Jaxon

I don't believe the Bombers pump in crowd noise. 
That being said, it is illegal to play music/ make announcements etc after the offence has broken the huddle.

Frankly, Fajardo showed more "game" than the guys around him

a lot of this stuff about the crowds goes back to my long-held belief that we actually have more die-hard fans who are intelligent football fans. They definitely have a lot more "casual" fans that buy all the green gear because it's trendy to do so, but in terms of the true die-hards, who stick around through thick and thin, I really and truly believe we have a lot more of those. They don't need to be told when to make noise and when NOT TO make noise....they just understand football. 

first star La Police.

HEe needs reps and experience....he actually sits in pocket way better than last year already...and once he gets used to coverages..and reads...he will get even better...he gets antsy at times, but thats because he is seeing things a lot of times for first time...so isn't processing right away and is still thinking...he gets more time under center..the thinking will dissappear, and it will be reaction and instructive execution taking over..it takes time , and it's not as advanced as we would have liked to date, but it's also because he hasn't been allowed to do this until....now
All his appearances up to last week he has been in on stupid gimmickey stuff, and limited play selection...what would you expect about his pocket awareness having no real work in the pocket to go through reads?
 

I think he mostly gives the team a similar opportunity to win as Nichols.  He needs to learn from his mistakes and and think he will.  He was playing against two of the top pass rushes in the league and I'm not convinced that our offensive line is good enough in a pass blocking capacity right now. We are awfully young at the two guard positions. He has shown in both starts that when the game is on the line he's capable of putting the team on his shoulders and willing a touchdown drive.  He put Edmonton away with one last week and he put the team up on the scoreboard on his last drive this week. I think that his accuracy is something that can be worked with and his ability to read defenses will improve with time. He's just really lacking experience.  I mean.. A guy like Cody Fajardo spent 4 years in the CFL/NFL learning before being thrust into action. Streveler is still just one year out of college. Some of the accuracy issues I think are more related to the lack of decisiveness on a certain read rather than a lack of accuracy. His biggest strength is his running ability which is beyond anything i've seen in this league. But that also holds him back a bit because he just doesn't get the passing reps that a guy like Dane Evans would get each game. Probably will take him twice as long to make all the mistakes and see all the things that they are going to throw at you and learn from them.   But we gotta keep in mind that Nichols was't passing for 300 yards a game in this offense either.  If Streveler passes for 175 and provides his running ability that's pretty much equaling what Nichols was providing IMO.  He's be more aware of when we get into field goal range we don't throw a pick and we don't take a huge intentional grounding call.  Those small details are where Nichols excels and wins games. 

That was a great game. 
So are the people who posted that Khari was an idiot for taking the Als' HC job walking back on that now?

I heard on the radio this morning that the Bomber Offense is in the top 3 of the league in most offensive categories other than passing yards. Now I will admit I didn't fact check this nor will I because it doesn't bother me very much. My question is, why is passing yards so hard to get over when the Bombers are winning? As far as I know they call more running plays than any other team which means they run less passing plays than any other team so if my math is correct, they would more than likely have less passing yards than....any other team. Again, I didn't fact check anything because it doesn't bother me as long as the Bombers are getting more Ws than Ls. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

TSN said that the minimum is the mid point of the 3rd quarter.    One of the problems that I have with this is that i’ve Seen some games where a strong wind is a significant factor, so having an imbalance in time played with the wind could be quite unjust. 

It’s strictly situational.   There are other situations where they took out Mathews and put Miller in.   Other times they took out Couture and put Remple in.  It doesn’t mean Remple should start at centre, it just means he has special skills as a long snapper.   
In the last minute of the game, with the lead, you want to run the ball to keep the clock running.  Strevs is a better runner than Matt, so the coaches made the right decision that proved successful.  I think it is folly to extrapolate situational decision to mean anything else. 

and, just for the record, I'm not absolving Nichols of anything or saying he's the second coming of Tom Brady, but Jesus.....some of you are so far out too lunch and just CONSUMED by negativity. I've seen enough 3-15's to last a lifetime.....I'm gonna enjoy 6-2, thanks.

do we blame Nichols because the punt return team turned two potential offensive series into automatic TDs??

Do we blame him for dropping a pass perfectly into a receivers hands in the end zone but it gets bobbled? 
 

Well he never turned ball over...got us in position to kick 2 field goals...another where we failed on 3rd and short...and put up 33 some odd minutes of time of possesion...effectively keping Cgy off the score board...there is that aspect that can't be understated
Maybe it's football gods shining down on him for many many many games in 2016 and 2017 where he put up over 30 points as the QB and we lost because our defense couldn't stop a JUCO offence consistently

I honestly don't want to wade into this big pissing contest, but here's one thing I know: I've seen a lot worse teams with a lot worse QBing than we have, win the GC. I'm not saying "we're gonna win!" but I'm saying "we're good enough, and Nichols is good enough to win".....it doesn't have to be pretty to get the job done.

Oh sorry I forgot. The wins are the team and the loses are on Nichols. 
Stupid me 

A neither option would be sensible, and less divisive. 

Where the “neither” option?

This seems to be an odd poll for a team that is currently  6-2 and first in their division.   I will not be voting.