This trade has raises some questions for me. Mainly, can or will glenn take the starting job? 

Glenn has the Raw tools to excel in this kind of system. Quick release, strong ability to find his best receivers especially in the clutch, ability to win the game and produce in volume. 

Nichols is the small ball, game manager and has shown strong ability of late to drive the field late in games. He knows the system and fits very well, hes shown strong intangibles through out his time, that winning mentality and attitude. 

On the down side, glenn is a gambler. He may lead the way to several blow outs, but he will also throw away games. Mean while with nichols we play close games that should be blow outs. 

 All in all its a great situation to be in, so long as it doesnt become a distraction to the team. Its certainly better then willy/nichols. Some one to push nichols for once could be a good thing too. Hes stepped in for injured and failing qbs. But we havent seen him be the no1 and have a qb behind him pushing him. I hope that when the win streak ends and equalizes a bit nichols wont be un fairly thrown under the bus if he continues to execute at the same level. At the same time I want to see the offense finally produce at a high level. 

Just now, JuranBoldenRules said:

So basically you don't understand the game enough to synthesize and analyze it qualitatively or quantitatively.

If our D and special teams score 2 TD's and our offense doesn't get a first down we win 14-13, the offense didn't play well enough.  There's analyzing the whole team, and analyzing the phases.  

If the other team scores more points than us and our offense turned the ball over 7 times, why would you look at the defense?

 

Depends how you look at it, could have come up against a hot D with good gameplan. While there's always room for improvement, the bottom line is W's.

41 minutes ago, LimJahey said:

Depends how you look at it, could have come up against a hot D with good gameplan. While there's always room for improvement, the bottom line is W's.

If this hypothetical offense goes an entire game without a first down there is no other way to look at it, our offense needed to play better. There are a lot of inches in the mile it takes to win a game. I don't understand why anyone is content to simply say 'as long as we're winning that's all that matters' and not see the value in analyzing how we got there, and how we could be doing even better.

19 hours ago, Taynted_Fayth said:

In other news I heard boomer talk today... no joke

It was pointed out to me a while ago that Gainer isn't real but a man dressed up in a costume. This may be the case with Boomer.  Just sayin'

Edited September 12, 20169 yr by Ripper

7 minutes ago, MOBomberFan said:

If this hypothetical offense goes an entire game without a first down there is no other way to look at it, our offense needed to play better. There are a lot of inches in the mile it takes to win a game. I don't understand why anyone is content to simply say 'as long as we're winning that's all that matters' and not see the value in analyzing how we got there, and how we could be doing even better.

if we win the grey cup with 0 yards on offense it was good enough.

We have won 6 games in a row. Until we lose i will not complain.

our offense is always working to improve i can personally guarantee that,

5 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

That being said, those two games were the hardest I've seen the Riders play all year.  Now watch them just fall apart against the Eskimos and make Reilly look like a star. 

Not true.  Played the Esks tight twice and the Stamps both times. Only the Cats and Larks blew us out.

59 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

So basically you don't understand the game enough to synthesize and analyze it qualitatively or quantitatively.

If our D and special teams score 2 TD's and our offense doesn't get a first down we win 14-13, the offense didn't play well enough.  There's analyzing the whole team, and analyzing the phases.  

If the other team scores more points than us and our offense turned the ball over 7 times, why would you look at the defense?

 

Correct, but.. i  can tell when the offence is moving the ball but not scoring Touchdowns. I can tell that the defense is making interceptions and giving the ball back to the offence and stopping the opposition from scoring.

There are alot of things to think about.

But to me, currently the Offence is scoring, perhaps alot less then we would like, the defense is stopping the other team from scoring, or taking the ball away and the STs are getting great field position or pinning the opposition deep in there zone.  To me, it looks like the team is playing well or well enough in all three phazes to win the games.   Its been along time since i have seen that and was getting depressed at the start of the season seeing the same old lack of production happening. And this as hug step in the right direction and an upward trend vs previous years.  I suppose it could be that all the other team we have played have been shitty, but then that makes us better then most based on our record

I want the offence to excel and believe there is alot of room to grow, but i'm really enjoying the wins.   I didn't think we could win the LDC and the banjo bowl.. I also never thought we would win three in a row?

 

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

This is praise of Nichols that actually has merit. It's something that can be quite valuable too, I just find that a lot of people are glossing over some of the problems that he does have though trying to make him into something he isn't because of the win streak we are on. 

Riders started 8-1 the year Durant go hurt in Banjo bowl, 2014. Our offense was horrible but the defense was lights out. Many here refused to look at how conservative our play calling was and lack luster DD's play was over that stretch. Winning cures all. Once DD went down all our chickens came home to roost.

16 minutes ago, Ripper said:

Not true.  Played the Esks tight twice and the Stamps both times. Only the Cats and Larks blew us out.

we beat the Esks and lost close to the Stamps with Willy and a horrible o-line at the time. Gonna be a good game next time we meet them

2 minutes ago, LimJahey said:

we beat the Esks and lost close to the Stamps with Willy and a horrible o-line at the time. Gonna be a good game next time we meet them

Every game is huge now after labor day. Its playoff time for you guys. Esk's aren't going to go away, neither are the Argo's. Your in a good spot but have to hammer down and keep this thing going. 

37 minutes ago, Adrenaline_x said:

 To me, it looks like the team is playing well or well enough in all three phazes to win the games.

 

as a team collectively sure you bet, but you can look at each phase individually too and see what is working and what needs to be better and quite frankly the offense needs to be better. Let's not even talk point, let's talk putting drives together to keep the defense on the sidelines and not tempt fate by letting the other team have more chances with the ball. They do that and all of a sudden we don't need to watch sphincter clenching games that come down to a late mistake by the other team to pull out the win we'll be able to cruise and the only thing we'll have to complain about is the other team getting some garbage time points. 

32 minutes ago, LimJahey said:

we beat the Esks and lost close to the Stamps with Willy and a horrible o-line at the time. Gonna be a good game next time we meet them

thats the nature of the cfl this year. Amazing parity even with such a big difference between the stamps and riders. The difference between teams execution is much closer, mistakes are more costly then ever. 

There is definitely a lot this team needs to work on, from both sides of the ball. Up to week 11, our D has given up the most first downs in the league and 2nd last for net offence against, this needs to change, just as much as the need for us to score more touchdowns. The one thing our offence has done really well is we are second in the league for fewest 2 and outs but we are third last in first down production. Also second last for TD drive %.

I think we still need more playmakers on offence, I miss Adams a lot but it would have been nice if one of our new import receivers showed a little bit more. We can't expect our receivers to have to dive out and make insane catches all the time, but we do need them to make those catches from time to time if we want to win. Nichols has done well enough a 70.7 completion percentage, gets first downs and like others have said drives the ball when it is most needed. Having said that we need to work on getting that ball in the endzone, personally i think if we had a bigger receiver it would help a bit more in that aspect. We still have a lot of games to go, let's see how this team does down the stretch.

7 hours ago, Goalie said:

We don't know the play calls tho. The idea that lapo is telling Nichols to throw a 4 yard pass is asinine.  Our receivers ate doing a very good job at making something out of nothing.  Calling that dressler "drop" a drop in sask when he basically had to contort his body in mid air cuz Nichols threw it to the wrong side is crazy. 

Or even the Sheppard one... where the 6 foot something receiver had to dive out fully to have a chance.... Cmon.  

As a matter of fact Nichols looks very similar to Drew Willy when we were 5 and 1 to start his career. Last minute drives to win games 

I disagree... if you watch the replay again you'll see he stretches out and falls down... it's not a full out dive... it was a ball that should have been caught...

as for the Dressler one, you're right, that would have been an extremely difficult catch... but you can't necessarily blame Nichols... Nichols was thinking inside and Dressler was thinking outside... one of them screwed up... we don't know which one...

36 minutes ago, Blue and Goldfish said:

There is definitely a lot this team needs to work on, from both sides of the ball. Up to week 11, our D has given up the most first downs in the league and 2nd last for net offence against, this needs to change, just as much as the need for us to score more touchdowns. The one thing our offence has done really well is we are second in the league for fewest 2 and outs but we are third last in first down production. Also second last for TD drive %.

I think we still need more playmakers on offence, I miss Adams a lot but it would have been nice if one of our new import receivers showed a little bit more. We can't expect our receivers to have to dive out and make insane catches all the time, but we do need them to make those catches from time to time if we want to win. Nichols has done well enough a 70.7 completion percentage, gets first downs and like others have said drives the ball when it is most needed. Having said that we need to work on getting that ball in the endzone, personally i think if we had a bigger receiver it would help a bit more in that aspect. We still have a lot of games to go, let's see how this team does down the stretch.

All good points. For me, where Bombers are right now, 11 games into 2016, reminds me of where they were at 5-1 at the start of 2014 with Drew Willy at the controls. All the attention was on Willy - new QB - at that time but the Defence and Special Teams, and placekicking contributed hugely to the win streak while the offence largely sputtered and often failed to score sixes. When our opponents figured out Etchevery about 1/3 of the way through 2014, and the offence continued its futility, the wheels fell off the bus.

There will definitely come a time when our D has an off day, and its up to our O to go out there and get us a win. Let's just hope that Nichols and co up to snuff when that becomes a necessity.

3 hours ago, LimJahey said:

if we win the grey cup with 0 yards on offense it was good enough.

We have won 6 games in a row. Until we lose i will not complain.

our offense is always working to improve i can personally guarantee that,

If I  see kg walking  onto the field  I'm gonna throw up in my mouth.

Edited September 13, 20169 yr by Floyd

KEEEVVVVVIIINNNN GLLLLEEEENNNNN!!!!!!  YYYEEESSSSSS!!!!!!!!

42 minutes ago, Floyd said:

KEEEVVVVVIIINNNN GLLLLEEEENNNNN!!!!!!  YYYEEESSSSSS!!!!!!!!

12 hours ago, wbbfan said:

The Denver Broncos are still a playoff team if they score one touchdown a game on offence.

1 hour ago, LimJahey said:

The Denver Broncos are still a playoff team if they score one touchdown a game on offence.

the CFL and the NFL are not the same. 

 

you can win with stout defense for sure, lots of teams have done it, but you're playing with fire when you always need your D to generate 3 or 4 turn overs a game. 

I do have a couple of points I would like to add, if we are saying the interception number is lucky because of DB drops or penalty calls then we have to consider the drops by our guys that hit their hands even if the throw was errenuous.  It isn't like when a DB almost intercepts a ball it is in a perfect throw to them.  Now the other reason I state this is because, do we analyze every caught pass by those Quarterbacks who are apparently elite?  I'm pretty sure Carter laid it out a couple times in the Montreal game to catch what we would consider uncatchable balls.  I remember Holley made at least two of those catches in a game against us.  I don't believe that Nichols threw the ball to the wrong side on the Dressler drop, sure Dressler looked left and then had to adjust to go right but I think it's the job of the Quarterback to throw the ball to the opposite side of the defender.  I believe the ball was well placed had Dressler recognized the coverage on the left sooner and made the adjustment to catch the ball on the right he would have had the catch.  This is just experience with a Quarterback I actually appreciate that Nichols has that forethought to control the ball in that way.  I also believe that the Sheppard drop was straight up a drop, he almost had no one on him he barely had to stretch out for that ball he pulled it in and it bounced off his chest and to the ground.  If Sheppard squeezed that ball it would be a sure catch. 

Now given those examples, I still am not saying that Nichols is an elite quarterback.  I guess I am more questioning what does an elite quarterback make?  Quarterbacks with receivers that catch the uncatchable ball are considered more elite because of their elite receivers.  I would say if we are talking about accuracy, Nichols accuracy in my opinion hasn't been that terrible.  Yes he has thrown the ball slightly behind or slightly ahead but I feel it has been much more accurate than what we had with Willy, although I do believe Willy corrects that and gets back to his former self.  I would say that Nichols accuracy though when compared to that of others in the league is about similar. 

I also remember a game where our offense would have scored touch down or had a very good drive going ad our running back fumbled the ball.  It is sometimes on the Quarterback for those fumbles but it can't always be.  We can't blame those drives that didn't score a TD on the quarterback and they do of course take away his numbers.  That is why they look at the Quarterback rating and have measureables because so much of a drive depends on those outside the quarterback position.  Nichols job is to take what they give him without turning over the ball.  The receivers jobs are to capitalize on a ball thrown their way.  The defenders job are to stop the other team from scoring in any way possible and create good field position.  It's a team game and right now the team is playing at a level that is allowing us to win games.

Can we keep this up against the "elite" teams? Well we have already beat Edmonton once and I am sure we can do it again at home.  I'm not afraid of Calgary as much this year as I have been in past years.  BC to me is really the unknown but I want to play a wait and see approach.  In reality we don't have to beat each team more than once. If we win the next two games we go to the play offs; we can lose our games against BC and Calgary and only need to beat them in the play offs to win.  Just like we can win all the rest of the games and lose in the play offs and be done. 

Something that stands out to me in the recent games is actually not only how Nichols is managing the game and the ball but how Mike O'Shea is managing the game.  He seems to be doing a much better job with his challenges, as well as his calls when it involves risks on 3rd downs.  I believe our team is just short of that star receiver that can be our go to guy when things break down.  Once we have that I feel we will be contenders and hope that it even carries into the future with the team that Walters has built.

 

 

 

 

 

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

the CFL and the NFL are not the same. 

 

you can win with stout defense for sure, lots of teams have done it, but you're playing with fire when you always need your D to generate 3 or 4 turn overs a game. 

i'm just trying to make a point that if your defense can create enough turnovers or force enough 2 and outs, our special teams can create field position and our offence doesn't need to be elite.

2 hours ago, LimJahey said:

i'm just trying to make a point that if your defense can create enough turnovers or force enough 2 and outs, our special teams can create field position and our offence doesn't need to be elite.

Cant compare the nfl and cfl like that Though. That style hasnt won a title in idk how long in the cfl. 

 

2 hours ago, Tehedra said:

I do have a couple of points I would like to add, if we are saying the interception number is lucky because of DB drops or penalty calls then we have to consider the drops by our guys that hit their hands even if the throw was errenuous.  It isn't like when a DB almost intercepts a ball it is in a perfect throw to them.  Now the other reason I state this is because, do we analyze every caught pass by those Quarterbacks who are apparently elite?  I'm pretty sure Carter laid it out a couple times in the Montreal game to catch what we would consider uncatchable balls.  I remember Holley made at least two of those catches in a game against us.  I don't believe that Nichols threw the ball to the wrong side on the Dressler drop, sure Dressler looked left and then had to adjust to go right but I think it's the job of the Quarterback to throw the ball to the opposite side of the defender.  I believe the ball was well placed had Dressler recognized the coverage on the left sooner and made the adjustment to catch the ball on the right he would have had the catch.  This is just experience with a Quarterback I actually appreciate that Nichols has that forethought to control the ball in that way.  I also believe that the Sheppard drop was straight up a drop, he almost had no one on him he barely had to stretch out for that ball he pulled it in and it bounced off his chest and to the ground.  If Sheppard squeezed that ball it would be a sure catch. 

Now given those examples, I still am not saying that Nichols is an elite quarterback.  I guess I am more questioning what does an elite quarterback make?  Quarterbacks with receivers that catch the uncatchable ball are considered more elite because of their elite receivers.  I would say if we are talking about accuracy, Nichols accuracy in my opinion hasn't been that terrible.  Yes he has thrown the ball slightly behind or slightly ahead but I feel it has been much more accurate than what we had with Willy, although I do believe Willy corrects that and gets back to his former self.  I would say that Nichols accuracy though when compared to that of others in the league is about similar. 

I also remember a game where our offense would have scored touch down or had a very good drive going ad our running back fumbled the ball.  It is sometimes on the Quarterback for those fumbles but it can't always be.  We can't blame those drives that didn't score a TD on the quarterback and they do of course take away his numbers.  That is why they look at the Quarterback rating and have measureables because so much of a drive depends on those outside the quarterback position.  Nichols job is to take what they give him without turning over the ball.  The receivers jobs are to capitalize on a ball thrown their way.  The defenders job are to stop the other team from scoring in any way possible and create good field position.  It's a team game and right now the team is playing at a level that is allowing us to win games.

Can we keep this up against the "elite" teams? Well we have already beat Edmonton once and I am sure we can do it again at home.  I'm not afraid of Calgary as much this year as I have been in past years.  BC to me is really the unknown but I want to play a wait and see approach.  In reality we don't have to beat each team more than once. If we win the next two games we go to the play offs; we can lose our games against BC and Calgary and only need to beat them in the play offs to win.  Just like we can win all the rest of the games and lose in the play offs and be done. 

Something that stands out to me in the recent games is actually not only how Nichols is managing the game and the ball but how Mike O'Shea is managing the game.  He seems to be doing a much better job with his challenges, as well as his calls when it involves risks on 3rd downs.  I believe our team is just short of that star receiver that can be our go to guy when things break down.  Once we have that I feel we will be contenders and hope that it even carries into the future with the team that Walters has built.

 

 

 

 

 

If a wr dives, lays out and just touches the ball its not a drop. Its easy to say if a wr touches it they should catch it. But a qb throwing wide or behind or leading the target into dense traffic will allways lead to plays that should have been hooked up that are not. Weve had a lot of that. Sure weve had drops too. But every game nichols had one where the defender should have caught it even by defender standards and muffed it. 

Nichols said after the game he threw to the wrong route. Dressler clearly ran different pattern and was expecting the ball out side, which is where you would want to put it on that play where its caught or in complete. So no.