Training Camp is over, the roster has been set, and the biggest Q is who should MOS start at QB.

The Bomber Brass are comparing notes on that and have yet to decide so its not clear cut by any means. The default is Ross by a nose but we could have 3 legit thoroughbreds in our stable all at once.

I personally believe Steveler has the most upside based on pure talent, scrambling pizzazz, and the ability to see the whole field. He is also the most likely to turn the ball over and make gigantically good plays. Ross will protect the ball best and run the short game well.

Ross may have played the most regular season downs but Bennett has the most experience especially in the Bomber system. I can see us saying later in the year "why didn't we start using Bennett earlier?" He is my pick for short yardage QB but I would be happy with Steveler in that role too.  My best guess: Ross starts but Steveler comes in as soon as Ross has two or three bad series in a row.

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

I almost yelled at the radio (it really wasn't the radio's fault) when I heard that while driving. Either this forum to a man (sorry iHeart) is seriously deluded or senility has struck the Bombers coaching staff. I don't know whether to feel angry, sad or resigned.

I feel like there was a strong case for 'seriously deluded' even prior to this past loss...

3 hours ago, Stickem said:

This current gang of coaches believe you go to the wall with inferior players like Lankford until it hurts.... *see Roc Carmichael of 17...Hurts us on the field,standings and hurts the club in the locker room...You can't tell me that players aren't noticing the fact we have better on the roster and yet continue to beat a dead horse.... I don't know if they'll play Lankford again against the stamps BUT if it is the case, higher ups like Miller must be wondering what the hell is going on here

The Riders just beat Calgary with Sam Hurl playing on the team.....  I like to blame Lankford but he really was a tiny reason for the games we lost this season.   

Richie Hall has much more of a responsibility then Lankford losing us games this year....

The real reason we lost was we had Ottawa second and long ALL night and Harris found the sweet spot in our zone every single time. I’ve never seen a team complete so many second and longs. This is 100 percent entirely scheme and even with the best MLB in the league and loads of talent on the defensive side we will struggle defensively all season unless there’s a change at the DC position. 

4 hours ago, Booch said:

What rookie receivers are you referring too? 

A line-up with Adams..Wolitarsky, Tompkins, Demski and Washington rather than Lankford is hardy conceding the season...nor does it fit your above comment.

In my opinion that is our best line-up we could field this year with whats on the roster...why they havn't given this set-up a chance blows my mind

What's your take on Petermann?

3 hours ago, pigseye said:

lol, it's getting harder and harder to keep admitting that this coaching staff/GM have even a hot clue on what it takes to build a winner but I won't give up hope as promised. C'mon you guys let's sing the Bomber fight song.....

Na, just be like Gump...

4 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Na, just be like Gump...

But never go full *****.

13 hours ago, J5V said:

What's your take on Petermann?

Hard to tell..as he hasn't had a lot of touches...but from watching in pre-season and practices...he seems very reliable...quick...gets the gritty yards and makes people miss....that being said he is a rookie so don't kow where he is at in the playbook..etc....but I like what I have seen

Dressler has been removed from the 6-game list. I wonder if he plays this week or takes one more to make sure he's good to go for Labour Day. If he's back this week, at least all the Lankford angst can stop.

10 hours ago, Booch said:

Hard to tell..as he hasn't had a lot of touches...but from watching in pre-season and practices...he seems very reliable...quick...gets the gritty yards and makes people miss....that being said he is a rookie so don't kow where he is at in the playbook..etc....but I like what I have seen

He can only get better by playing & not sitting. Making mistakes is how he'll learn & develop. 

47 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

He can only get better by playing & not sitting. Making mistakes is how he'll learn & develop. 

Same with Streveller. Two guys I'd love to see get some game action that I have no confidence will see the field.

13 minutes ago, J5V said:

Same with Streveller. Two guys I'd love to see get some game action that I have no confidence will see the field.

I agree that Streveler should get more playing time but not as a starter. MOS shouldn't be saying his time is capped because he got more playing time than he would have got had Nichols not been hurt. That comment by O' Shea is beyond stupid.  It does give you an idea of his strange mindset.

23 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I agree that Streveler should get more playing time but not as a starter. MOS shouldn't be saying his time is capped because he got more playing time than he would have got had Nichols not been hurt. That comment by O' Shea is beyond stupid.  It does give you an idea of his strange mindset.

Agreed and here's my strange mindset ... after the egg Nichols laid last game followed by the whining  I'd start Streveler against Calgary and call it a "hunch". If he sucked I could always revert to Nichols, but it would definitely send Nichols a message and if he kept whining he wouldn't get any more starts. I'd continue to play whichever one was producing on the field, loyalty be damned. It would force Nichols to STFU and play better and/or it would give Streveler the development time he needs. A win-win situation AFAIC.

3 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

He can only get better by playing & not sitting. Making mistakes is how he'll learn & develop. 

its hard to tell which guys can get more from practicing then others. but without a doubt, you quickly reach a diminishing point where you need to play to improve. I can see simonise being a guy who benefits from a slower route to regular action. But I think petermann is pretty ready. I mean he would have been an instant starter for us for at least the previous 10 years. 

2 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

I agree that Streveler should get more playing time but not as a starter. MOS shouldn't be saying his time is capped because he got more playing time than he would have got had Nichols not been hurt. That comment by O' Shea is beyond stupid.  It does give you an idea of his strange mindset.

Id love to see a return to the hurry up with streveler for a play or two after a short yardage sneak. Or as a package if the offense is stagnant. 

4 hours ago, J5V said:

Agreed and here's my strange mindset ... after the egg Nichols laid last game followed by the whining  I'd start Streveler against Calgary and call it a "hunch". If he sucked I could always revert to Nichols, but it would definitely send Nichols a message and if he kept whining he wouldn't get any more starts. I'd continue to play whichever one was producing on the field, loyalty be damned. It would force Nichols to STFU and play better and/or it would give Streveler the development time he needs. A win-win situation AFAIC.

I don't find that a strange mindset.

I'd start Streveler against Calgary not to teach Nichols a lesson but to make sure he's 100% healthy...

5 minutes ago, Floyd said:

I'd start Streveler against Calgary not to teach Nichols a lesson but to make sure he's 100% healthy...

Will Nichols ever be 100 percent healthy tho? I mean hes pretty injury prone. Hes playing scared tho.. Afraid to get hit. Sitting him for a week wont change that. Its a mental thing. 

14 hours ago, J5V said:

Agreed and here's my strange mindset ... after the egg Nichols laid last game followed by the whining  I'd start Streveler against Calgary and call it a "hunch". If he sucked I could always revert to Nichols, but it would definitely send Nichols a message and if he kept whining he wouldn't get any more starts. I'd continue to play whichever one was producing on the field, loyalty be damned. It would force Nichols to STFU and play better and/or it would give Streveler the development time he needs. A win-win situation AFAIC.

This is literally the dumbest suggestion. Its a good thing that fans don't manage a team.

 

Backup QB's are always a fan favorite. You do realize wins started to happen when Nichols came back right?

You also do realize our defense is crapping the bed?

3 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Will Nichols ever be 100 percent healthy tho? I mean hes pretty injury prone. Hes playing scared tho.. Afraid to get hit. Sitting him for a week wont change that. Its a mental thing. 

Thanks Doctor Nick.

6 hours ago, Floyd said:

I'd start Streveler against Calgary not to teach Nichols a lesson but to make sure he's 100% healthy...

Us? against calgary? heck throw them bryan bennett and prepare for the riders. Yeah cant do that i know. 

actually I think we will get an equal result with Bennett or Streveler to be honest..we have 2 pretty good youngins right now...

I believe this will be the changes to the 46 

IN: W.Dressler, B.Bryant, J.Rush
OUT: T.Cooper, J.Augustine, J.Hardrick

On 2018-08-23 at 11:55 AM, TheBandit said:

This is literally the dumbest suggestion. Its a good thing that fans don't manage a team.

 

Backup QB's are always a fan favorite. You do realize wins started to happen when Nichols came back right?

You also do realize our defense is crapping the bed?

In my fantasy world as the head coach it makes sense. Everyone else gets to voice their opinion. I'm just voicing mine.

Yes I do realize wins started to happen when Nichols came back. But he hasn't been playing well of late and worse, he's started whining. I happen to believe in actually playing the players that are performing best and that might be Streveler. At this point I'd at least give him a game or two. If he craps the bed switch back to Nichols. 

Yes, I also do realize our defense is crapping the bed. However, I don't see O'Shea changing the DC at this time. The next best scenario is for the offence to stop with the 2-and-outs and hopefully the D won't be so gassed from being on the field all the time.

Oh please the "whining" by Nichols is nothing. That's just frustration from a losing effort coming through. Guy isn't like that, just a heat of the moment lapse in his usual attitude. 

 

On 2018-08-21 at 6:10 PM, Arnold_Palmer said:

The real reason we lost was we had Ottawa second and long ALL night and Harris found the sweet spot in our zone every single time. I’ve never seen a team complete so many second and longs. This is 100 percent entirely scheme and even with the best MLB in the league and loads of talent on the defensive side we will struggle defensively all season unless there’s a change at the DC position. 

There were roughly 6 second and long situations where the Bombers were called on a penalty which extended the drives. Over 20pts were scored as a result of it. Please don't give all that credit to Trevor Harris nor blame the scheme because I can guarantee the defense didn't scheme all those penalties. It was a complete disaster on the penalty side of the game....whether they were warranted or not.