Nash00
-
Posts
502 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Nash00
-
-
Just now, Super Duper Negatron said:
Reading Paul Weicek's article today, and he made this statement:
"The special teams — which had been wildly inconsistent — stepped up in a big way against Hamilton." - http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/cancel-the-priest-the-bombers-are-recovering-389204871.html
Have I been asleep all season, or is that statement not even remotely true?
This statement is based on the assumption that Wiecek watches the games and/or knows what he is talking about. I would argue otherwise on both counts.
- Wanna-B-Fanboy, Jimmy Pop, Goalie and 3 others
-
6
-
4 minutes ago, wbbfan said:
Thats the type of attitude that leads to long losing streaks. You dont often get that many turn overs and amazing returns on teams leaving you starting at center field all day/
NO game in the cfl is over at the half. One needs only look back to last week edm and ham to see that.
I'm not suggesting that MOS shouldn't be breaking down the 2nd half and making corrections, absolutely he should and he will. He isn't going to pat Nichols on the back and say he played a perfect game when he didn't. I'm saying as a fan, I look at it as we took advantage of our opportunities in the 1st half and protected the ball in the 2nd. The turnovers didn't just fall into our laps either, we have to make the plays when they come. You referenced earlier the dropped INT from Hamilton, well CJ Roberts didn't drop his chance and we scored. Loffler didn't drop his and we scored off that too, ditto the Cole forced fumble. Plays made by the D led to points by the offense.
Fan perception has no bearing on team performance, I'm fairly certain.
-
6 minutes ago, 17to85 said:
Going deep isn't the be all and end all of aggressive play calling. To me aggressive is more about taking risks and the Bombers did not do that at all in the 2nd half, but you expect that when you're up that big. trouble is the Bombers do that if they're up by only a little too.
I thought we seemed to get away from what was working in the first half, short to intermediate throws on first down and getting the ball out quick. We also had success with hurry-up in the first half as well. You aren't going to run hurry-up with a lead in the second half but the quick hitters seemed to stop. We could have ran a few screens to Harris too but he was in pass pro for those longer passes.
-
2 minutes ago, White Out said:
My excitement wouldn't be dampened by one bit if Willy was back in at #1 and was helping us win games. Not a bit. I like to win, I like when my team wins, and losing sucks. Period. That's why I'm glad Willy is the backup .. he isn't a winner. And history shows that. You're also creating a strawman there for me, suggesting I want the team to lose because of Willy. Untrue.
Not suggesting you are actively wanting the team to lose because of Willy, more so genuinely interested to see what the priority was. You mentioned that you were happy Willy was exposed.
Willy has started under 30 games in his career, that equates to less than 2 full seasons. He has shown flashes but injuries have derailed his career. Nichols has had similar opportunities in Edmonton with similar results and the talent he had to work with in Edmonton eclipses what Willy had here by a mile.
I think Nichols should be the starter here until his play warrants otherwise, but to say Willy isn't a winner based on 30 games is premature. Who was Willy throwing to compared to the rest of the league? How about his o-line play? It's generally accepted that both those issues have dogged this team since Willy got here, doesn't that affect the bottom line?
-
5 minutes ago, bearpants said:
the penalties in the second half were getting frustrating... I think we had 4 major fouls in the half... that is inexcusable under any circumstances...
That is probably the most frustrating aspect of the 2nd half. The major fouls are all things that can be controlled and it was a lack of discipline across the board. Bryant's penalty took us from 2nd and medium to 2nd and long and if it wasn't for Maher not knowing how to loft a kickoff the Westerman penalty could have had larger implications. Those are easy things to clean up and they need to be. We won't always have a 26 point cushion.
-
18 minutes ago, Brandon said:
Loffler had a nice game but he only got the pick because the ball bounced off of Fogg's head. IMO on defense Fogg had the best game.
Denmark for sure coming in on a few days notice played solid.
He still needed to make the play on a tip drill against a sure handed receiver in Fantuz. Full mark to Loffler for awareness and outworking Fantuz for the ball.
No argument on Fogg though, he was brilliant. (He does need to work on those hands though)
-
Just now, White Out said:
I don't think you have a very good grasp on me. The last 2 weeks have been my favourite Bomber football in years. Willy has been exposed and the team is winning. What more could I possibly ask for? I don't care if MOS stays, in fact, I predicted that he likely has job security now for the remainder of the season.
I'm borderline feeling Bomber joy
Based on the wording of this post, you seem to take as much if not more joy in Willy failing than the Bombers winning. You even mention it first before the fact the team is winning. Again this logic drives me nuts.
If Nichols were to be injured next game and Willy comes in and rides the wave of momentum we have right now and plays well, will you be as satisfied or will that damper the excitement?
Willy may not be a world beater but he hardly seems like the kind of player you would actively wish failure upon ON YOUR OWN TEAM. Save the vitriol for domestic abusers like Rainey in BC or when Greg Hardy ends up playing in Sask.
-
2 minutes ago, wbbfan said:
your right. Which is just over half the length of the field. that 7 play drive was also our longest iirc. in every other game this year that would have had us in fg range. Our td drives came from there 10, our 43 and there 39.
Mean while we punted after starting from our 55, kicked a fg after starting on the hamilton 17, and a fg after starting from the ham 37. punt after starting at our 41, fg after starting at our 54,
Point is, nichols put up points but in situations he should have, and with gift wrapped field position left a ton of point on the field.
Meh, I'm not going to moan about lost opportunities in a game we won by 26 points. Maybe there will be a time when it matters but no point labouring over hypotheticals.
Willy was put in similar situations this year with less results, and I am a Willy fan. You can argue he didnt have the best circumstances in the first few weeks but can anyone say what Nichols had to work with last night was ideal?
I don't understand why the fanbase has to be fractured over the starting QB. If Justin freakin' Medlock is the starting QB and we win I don't care. Wins are rare in these parts, hopefully one day we can dissect every missed opportunity but right now I'm going to enjoy the win for what it was.
-
11 minutes ago, wbbfan said:
nichols had 3 drives over 30 yards and none over 60 yards.
The drive where Mayo scored was a 67 yard drive.
-
15 minutes ago, Brandon said:
I was blown away that they didn't pull Masoli early on... his passes in the first half were atrocious. We missed out on a few more ints.
He also was helped out big time by Tolliver making shoe string catches and Fantuz making touch catches on terrible throws.
There was one really nice catch by Tolliver on the sidelines where Fogg played perfectly and forced him out of bounds. I didn't think he had a chance in hell of catching that ball but sure enough he did. One of those ones where you have to tip your cap to the WR.
Masoli was extremely lucky he didn't have more INT's. The one where he threw off his back foot to the sidelines to Watt I believe where Johnson and Frederick(?) were in the area should have been picked.
-
1 minute ago, Goalie said:
Not sure if it was the play calling or just lack of execution in the second half, cuz it seemed like Nichols was certainly trying to go deep quite a bit, I'm sure he had other outlets he could have thrown to but he went deep quite a bit, perhaps trying to run the score up, but... i'd prefer if they just played the quick passing game and sprinkle in some runs quite abit to keep the clock moving. The game was over at half tho. You could actually see it on the ticats players faces, the game was over. There was no way the cats were coming back. Not a chance. They were done.
Yeah the last few plays leading to the half they panned the Ticat sideline and those guys looked defeated. They had nothing going for them at that point, halftime was the best thing that happened to them.
One has to wonder now, does this get Winnipeg any respect across the league as a legitimate threat? Last week in Edmonton, no one expected us to win and that was warranted. Not only did we win but we did so in convincing fashion. This week, we had 3 new receivers in and hadn't beat HAM at home, hadn't won 2 in a row since 2014 etc. and we blew the doors off of them. This one was over after Masoli's first throw. So after pounding two pre-season favourites back to back, does that buy us a little respect?
-
1 minute ago, TBURGESS said:
That surprised me too. I wouldn't have put Masoli back in after the half.
Me as well. I guess his rationale is that Collaros will be back next week so let Masoli get as many reps as he can before he is relegated back to the bench? Maybe he thought Masoli could pull of a miracle in back-to-back weeks and by the time they realized it wasn't going to happen there was no use putting Mathews in?
-
2 minutes ago, Arnold_Palmer said:
Fun fact. McDuffie actually has a better return average then Brandon Banks.
Banks was dancing and going backwards all night. I didn't hear Rod Black say Speedy B once, how refreshing.
-
Just now, HardCoreBlue said:
Matt Dunnigan put it well last night about having that Killer instinct.
I was thinking about sportmanship and easing off when we were up 34-0 but as soon as Matthews threw the ball in the end zone and Fantuz kicked the ball in the stands, I knew right there, no feeling sorry for the opponents, play like it's 0-0.
Yeah I agree.
I remember when Don Matthews used to run it up on us and as much as I hated him for it, you are professionals. Don't want them to score? Stop them.
I can understand Fantuz was probably more frustrated than anything else and his frustrations manifested into the punt, but the backup QB who scores on the 1-YD sneak to bring the game to within 3 TD's? Check yo-self, son.
-
1 minute ago, JuranBoldenRules said:
McDuffie costs us field position far too often by letting the ball hit the turf. He doesn't make up for that with great returns either. Personally I'd try to find a better receiver to take a DI spot or promote Flanders to return kickoffs and give Harris some snaps on the sideline.
I`ll agree to disagree on this one. Maybe my eyes are fooling me but he always seemed to be getting decent yardage on punt returns.
-
5 minutes ago, bearpants said:
I would have like to have seen at least one TD drive in there... of only in prep for the games where we're holding a 7 point lead rather than a 34 points lead...
The drive where we kicked the FG to go up 37-11 comes to mind here. 2nd and short and we run a toss to Harris that was doomed from the start. We stacked the left side and I was really hoping we would run a corner route to the endzone or at least use levels to force the DB to pick and worst case we find the guy underneath for the 1st down.
-
4 minutes ago, HardCoreBlue said:
And what was nice always broke the first or second attempted tackle.
Maybe I'm in the minority here but I think McDuffie has done a nice job of speeding past first contact and getting upfield. Don't get me wrong, Fogg has been outstanding in relief but I think McDuffie is still a good use of the DI spot.
-
3 minutes ago, bearpants said:
just curious if you saw that hold on Knox?... I watched the replay and all I saw was Knox basically touching the arm of the defender around the time the flag was thrown... not sure if that was the actual penalty... but if it was, calling that borderline would be generous...
I didn't see it. I think that the refs are being reactive on some of these occasions. They see a big play and they look for anything at all to warrant throwing the flag. Knox was guilty of looking like he might have done something so there goes the flag. I think a ref would sooner call back a good return than let one score when there actually was a hold/illegal block.
-
Just now, JuranBoldenRules said:
Doesn't really need to be called IMO. Inconsequential to the play and nothing really with intent behind it, hand in wrong place. Ref easily could have easily let Green know he saw it and that he can't do that.
Sure they COULD. But for whatever reason refs like to call the ticky tack stuff on returns, and then the league has to add new rules to allow the returners to score more often. There's an easy fix in there somewhere.
-
1 minute ago, JuranBoldenRules said:
Much prefer Fogg to McDuffie. Catches the punts effortlessly and protects the ball.
Should have 2 TD's in basically 2 games returning, both brought back for marginal (being generous) calls once he was already gone.
The holding call last night yes, but the hands to the face call on Green was obvious. Just a stupid decision on that one.
-
1 minute ago, bearpants said:
According to the Riders depth chart they started 3 on D and 4 on O... which is the ratio they would need to maintain throughout the game... In order to track it I guess someone would have to go through every play and count the players on the field... this actually legitimately sounds like a fun activity (if I had the time and access to film)...
Get Eric from BomberBuzz who PDF'ed every play for the Bombers/Stamps game a while back to do it!
-
2 minutes ago, Ripper said:
It looks bad on any team, the Canada's team thing is a media hype thing. I think lots of people don't like Jones so this is just another thing to jump on him about. I've also never heard of a team getting a fine this large. I wish the commissioner had some balls when it came to qb's getting hurt with illegal hits. I would like to know more about this, when?, how many plays?
I'm not familiar with the CBA but does the commish have Goodell-like authority to impose whatever he feels like for fines or is it mandated by the CBA? It would be nice to see any illegal hit to the QB to be subject to a possible heavy fine/suspension.
-
Just now, Mr Dee said:
Im still thinking about that great ST call from MOS to have Derek Jones fake blocking, slide over and rush the punter for the block.
Perfectly executed!
MOS the special teams coordinator is no slouch. Once we let Tracey go, the performance on teams have been night and day different.
-
1 minute ago, Ripper said:
There is no excuse to not have the correct amount of Canadian's playing. I think the fine is hefty enough if it was a few plays. If it was more than a few plays and the team won the game, I agree they should forfeit the win. Rules are rules. I agree with you but then again I'd like to know more about the storey. I am not making excuses for Jones, he is not a rookie and is being paid more than enough money to f'n know the rules
It's also a bad look on the Riders in general. For a team that brands itself as "Canada's team"* it doesn't reflect well on them to not employ the correct number of Canadians.
*Maybe it's just Rod Pedersen, but he's an employee so that counts.
OK, it IS Willy ...
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
Again, he made the plays he needed to when the situation arose. We scored TD's on 2 of the first 3 drives. Game was over effectively at that point.
Nichols wasn't great in the 2nd half, he didn't need to be. He was very efficient in the first half, you can't really argue otherwise.
Good team win all around. Nichols was bad in the 2nd half and the D gave up 300+ yards to Masoli who was hot garbage all night. The teams were the real superstars.