Old Bomber Fan

Not sure why we would even consider Glenn. In training camp and based on last year's performance as well as that in training camp we had Streveler, McGuire, Bennett and Nichols. Now Nichols goes down and we released Bennett because our coaching staff determined that Streveler and McGuire were the better two of the last three behind Nichols. Okay so you have a half season to go should Nichols not return. I would hope that the decision of the backup QBs was based on something other than standing around holding a clip board. These two guys now have a chance to show us and the coaches that they made the right decision. As has been said many times before next man up so why change at QB. I think Streveler given some quality reps with the first team, McGuire given some reps as well will bode well for us down the stretch. If they both continue to develop as the season winds down, we are at the half way point right now, we should win a few more games and get us into the playoffs. Hopefully by that time they will be well conversant with the play book and be more comfortable reading defenses etc. My big concern isn't so much how these two will develop but rather can or will Lapo change his game plan to suit their strength and develop their confidence with a play book designed for them. He did it for Nichols, dink, dunk and once in awhile, last game example, toss it deep as a change of pace, so why can he not do that for these two. Steveler has a gun, albeit not as accurate right now as one would hope, but he can run and throw on the run as well. McGuire in the short period of time we have seen him can also throw it good and has a good escape ability. So we have a cushion to work with. Let's see what happens and should Nichols be able to return prior to the end of the season or the playoffs then let him take over again with a short leash. We all know when he returns from injury he isn't the same as when he left. Time will tell.

For many years but never have I seen a DB drop back that far with no one in the near vicinity, actually surprised me

Strevelers mechanics may be odd but he gets the ball away quickly and for the most part accurately. My concern is his confidence. Last night he did not seem confident, looked confused at times. With that said he is a horse and can run when he sees no one open. I think he will do well with more reps at practice. McGuire looks a lot smoother and has an equally good arm. As has been the case with the bombers for years, maybe decades, they cannot or at least do not develop QBs and would rather cherry pick someone from another team. We have two now who have showed a great uprise but the big question is can and will they develop them or lose them to another team or will they simply drop out of sight.

Totally agree saw open receivers but he obviously didn’t. Hope he is okay though never want to see anyone hope. On another note Fenner is a big problem in our backend. Reilly targeted him often and was successful in most cases. Watched on one play Fenner dropped off the line by 20 yards on one play that resulted in an easy reception for good yards and a first down. Overall defense took over game O struggled after first two series and Streveler didn’t look sharp in fact looked confused on more than 1 play. we will see next week and the following 2 a test of time

All games have three phases, last night was no exception. The defense played okay not great. They did have some individual efforts that saved the day but really it was Calgary receivers not catching the ball similar to our receivers. The special teams won the game plain and simple. 14 points on punt returns deducted from the score and we lose. The offense did not score a touchdown, only field goals and one great effort from Medlock. Had he missed that 55 yarder again we lose the game. We constantly talk about the offense and how predictable it is, and I believe that to be the case. I am finding it increasing difficult to determine who is to blame the most....Nichols or Lapo, or are they equally to blame. Mathews was good when running slants and posts not curls. He was better I believe as a WR not a SB. I do agree that Nichols cannot read the defense or his receivers. As has been mentioned he looks at target 1 then looks for Harris 2-3 yards away. Unless this changes, Harris will burn out or get hurt, should we make it to the playoffs and that seems reasonable, we will get smoked by the opposition DC because anyone can predict what plays will be called when. And the play calling, well he may have the most offensive stats in the league so far but it is a different ball game come playoffs and we have seen this movie before. BUT good luck don't take BC lightly, think we already did with Toronto.

While I agree with everything said here about Nichols I can't help but believe it isn't just him alone. Yes he can't seem to read defenses, can't seem to go through progressions but I think another part of it is the play calling and how limited he is with it. Yes I don't think he can throw an accurate long ball except on occasion only but the play calling is not good when it should be. As for our back up I don't think he is being groomed well enough to become a #1. He has all the tools but is being limited in what he can do and while I'm not at practice I doubt he is being taught the nuances that are required in this league. After all he did come direct from college to CFL only last year. We will see I guess.

I watched the game again last night and a couple of questions popped into my head....as empty as it might be. Then reading this thread and the last couple of comments confirmed I think what I was thinking. Lapo calls and develops a game plan NOT TO LOSE instead of WINNING. His play calling when the team is up in the 4th quarter is so conservative it leads to 2 and outs consistently giving the bull over to the opposition and putting the D on the field far too long. In addition it doesn’t create or take away momentum which at that juncture is huge. Secondly the comments regarding Nichols and his lack of vision sure stand out when watching the game the second time. He has come to rely on Harris not just as a last resort but as his secondary receiver. Neither of these are good for success. Thirdly it seems to me that his arm strength is not anywhere close to the Toronto QB. He’s on the run or going down and can gun the ball 10 yards or more with apparent ease. Nichols on the other hand can barely get it to the sidelines and it seems to take a long time to get there. Combine the three and as it has been said before we will get a winning record and bow out in the first round. i find it interesting that a guy like Harris QB that is can come into an different organization and throw for over 300 yds consistently, a guy like the Toronto QB can throw for over 300 often and the same can be said for many in the league yet Nichols has trouble getting close to 300 being in the same system for what 5 years now? Is it home or Lapo or perhaps a combination of both.

I do agree with the Mathews plus and minus as a receiver. He has been both in the cfl and nfl a very good receiver at the wide out position. His ability to go straight or diagonally downfield is his strength. His speed and height make him a desirable target in those situations. We currently have or should I say had Adams in that spot. Unless lapo designs an offence to accommodate both in that role someone is either going to sit or play our of position and in an inferior manner. I don’t believe other than the Tdbto Adams did I see a receiver catch a ball in stride moving up field or diagonally upfield, they seemed to be all curls posts or a dump to Harris to save a sack or something. That is bad game planning or bad reads by the QB. in any event dare I say you will see a different team come Thursday. One other observation was on the defence. Seemed to me that while Bighill was flying all over the place the middle of the field was wide open. Further he seemed to be very late on many of his blitz’s. Hopefully it is just rust because I’m afraid if it isn’t and had Masoli been in the entire game, we would be shell shocked today from their exploiting the middle of the field. He did it very well for the what 10 mins he played.

First game this year I have seen so many bomber receivers within 5 yards of one another. Doesn’t take much to understand someone is running the wrong routes OR the play design is crazy! With that said Nichols was not good...why....only he can tell us. In any event if he plays like this in “big” games we will get to the playoffs and exit prior to western final. I don’t put all the blame on Nichols but instead distribute it to a Lapo and Nichols. Poor game plan and poor execution.

Class move by the bombers

Let’s not count our chickens before they hatch shall we? Just sets everyone up for a huge deflation should they by chance lose and then everyone will be pointing fingers at whomever because it was their fault or his etc. While Toronto’s record is not stellar they are not as bad as what is suggested here. Be cautiously optimistic just a thought

We won the game and I guess that is all you can ask for. With that said wonder how many more we can win like that....TOP huge disparity, bad play calling when we needed it most, way too many yards against and only by the fact Edmonton receivers started dropping balls did we survive, and the old standard Nichols who seems lost at times (holds onto the ball too long, thinks he is a scrambler and some bad decisions throwing). Hope that isn’t a sign of pressure getting to him. Lastly ball distribution....7 to lucky a couple to demski one to Peterson one to Adams? Personally your most reliable Wol....(sorry for spelling) 0? End result we won but not sure how many more playing like that

I would concur with the list with one exception. QB. While I agree that Ploen was a great QB and really don’t disagree I think that the various eras have to be considered as well. “Indian Jack Jacobs” was likely the most dominant QB of that era and while he may not have won as many grey cups as Kenny he at least in my opinion was as significant as Kenny in his era. Nonetheless a good selection of players from the beginning to now.

If we are talking QBs then what Strev has shown in his short time behind centre suggests he is a far better QB than Nichols....quicker decisions, better arm, better running, and spreads the ball around much better. However if you include the OC into the equation it may well be a different conversation. Many who have watched LAPO years ago see the same tendencies even today......he does not game plan for big strikes it’s all short and dump so he may well hinder what the QBs including Strev can and will do. With that said I totally agree from what I have seen Strev is a better QB and with some experience he will show he is a prototypes CFL QB. My hope is that both the OC and HC realize what they have....develop him and make sure he gets playing time so he doesn’t bolt to the NFL after this season. Make him feel wanted he seems like a real down to earth kid!

Casey; Rowland; and Bolton in that order. As I mentioned before it is hard to measure present day players with the past as so much has changed, playing both sides of the ball is only an example.

Glad to see that consideration is being given to yesteryear players. There are many during my younger years that come to mind for consideration but must state the game was much different back then....consider Herb Gray, Buddy Tinsley, Leo Lewis Jerry James to mention a few. An interesting exercise but think the eras of football cannot be compared equally

Seems we have wine a Grey Cup in 2011 with Laporte as head coach! I know he did win one as OC with Saskatchewan but never with bombers or as a head coach fact checking required btbTSN!

Their defensive game plan was to make Nichols beat them with his arm. Every DC in the country knows if you take away Harris you can beat us with a relative degree of ease if the other 2 phases play well. It is a combination of Lapo and his play calling and Nichols inability to throw accurately consistently like say a Reilly or a mitchel or a Harris.

I agree with those who have said we were out coached today. The players played hard especially the defence and Harris. Our offensive game plan did not to be one where we attack aggressively but rather just don’t make a mistake! I don’t believe I have ever seen a QB throw the ball away as much and seldom throw downfield. It is either the OC or the QB. Another question I have is why was #12 returning punts and the best in the CFL was not? Was Fogg hurt, did I miss something, or was this another coaching blunder? i also believe Bighill was hampered by his hand. All in all not an unexpected loss but a loss nonetheless. Defences can will titles but the offence has to contribute a little. 4 field goals doesn’t cut it sorry

When I wrote they were the worst team I wasn’t referring to the bombers but Montreal. Regardless everyone who was saying how great we were and how great our talent was say the same things year after year without considering other teams improve as well. Our problem is our coaching and I’ve said it hat from day one! Many said give him a chance and now we have given them, all the coaches, what 4 1/2 years and what do we have to show for it! He still does not have a winning record while the likes of Campbell and jones have out coached him each year and even jones tore up a sask team and rebuilt it in two years....and I’m a bomber fan! It sure says a lot about our head office and more particular our head coach

Sorry guys it is hard to convince me that it was a great win. They are the worst team in the league and we are now in last place in the west. At the rate we are going and considering our schedule going forward we will not make the playoff. The rose coloured glasses are off!

I think any coach who bends to the wishes of the fans, like us, is not a good coach. With that said any coach who cannot see that their offense has stalled, continues to stall in the second half of what the last 3 games, and does absolutely nothing about it other than try to justify it through stats, also is not a good coach. So either way you look at it MOS is not really a good coach and frankly doubt he will ever bring a Grey Cup to Winnipeg.

Personally I believe a coach can be a "player's" coach as well as a disciplinarian. The biggest asset any coach can have is an ability to communicate to the players and his staff. In that communication he has to make sure they (referring to all including coaches) understand the standards he expects of them and the consequences should they not be met. Unfortunately I believe MOS can communicate with his players and his staff but unfortunately has not been able to communicate the standard expected or the consequences if not achieved. Instead he seems to defend in public for sure but not sure in the room or the coach's offices. This I believe is the big problem. I have seen coaches over the years who are both player coaches (Riley for one) and disciplinarian (Murphy for example) and then some that were both (slot in Grant). They were all successful and I think it was because they followed through with the consequences. Setting short term and long term goals for players and the team itself is standard coaching 101 but in setting them they have to be realistic, attainable and consequential. I haven't seen that from MOS to date.

the reason we lost was because our OC cannot develop a game plan other than throw it 5 yards. To even suggest that throwing the ball across the field 20 yards for a 5 yard potential gain is why we lost the game. That is coaching my friend nothing else. As far as Nichols not being able to throw it more that 10 yards might be valid however a game plan game in and game out that does not stretch the field and is very predictable results in what you see. I won't comment on the D but we cannot sustain a drive in the 4th quarter nor can we stop the opposition in the same situation so what does that say.....to me the coaches cannot adjust or game plan against various opponents.

Guess the point may be people are upset not only because of the loss but the way they lost......a very similar pattern not only this year but in recent years as well.