Thanksgiving Football

[Booch]

4 minutes ago, NorthernSkunk said:

 

I personally feel that winning is a team accomplishment.......but I also believe that those who handle the ball more also shoulder more of the responsibility....... plus I get confused when O'Shea states that, "Matt Nichols has won us a bunch of games ".. why doesn't he just say the team has won a bunch with Matt at the controls ? 

yeh those numbers look okay in hindsight......but the fact was he needed to do more to help the team win...

the decision may not be that hard if Bennett and Big Chris step up 

That statement really is not well thought out...he did more than enough o win both play-off games...those losses were not on the offense in any way whatsoever...if you score 30 points in a game...especially playoffs when weather is less than ideal....your team should win.

QB's with lesser stats have won many a game because they didn't have a defense that gave up 30+ a game..over and over.....and over

[Ripper]

1 hour ago, Booch said:

are you ok with Collaro's 450?

Nichols is middle tier in terms of salary for starting QB's in the league and was a bargain....other than his 4 game funk when I think he was still hindered by injury and trying to do too much for compensating for it.

Collaro's is pulling in top 2..or 3 in salary and in no way is worth it...or earning it...a lot of money tied up in a guy who most likely has seen better days and no real legit prospect/back-up behind him may make it difficult to upgrade that position..especially if you guys stick with him thinking that he is the reason for your current success...which he isn't

 I am not ok with him making that much. I was very worried about us bringing him in because I never thought he would stay healthy.  I believe we could have got him off the scrap heap for much less. Hamilton would have had no choice but to cut him because they simply couldn't afford him.  Jones f'd up by trading for him, Tillman fleeced him IMHO.  Collaros had a 2 year deal when he came and we reworked it back to a one year deal so I guess that's probably why the money stayed up there. But again I did not like the move.  Zack hasn't been horrible for us, but he is not worth what he is getting.  He is better than what we have had in the last 5 years however, much like Nichols has been for you.  Far from a super star but better than anything you have had recently

[Booch]

Yeah why he made that trade is baffling considering everyone and their dog knew he would be cut...maybe he got psyched out thinking they would trade him to Montreal so he panicked.

Nichols has piled up quite a few wins and some good stats in 3 years here...and a lot of the wins were because of him when he had to put up 35....40 points a game to compensate for a cheescloth defense...and that's where the difference lies I think as he can put a team on his back and win a game...or at the least be the reason for the win.

From what we have seen this year..Collaro's has not been the difference in..or the reason for a win in Sask...they have won despite his poor play...

[SpeedFlex27]

4 hours ago, blue_gold_84 said:

By your horribly flawed logic, other high salaried players on this team aren't worth their salaries, either - because they didn't win in the playoffs. That's not how it works, though. How many more times do you have to trot out that invalidated narrative? A win is a team accomplishment and while Nichols has been terrible to mediocre at best this season, he did more than enough in 2016 and 2017 to contribute to this team's success, especially in the playoffs.

You seem to ignore the stats whenever they're posted, so here they are again: 2 GP, 61/88 (69.3 COMP%), 761 yards (380.5 YPG), 5 TDs. From an individual standpoint, those are the kinds of numbers you need from a QB come playoff time. 

Furthermore, had he maintained his level of play from the previous two seasons (among the best pivots in the league), he'd certainly be earning his salary in 2018. But the reality is not the case and the WFC will have a hard decision to make looking ahead to 2019.

Damn, why do you quote him.

[Floyd]

Trade for Pipkin!

[Fatty Liver]

3 hours ago, Ripper said:

 I am not ok with him making that much. I was very worried about us bringing him in because I never thought he would stay healthy.  I believe we could have got him off the scrap heap for much less. Hamilton would have had no choice but to cut him because they simply couldn't afford him.  Jones f'd up by trading for him, Tillman fleeced him IMHO.  Collaros had a 2 year deal when he came and we reworked it back to a one year deal so I guess that's probably why the money stayed up there. But again I did not like the move.  Zack hasn't been horrible for us, but he is not worth what he is getting.  He is better than what we have had in the last 5 years however, much like Nichols has been for you.  Far from a super star but better than anything you have had recently

Funny thing is Collaros will probably ask for more next season and Jones will have to pay him after looking around the league and concluding there really isn't any other viable starting QB's to be had.  I seriously doubt any of the current starters make it to F.A. when it comes right down to the crunch, no teams want to be caught short at QB.

 

 

[trueBlue83]

7 hours ago, NorthernSkunk said:

but like Booch asked, is Collaros worth his wage ?.....maybe I can armchair this stuff after all...cause collaros is way worse a QB than what Matty is right now...

Way worse??  Numbers look pretty similar too me

15

NICHOLS, Matt

WPG

12

220

341

64.5

2633

15

13

86.8

3.8

7.7

 

17

COLLAROS, Zach

SSK

11

197

320

61.6

2526

9

11

81.3

3.4

7.9

[blue_gold_84]

3 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Damn, why do you quote him.

I took the skunkbait!

[Ripper]

2 hours ago, Throw Long Bannatyne said:

Funny thing is Collaros will probably ask for more next season and Jones will have to pay him after looking around the league and concluding there really isn't any other viable starting QB's to be had.  I seriously doubt any of the current starters make it to F.A. when it comes right down to the crunch, no teams want to be caught short at QB.

 

 

Lots of QB's are free agents. I'd expect us to do the best we can to get what works for us.  You just stand pat with your guy Matt.  How's that been working so far? NVM, I already know

[trueBlue83]

7 hours ago, Booch said:

Nichols has piled up quite a few wins and some good stats in 3 years here...and a lot of the wins were because of him when he had to put up 35....40 points a game to compensate for a cheescloth defense...and that's where the difference lies I think as he can put a team on his back and win a game...or at the least be the reason for the win.

Very debatable.   You can't say it's Matt putting up 35+ when we're kicking 6 field goals a game.  In 2016, Nichols threw 18 TD passes (108 pts) , and 3600 yds, while Medlock kicked 60 field goals (180 pts) on 68 attempts. In 2017, it was Harris and his 100+ receptions and 1000 yds rushing.  No QB with a good arm needs to throw 128 passes to his running back.   The brutal truth with Nichols is, everything has to be working perfectly around him to make him shine.   Once a couple pieces are out of sync, he's very much what I have been calling him for a year:. Mediocre Matt.

Edited October 11, 2018 by trueBlue83

[Mr Dee]

What I see is a QB who uses the tools he has available to him to fit the design of the system he’s involved in. Does it really matter that he takes advantage of one of the best kickers in the league? Or use a RB who is capable up putting up yardage, no matter how? Does he not run an offence that incorporates exactly these kind of players?

Everything has to be working perfectly? No team has that. 

What I also see is other QBs struggle when pieces of their lineup are not available.

Must be a mediocre league.

[SpeedFlex27]

Look at how Reilly struggles without Walker. Mitchell struggles without 4 of his receivers. 

[Booch]

Yeah we kicked a few field goals..but someone got us in field goal position..no?

Also you have to look at an offence as a whole...passing opens up for the run..and a good running game opens up the passing...so if both are cause for concern for a defense..one or the other will benefit 

[Fatty Liver]

38 minutes ago, Booch said:

Yeah we kicked a few field goals..but someone got us in field goal position..no?

Also you have to look at an offence as a whole...passing opens up for the run..and a good running game opens up the passing...so if both are cause for concern for a defense..one or the other will benefit 

A very good example of this was in O.T. vs. Ottawa.  Nichols made use of Harris to run the ball and threw high percentage passes to march the ball down the field, never putting the ball in jeopardy.  On the other hand Trevor Harris relied heavily on his ability to throw to small windows and his receivers to come up with great catches.  On many of these receptions the D.B. was right in the receivers hip pocket and had a chance to make a play on the ball.  I think it's obvious which is the smarter approach.

[Floyd]

2 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Look at how Reilly struggles without Walker. Mitchell struggles without 4 of his receivers. 

Not sure Mitchell is 'struggling' at all...  I think Calgary just completely took Montreal for granted...

Other than that, Mitchell is putting up huge numbers

Edited October 11, 2018 by Floyd

[TBURGESS]

We know what Matt (Avg 219 YPG) looks like without his top receiver. Just look at last year when Adams went down or this year when Dressler went down.

BLM (Avg 295 YPG) looked great until his 4th receiver went down.

Reilly (Avg 307 YPG) is struggling because his OL isn't picking up the blitz, because Walker is down, and because the lost Bowman and Zylstra in the off season.

 

 

[trueBlue83]

7 hours ago, Booch said:

Yeah we kicked a few field goals..but someone got us in field goal position..no?

Also you have to look at an offence as a whole...passing opens up for the run..and a good running game opens up the passing...so if both are cause for concern for a defense..one or the other will benefit 

the numbers I threw out were for previous years... just saying, it wasn't all Matt putting up points on the board.  we're late in the 2018 season, and maybe finally starting to find a good blend of play calling that's allowing this offence to start working well.  All the weapons are on the field, and things are working well.  Hopefully this can continue, and *knock on wood* everyone stays healthy.   Would be amazing to have the Blue & Gold finally have everything in sync at the right time of year!

Saturday is going to be a fun game to be at... hopefully it's a raucous crowd!

[Floyd]

Hey the Riders stole Demski's stair climb...!!!

[17to85]

10 hours ago, trueBlue83 said:

 No QB with a good arm needs to throw 128 passes to his running back.  

Why do you blame Nichols for that when Paul Lapolice has a long history of using his runningbacks as pass catchers? 

Remember who our leading receivers were in 2002? It was Milt Stegall, Arland Bruce and then #3 and 4 were Roberts and Sellers. 

Guy loves his check down passes, always has and always will. There's a reason they went and got Harris and Demski and Dressler and guys like that who can take those little dump passes and make things happen. It's because that's what Lapo wants from an offense. 

[Booch]

Who cares where the passes are going if the team is scoring...and a game dictates where you go anyway for the most part...so if thats where the game dictates where to go...then you go there...why force things into spots that just aren't there risking a =turnover just to get the fancy stats?

 

[NorthernSkunk]

10 hours ago, trueBlue83 said:

Way worse??  Numbers look pretty similar too me

15

NICHOLS, Matt

WPG

12

220

341

64.5

2633

15

13

86.8

3.8

7.7

 

17

COLLAROS, Zach

SSK

11

197

320

61.6

2526

9

11

81.3

3.4

7.9

Oops, I guess I was giving Matty credit for being better than he actually is right now......my bad.

[trueBlue83]

On 2018-10-11 at 9:41 AM, 17to85 said:

Why do you blame Nichols for that when Paul Lapolice has a long history of using his runningbacks as pass catchers? 

Remember who our leading receivers were in 2002? It was Milt Stegall, Arland Bruce and then #3 and 4 were Roberts and Sellers. 

Guy loves his check down passes, always has and always will. There's a reason they went and got Harris and Demski and Dressler and guys like that who can take those little dump passes and make things happen. It's because that's what Lapo wants from an offense. 

you don't feel that he defaults to the check down more often than not because of lack of arm strength and accuracy on deeper passes?

[Mr Dee]

No, I think Nichols would love to prove he can hit the longer routes, but if it isn’t there..it isn’t there. He can fire the ball in there in tight windows, but I agree, his “touch” on long throws is not de fault of anybody else but his.

[17to85]

1 hour ago, trueBlue83 said:

you don't feel that he defaults to the check down more often than not because of lack of arm strength and accuracy on deeper passes?

No I don't, I feel he does it because that's where Lapo has the targets going. That hasn't changed for Lapo ever. He likes to dump the ball off and rely on the players picking up the extra yards. 

[Mark H.]

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

No I don't, I feel he does it because that's where Lapo has the targets going. That hasn't changed for Lapo ever. He likes to dump the ball off and rely on the players picking up the extra yards. 

You are revising history to suit your argument - Milt Stegall & Arlan Bruce were targeted deep plenty, and with success.