Atomic
-
Posts
10,182 -
Joined
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by Atomic
-
-
well no in fact, that is quite incorrect. If you want to use just one game as the comparison then We got some very high points. 250 yards is not a good game by a qb by any stretch, it's adequate only if your runningback has picked up tons of yards or your defense is insanely good.
The best single games by a bomber qb in the last few years came from Elliott, on average he was better than PIerce last season as well.
Elliott sucked
-
School doesn't start til September, bring in Johnny Aprile
-
Sorry, Pierce gets zero credit for our last win, he is lucky we won that.
61.3%, 250+ yards, and a couple TD drives of 60+ yards each.
That is good enough QB'ing to win with a good defence, which is all we need. More than we ever got from Elliott, that's for sure.
-
well considering eliott did not have the most ints it shouldn't be that hard. I'm not saying it was a high bar, I'm just saying that Elliott set the bar and Pierce hasn't reached that level.
One more win and he will be at the same level
-
he has the most ints in the league, he's got a bottom 2 efficiency rating...
Wait are you talking about Pierce this year or Elliott last year, hard to tell
-
Third worst QB rating in the league, and least TDs thrown by a starter.
http://cfl.ca/statistics/league/stat/Passing/year/2013/type/reg
2012 Elliott -> Worst QB rating in the league (20+ attempts)
-
because neither brink or pierce (the other qbs who have got significant playing time lately) have been able to even do that much! With Pierce it's 2 and outs all game save for a couple drives! That's how low the bar is set here!
Third most passing yards in the league
-
We should have won that home game against BC last year, that we lost on the last play of the game to a FG. I know Lapo takes part of the blame for his conservative vanilla play-calling, but Elliott should have delivered that game. He had multiple chances to put it in the endzone and didn't.
Exactly, and that's the whole point. If Elliott manages to put the ball in the endzone even once, there are no opportunities for bad coaching decisions or defensive breakdowns because he put the points on the board and won the game. But it just didn't happen.
I just love how the Elliott boosters' main argument is that he was great at moving the ball until he got into the redzone, like that is something to be proud of. And then they put on their coaching hats and tell us how easy it is to fix.
-
The only times That the offense didn't move down the field were Labour day and in Calgary. Other than that, yes Elliott was quite good at moving the ball, much better than either Pierce or Brink have been at it at any time since halfway through 2011. The issues he had were in a couple games he threw interceptions once they got close to scoring range. IT wasn't a failure to move the ball, it was turning it over when they had a chance to put points on the board. An issue, but a far lesser issue in my mind than a complete inability to actually move the ball because at least if a guy is just throwing the ball in bad places at the wrong time you can work on that. Much easier to take away those few bad throws than trying to make a qb able to do anything right.
Buck Pierce has already led a longer drive this season than Elliott did all of last season.
Elliot was awful only on Labour Day and in Calgary? How about the Banjo Bowl when Elliott was given the ball on the Rider side of the field multiple times and never got a sniff of the endzone? How about week 14 against Toronto when he threw 3 interceptions?
Pierce is bad, Elliott was worse. I agree we have a QB problem but I don't agree it would be any better with Elliott still here.
-
I hear you, but that's all correctable. Joey had some real drive, he could move the ball, and showed confidence in the way he played (for better or for worse). He didn't throw a tight spiral every time, he didn't spot every open receiver, and he wasn't speedy... but **** me if he didn't get first downs when we needed them.
He absolutely did NOT get first downs when we needed them, or else we would have had more wins.
People seem to have this skewed memory of Elliott in which he was a star that drove up and down the field all day, when nothing could be further from the truth. He was given great field position time and time again and coughed up the ball or stalled drives and caused us to go for field goals. People's hate of Pierce is causing them to build Elliott up into some kind of star when he was actually nothing more than slightly below average.
Also love how everyone talks about all his "easily correctable" flaws like they actually have a clue how easy it is to coach up a QB.
-
Pierce only has to win 2 more games to beat Elliott's win total as a starter last season (in 9 games started), not exactly a lofty goal but it's the standard laid down by the guy everyone here is crying about cutting. I'm sure Pierce can do better than that.
-
I doubt Edwards dresses... 4-man is likely Kowalczuk, Edwards, Woods, and one of Fitzgerald, Lucas, or Thomas.
-
not until we get a better option at the position.
We already have one, Elliott was terrible
-
-
-
Charleston Hughes is one of the most dominant players in the league.
Good point, don't know how we could forget about him. He is just about as complete a DE as you will find in the CFL. He does it all.
-
*EDIT* If Pierce played as well as Glenn the Bombers would be 12-6 or 11-7 no problem. With Pierce he's either hurt or it'll be 6-10.
Glenn tried his hardest to lose that one. Once again. All he's good for is an opening drive and then a bunch of 2 and outs.
-
I gotta say, I'm thinking Als win in this one. I don't think they're as bad as the Bombers made them look and they will bounce back.
36-25 Montreal.
-
Hufnagel was SHOPPING Glenn around... he wasn't trying to dump Glenn, he was trying to get maximum value for him.
Sure nobody jumped on giving up something valuable to make Glenn their starter, who knows how much Hufnagel wanted for him... maybe Huff's price was too high rather than Glenn value too low.
Look where Calgary is at now - Glenn starting with Tate on the sidelines again... Glenn provides Calgary with a LOT of value since it seems obvious that Mitchell isn't quite ready to be their guy yet.
And if Glenn is still the guy at QB in November, we know Calgary won't be winning the Grey Cup. Exactly my point.
-
Nobody wants him as a starter? I'm pretty sure Edmonton would take him, Winnipeg would as well most likely if we could get him for free.
It wasn't like Glenn was released by Hamilton and Calgary was the only team who came calling to offer him a backup job - he was traded and told he was being brought in to be a reliable backup in case their new starter didn't work out or got hurt.
I wouldn't be shocked to see Glenn named the starter in Calgary if Tate has another injury that knocks him out for the season. (I.E. Calgary might give up on Tate and make Glenn their guy until Mitchell is ready to go)
That's all speculation. If a team wanted him as their starting quarterback they could have had him.
-
http://www.cfl.ca/roster/show/id/269
http://www.cfl.ca/roster/show/id/3653
really think it's not true after comparing that?
And even with those pretty stats no one wants him as a starter... hmm must be a reason for that
-
Watson getting a lot of love
-
I can see what you're getting at... but why Glenn over and over, when he's one of the LEAST likely guys that would end up here.
Forgot to add probably, that yes, Glenn is a better QB than Pierce in our system. Sad that Calgary's backup is better than our starter...
It would be sad if it were true, yes.
-
I wonder how much they're paying Shomari Williams to sit on the bench and have 0 special team tackles
Argos @ Bombers Gdt -- Game Day: We All Play
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
I had a dream last night that we will get off to a hot start tonight, 11-0 in the first quarter.
But I also dreamed that Oscar from the Office played for the Argos, Doug Brown was back with the Bombers, and they were wearing orange and blue.
So I don't know how reliable that dream was.