and Ray, none of the CFL starters are always accurate. Certainly not Glenn, Burris, or Durant.

 

True but even on a bad day those guys aren't finishing games with less than 50% of their passes completed.

 

Yes Goltz is young.  But improvement isn't guaranteed.  All we can really say is that he's not there yet... maybe someday you can talk about him in the same vein as Glenn, Burris or Durant, but he's not there yet.  Not by a long shot.

[iso_55]

True but even on a bad day those guys aren't finishing games with less than 50% of their passes completed.

 

Yes Goltz is young.  But improvement isn't guaranteed.  All we can really say is that he's not there yet... maybe someday you can talk about him in the same vein as Glenn, Burris or Durant, but he's not there yet.  Not by a long shot.

Goltz can only wish he can be compared to Glenn who is a 13 year veteran instead of Elliott & Brink all who stunk the joint out as pros with Winnipeg. This hate for Glenn is crazy & misguided. We'd be a competitive team with Glenn right now so keep cracking jokes about him because all we do is lose with the qbs we've had that are soooooo much better. Glenn's playing for a winner with actual coaches who know what they're doing & not for the clown show here.

[saskbluefan]

No doubt the Bombers should start Goltz next game, the game after, and for the foreseeable future.  It's the responsible thing to do for the organization. 

 

But if there was a game tomorrow for my life, of the two, I would want Buck to start it.  Goltz level of innacuracy in BC was almost Bishopian.  Just my opinion though. 

 

More importantly, Crowton sucks.  But can we please not go down the road of it's all his fault.  Like we would be a contender if this guy or that guy was our OC.  Enough with the simple solutions.  The problems on this team are elbow deep.  Nay, shoulder deep.  They go beyond the OC, or the last HC/OC, or the OC before that.   

[pigseye]

60.4% vs 57.7% accuracy.

 

Receivers have dropped passes from both.

 

As far as decision making, fast doesn't always equal right.  Can't believe I have to explain that.  Goltz had the lowest gain per pass in the league in that last game because he continues to throw it too early.

 

lol, you can't argue facts with a group of sexual intellects.

[kelownabomberfan]

lol, you can't argue facts with a group of sexual intellects.

Oh I disagree.  So does she:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sz8Sx5KzHc

[Zontar]

Cusp.

 

Sounds like a cereal.

[pigseye]

Oh I disagree. 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ    

[kelownabomberfan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfr64zoBTAQ    

 

That just sent me to some Rick Astley video from the 1990's?  What was the point of that?

[kelownabomberfan]

Cusp.

 

Sounds like a cereal.

 

or half a tooth.

[pigseye]

That just sent me to some Rick Astley video from the 1990's?  What was the point of that?

 

 

I'm crying I'm laughing so hard K........you've been rick rolled brother.

[kelownabomberfan]

I'm crying I'm laughing so hard K........you've been rick rolled brother.

 

and I'm crying I'm laughing so hard that you didn't think I knew that.

[Jacquie]

I'm crying because this and another thread seem to have been taken over by a grade schooler.

[pigseye]

I'm crying because this and another thread seem to have been taken over by a grade schooler.

 

Oh lighten up, it beats bitchin and complaining about the state of the team for a change.

[17to85]

60.4% vs 57.7% accuracy.

 

Receivers have dropped passes from both.

 

As far as decision making, fast doesn't always equal right.  Can't believe I have to explain that.  Goltz had the lowest gain per pass in the league in that last game because he continues to throw it too early.

when you compare the differences in completion percentage it amounts to 3 completions different over the same number of attempts... now do you have stats for drops? Cause without them you can't really make a good comparison. Let's say this.... their completion percentage for all intents and purposes is equal. Pierce has thrown more ints (ie. more bad decisions) he has taken way way more sacks (slower decisions, less mobility) what exactly are you trying to prove in regards to this argument? Do you really think you have proven anything about the effectiveness of Pierce vs. Goltz? Goltz makes less mistakes, completes the same number of passes essentially AND adds a huge amount of mobility and makes quicker decisions. Considering that one guy is a 9 year CFL veteran and one guy has 2 career starts this really is a no contest.