Tracker

Luck has nothing to do with it. Before this year, Nichols played a smart, controlled game, but he has devolved into forcing the ball, missing the receiver or just flat-out throwing brain-dead chucks.

Since his last name isn't Lankford, he wouldn't see the field.

Apparently not for O'Shea.

If so, it seems to have affected his brain.

Brock did not show up with that arm strength. He was just another QB prospect who managed to hang around long enough to get noticed. At season's end, he was told to strengthen his arm, so he went back home and started throwing shot-put balls around all offseason. He returned the next training camp and had put about 20 pounds on in his upper body- mostly on his shoulders and arms. I was spectating at that camp and his arms did not seem to taper from his shoulders to his wrists. And boy, could he sling that ball. The receivers were complaining about their hands being hurt.

If Bennett could not beat out that sad lot of quarterbacks in Regina, how good can he be?

With benefits?

It is all but confirmed publicly that Nichols will start against the Als, and Chad Owens re-injured his leg today and is gone for an indefinite period. Why are Calgary, Edmonton Ottawa etc able to find darned good receivers but the Bombers cannot?

And we thought Nichols was one of the three best QBs in the league. As the QB goes, the team goes.

Once Hardrick and Dressler are back, our starting offensive roster will be at full strength, and the Bombers were not playing well even then. Injuries are a poor excuse unless the starting QB goes down.

'Cuz our fastest player (Lankford) is fast only in straight lines.

I am not sure that Nichols' injury has much to do with his performance in the past few games. If it is, it was a time bomb that would have gone off sooner or later. Mr. Dee, you were not alone in your comparison of Masoli vs Nichols. I was one of them and the majority here even thought Nichols was better than even Harris in Ottawa and perhaps one of the top three QBs in the league. If Nichols cannot function as a pure drop-back passer, and that is the only option for him, then he needs to be replaced.

There's a plan???

But the Esks had both Reilly and a competent coaching staff plus some darned good receivers

The problem with trying to keep positive about this team is the steady downward spiral and the multitude of concerns: quarterbacking, inability to adapt the gameplan, and a suspect defence. Our import receivers are sub-par and the coaches underutilize the NI receivers. Where to begin?

Ironic, isn't it? Durant screwed the team over by bailing after getting his signing bonus, but if he were here, he would probably be starting now. We have Streveler but his experience is very limited.

We could cut Alex Ross again.

Teams are allowed to do that midseason?????????

My mistake- that is going to be stressful outing for our side.

If the Bombers' next game was at home, he would probably be loath to start Nichols again, but in Montreal, far away from the suddenly hostile Bomber fans, O'Shea will feel far safer to start Nichols.

O'Shea's past record would indicate that he will want to live or die with Nichols , but we do not know what, if any, direction he is being given from above.

From O'Shea's comments after the game, it would seem probable that Nichols will start next game.

The Bomber defence played well against what may be the worst offence in the CFL. They will probably play "well" against Montreal, but their true colours will not be known until we play Edmonton, Calgary or Hamilton. Then Richie Hall will know whether to polish up his resume.

FIRST SIGN OF ADVERSITY???? Which team are you watching?

The Riders are not a good team, and won both games only because Nichols threw the games away- literally.