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.

Aaaand,,,,to absolutely no one's surprise, O'Shea has confirmed that Nichols will start against Montreal this Friday.

I hope Charles Nelson gets to play for Edmonton. 

Then when he caught a pass it would read

Charles Nelson from  Reilly !

----bada boomp.

🎩

Edited September 17, 20187 yr by Mark F

1 hour ago, Tracker said:

My thinking exactly. We are going to find out if Nichols blossoms or wilts under pressure.

He is all ready wilting.....so never mind blossoming he needs to get some stiffness back into his stem before he can produce any blossoms....

1 hour ago, Floyd said:

You're post was worded really strangely...  like of course if BC wins more games they will make the playoffs and we won't - same with Saskatchewan.

If we win more games, then we will make the playoffs. 

Pretty neat, eh?

You're still not getting it. Because BC has a game in hand, they control their own destiny and we don't control ours. They need to win the extra game AND win as many games as we do. As long as they do that, no matter how many games are won, they get 4th place or better in the west. In short, us having the head to head series doesn't mean as much as them having the game in hand.

2 hours ago, Sard said:

Outside of two very bad decisions, Nichols was playing fine.  They were moving the ball without too much trouble, he just tried to force a throw when he didn't need to, and then he made a bad decision rather than take a sac.

I don't think Nichols has been playing all that poorly the last few games, just making a few bad decisions that have cost the team.  If he even had one of those back in the Banjo bowl, we win that game.

Nichols played like **** in the BB and if you can't see that you are blind.

deledit

Edited September 17, 20187 yr by Mark F

11 minutes ago, rebusrankin said:

Nichols played like **** in the BB and if you can't see that you are blind.

Well yes, those bad decisions were egregious, but if we were to take into account his game before the complete meltdown it wasn't that bad. Especially when you factor in the drops he had early. 

The entire offense has been **** the last month and it's not all on the qb.

10 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Well yes, those bad decisions were egregious, but if we were to take into account his game before the complete meltdown it wasn't that bad. Especially when you factor in the drops he had early. 

The entire offense has been **** the last month and it's not all on the qb.

Of course not. We have a weak international receiving group, the OC isn't great but Nichols has been awful this past month and not really good all year.

deledit

Edited September 17, 20187 yr by Mark F

18 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Well yes, those bad decisions were egregious, but if we were to take into account his game before the complete meltdown it wasn't that bad. Especially when you factor in the drops he had early. 

The entire offense has been **** the last month and it's not all on the qb.

The Banjo Bowl was 100% on Nichols... no reason to throw those two garbage high school interceptions.

2 hours ago, Floyd said:

Worse if, Nichols sucks and Streveler has to start against Reilly - that's going to get in his head from the first minute of the game.

Why will that get in his head?

13 minutes ago, sweep the leg said:

Why will that get in his head?

Same as Nichols... trying to do too much.  Forcing stuff to keep up with the inevitable Reilly late game drive or big plays.

Starting against Johnny Manziel is like a best case scenario for Streveler... no pressure, no media attention and Manziel sucks.

5 hours ago, Mike said:

I still really like Charles Nelson although I'm still not sure he fits a role here. Could be like a Fogg-esque player who could take snaps on O as well, but not sure his high end is enough.

isnt he coming off a major knee or ankle injury too?

4 hours ago, Bomber_fanaddict said:

I had to double check Boobie Hobbs. At first I thought it was a joke....and then I thought maybe it was supposed to be Bobbie Hobbs and was a typo on the player sheet they handed out......nope It's Boobie. And anyone who saw him yesterday.....he seems to be a weird dude.

boobie and poop. with names like that how could we lose? 

2 hours ago, NorthernSkunk said:

I don't care, I just purchased two tickets for fridays game.  Man I hope it don't rain on me again this year.

 

yep ill be in the stands again too. but i sit higher up in the 231 range. Midfield, covered, great price, great angle love it. 

3 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

Check your facts. They have a game in hand. If they win it, they go ahead by 2 and the tie breaker doesn't matter.

Then check your post.

17 minutes ago, wbbfan said:

yep ill be in the stands again too. but i sit higher up in the 231 range. Midfield, covered, great price, great angle love it. 

Everytime we go we sit somewhere different..... gonna have try up there soon

4 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

We don't actually control our destiny. BC does. They have a game in hand. If they win the extra game and match our win total, they get the the last playoff spot unless Montreal or Toronto gets it.

Check.

3 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

Check.

At this point, everyone controls their own destiny outside of mtl and to. Win out and you're in. 

Atlanta Falcons actually made more off of concession when they dramatically cut their prices.

3 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Only if you are ready to move on from Nichols, which is a short sighted view in my mind. Streveler hasn't proven he's better yet so until that happens stick with Nichols. 

So what is your standard for moving on from a QB... Nichols absolutely handed the Banjo Bowl to Sask - that sidearm toss to Jefferson(?) should have been enough

Nichols has thrown away three games in a row...

Apparently Nichols was upbeat and relaxed at practice today. What- me worry?

15 minutes ago, Floyd said:

So what is your standard for moving on from a QB... Nichols absolutely handed the Banjo Bowl to Sask - that sidearm toss to Jefferson(?) should have been enough

Nichols has thrown away three games in a row...

When the backup unequivocally takes the job. Streveler didn't do that against the Riders. 

5 hours ago, 17to85 said:

And if you start Streveler and he beats a sad sack Montreal team and the team goes into Edmonton thinking problem solved and turns out he isn't really ready then you have both qbs being ******. 

No given that there wasn't a huge difference in their respective performances last game you 100% go back to your veteran guy.

That's just ridiculous. Streveler was forced to run Nichols crappy QB package, since Lapo hadn't apparently prepared a package for Streveler, and did just as good as Nichols did. That's a win for Streveler. How do you think Nichols would do running Streveler's QB package? LOL!

4 hours ago, Tracker said:

Aaaand,,,,to absolutely no one's surprise, O'Shea has confirmed that Nichols will start against Montreal this Friday.

Aaaand ... O'Shea will ask Medlock to attempt a 61 yard field go- ... oh wait, that was a different game. Never mind.

3 hours ago, rebusrankin said:

Nichols played like **** in the BB and if you can't see that you are blind.

Some people just go through life without ever taking off the rose coloured glasses.