Mark H. Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, ddanger said: Calgary rarely rushed more than 4...against our 5....and was flushing out Nichols over and over again. So the answer for me is no, our o'line lost the trench battle no doubt. Nichols mostly flushed himself out of the pocket. If you watch the game again, count some steamboats. Bigblue204, Piggy 1 and HardCoreBlue 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wideleft Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 12 hours ago, trueBlue83 said: What bugs me, as O'Shea just stated on the coaches show, is they didnt "open up the packages for Steveler". So, Nichols had to play a little better to earn Streveler some playing time?? Talk about whacked out logic!? What about giving a change a try to see if it opens up the defence!? How I took that comment was that the Bombers didn't get close enough to the red zone to bring Streveler in. I'm not sure if that's what O'Shea meant, but it makes sense having watched what they've done for most of the season. blue_gold_84 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booch Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 (edited) We are going to camp next year with Nichols and Streveler guaranteed...which is a better position than any team in the league right now...save for Hamilton and Ottawa....both of whom have big ? marks at back-up every team in the league doesn't really know who their starting QB is going to be...and a couple teams may even lose who they are hoping it is going to be...so fact of the matter we should be feeling pretty good....Sure Nichols won't pull a Reilly or a Mitchell and totally take over a game...again and again...but he has been the sole reason for many of our wins over the last 3 years he has started for us...and is he not something like 29-15 as our starter since 2016?...so he can win games in this system and if we can toss in a big play maker who can make those contested big catches that Reilly and BLMitchell get the benefit of..then we are just fine...especially seeing as we are finally grooming what may be the next stud QB in the CFL But...and this is the biggest but...Next year at TC Oshea HAS to say the #1 QB position is an open competition...it will drive both guys to excell, and also won't hinder/hamper Strevelers development...it has to be seen if the Kid can run the whole compliment of the offence...and many say he ahs to show he can be a passer more than a runner...but he is...in College he threw for huge yards and had many games of 300+ yards passing...sevral with 400+ yards and an over 500 yard one...so he can pass but has been constrained here...Lapo has to let him loose and see what he has Now if that ends up relegating Nichols to a back up role at 450k..so be it...pretty darn good back-up option..best in the league....and we are paying both those guys anyway regardless of where they sit on the depth chart...so who cares Edited November 20, 2018 by Booch blue85gold 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBURGESS Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 I can only think of one game this year that Nichols was a difference maker. The rest, Streveler could have won too. I'd be happy to have both back next year except for the fact that Nichols will be getting $450K. If your making that kind of money, you better be significantly better than a rookie and Nichols simply said, wasn't. We could offer him less money in the off season but I don't see Walters/MOS doing that and I doubt Nichols would agree to it. I expect that both are back next year. Nichols is the starter. Streveler will get less playing time than he got this year unless Nichols is hurt. Some short yardage and a few series to slowly develop him. By years end, we will be wondering if Streveler is good enough, if he can read defenses, if he can run our offense. He'll want a starters job so he'll sign with another team who gives him a real chance. trueBlue83 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 21 hours ago, do or die said: Well, Nichols was right on the bullseye, with hitting the right sideline, all day....... Difference between wanting to avoid turnovers.....and being somewhat obsessed with it.... When he rolled out there were 2 options to him. Harris for the dump off, who was always covered because the Stamps did their homework and knew that covering Harris was priority one and option 2 was usually Adams further downfield also being covered. This team has a problem helping their qb out when he rolls out of the pocket and I think it's by design. So yeah, I'm blaming Lapo for his passive crap. Same **** as when he was head coach here. Playing not to lose rather than playing to win like the Stamps did. Noeller 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 19 hours ago, trueBlue83 said: the more I think about what Nichols said in the post game press conference, the more it bugs me.... he thought he played "a pretty solid game". The guy had 75 yards passing going into the 4th quarter. I think he's delusional and gauges the success of his game on number of turnovers over putting points on the board. Not throwing a pick for a game, he seems to consider a win, regardless of other stats. Paul Lapolice everyone. Seriously I said it before I'll say it again, we will never win a championship until we replace him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueBlue83 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 55 minutes ago, Wideleft said: How I took that comment was that the Bombers didn't get close enough to the red zone to bring Streveler in. I'm not sure if that's what O'Shea meant, but it makes sense having watched what they've done for most of the season. what about the 2nd and short packages where they left Nichols in, where, all season, those have been Streveler downs. And sometimes even leave him in for a couple extra plays afterwards. There was none of that. Playing too safe in my opinion, and trying to let Nichols earn all the glory himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 15 hours ago, Goalie said: Nichols over threw a wide open Darvin Adams and had like 100 yards passing all game. Because Adams stopped ******* running his route and Nichols expected that he'd keep running like a receiver should do. Seriously that one was on Adams. TBURGESS, blue85gold and White Out 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueBlue83 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, 17to85 said: When he rolled out there were 2 options to him. Harris for the dump off, who was always covered because the Stamps did their homework and knew that covering Harris was priority one and option 2 was usually Adams further downfield also being covered. This team has a problem helping their qb out when he rolls out of the pocket and I think it's by design. So yeah, I'm blaming Lapo for his passive crap. Same **** as when he was head coach here. Playing not to lose rather than playing to win like the Stamps did. there was one play in particular in the second half where they rolled out to throw right, and you saw 3 receivers on the left side, waddle 3 yards and set up blocks. Pretty easy for the defence to figure out whats going on there when none of these guys were moving. At least have a couple of them bolt downfield and stretch the D. Now was that the designed play, or were these guys just dis-engaged knowing the ball wasn't coming their way, who knows!? Was sad to watch either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wideleft Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 9 minutes ago, 17to85 said: Because Adams stopped ******* running his route and Nichols expected that he'd keep running like a receiver should do. Seriously that one was on Adams. Adams definitely slowed down there. Not sure who (but I can guess) didn't understand where the ball was supposed to end up on that play. Adams turned and put his hands out and then kept running with his hands out when he should have put them down and gave 'er to where the ball was landing. Looked like an 8 year old playing outfield on that one. blue85gold 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueBlue83 Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 40 minutes ago, Wideleft said: Adams definitely slowed down there. Not sure who (but I can guess) didn't understand where the ball was supposed to end up on that play. Adams turned and put his hands out and then kept running with his hands out when he should have put them down and gave 'er to where the ball was landing. Looked like an 8 year old playing outfield on that one. I really hoped Adams was going to have that breakthrough season this year, but it sure seems like he's just not a reliable #1 go to guy. Many have said, get a number 1 and have Adams as your secondary guy and he'd probably produce more, and I think that is pretty bang on. Don't get rid of the guy, because there's talent there. But kind of like when Phil Kessel went to Pittsburgh, I think you just need to take him out of that #1 role and take the pressure off! Wideleft 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 If you keep Adams on one side - and get someone who is a serious downfield threat on the other.........would also really open up the field for quick hitters, drags, slants etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booch Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 4 minutes ago, trueBlue83 said: I really hoped Adams was going to have that breakthrough season this year, but it sure seems like he's just not a reliable #1 go to guy. Many have said, get a number 1 and have Adams as your secondary guy and he'd probably produce more, and I think that is pretty bang on. Don't get rid of the guy, because there's talent there. But kind of like when Phil Kessel went to Pittsburgh, I think you just need to take him out of that #1 role and take the pressure off! the guy was second in the league with 10 TD receptions and I believe was tops in the league in plays over 30 yards...so to say he was or is a bust is a bit off balance..and that was playing with a raw rookie for 3 starts...and 4 starts where Nichols played like he was straight out on CIS ball...Get him a running mate to take some load off...and he will be even better also...something overlooked is his blocking when not getting the ball and help in run game, the guys a beast Mark F, JCon, blue85gold and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardCoreBlue Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Booch said: We are going to camp next year with Nichols and Streveler guaranteed...which is a better position than any team in the league right now...save for Hamilton and Ottawa....both of whom have big ? marks at back-up every team in the league doesn't really know who their starting QB is going to be...and a couple teams may even lose who they are hoping it is going to be...so fact of the matter we should be feeling pretty good....Sure Nichols won't pull a Reilly or a Mitchell and totally take over a game...again and again...but he has been the sole reason for many of our wins over the last 3 years he has started for us...and is he not something like 29-15 as our starter since 2016?...so he can win games in this system and if we can toss in a big play maker who can make those contested big catches that Reilly and BLMitchell get the benefit of..then we are just fine...especially seeing as we are finally grooming what may be the next stud QB in the CFL But...and this is the biggest but...Next year at TC Oshea HAS to say the #1 QB position is an open competition...it will drive both guys to excell, and also won't hinder/hamper Strevelers development...it has to be seen if the Kid can run the whole compliment of the offence...and many say he ahs to show he can be a passer more than a runner...but he is...in College he threw for huge yards and had many games of 300+ yards passing...sevral with 400+ yards and an over 500 yard one...so he can pass but has been constrained here...Lapo has to let him loose and see what he has Now if that ends up relegating Nichols to a back up role at 450k..so be it...pretty darn good back-up option..best in the league....and we are paying both those guys anyway regardless of where they sit on the depth chart...so who cares Based on his style to date, not in MOS DNA to do this. He'll anoint MN the starter and say its his to lose. TBURGESS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernSkunk Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 6 minutes ago, Booch said: the guy was second in the league with 10 TD receptions and I believe was tops in the league in plays over 30 yards...so to say he was or is a bust is a bit off balance..and that was playing with a raw rookie for 3 starts...and 4 starts where Nichols played like he was straight out on CIS ball...Get him a running mate to take some load off...and he will be even better also...something overlooked is his blocking when not getting the ball and help in run game, the guys a beast When you put it like this it makes me think we need a QB who can get Adams more targets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 2 hours ago, do or die said: If you keep Adams on one side - and get someone who is a serious downfield threat on the other.........would also really open up the field for quick hitters, drags, slants etc. But...but..but..we have the answer in our midst: Ryan Lankford, do we not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Tracker said: But...but..but..we have the answer in our midst: Ryan Lankford, do we not? Your application for OC, has been summarily rejected NorthernSkunk and Wanna-B-Fanboy 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 3 hours ago, do or die said: Your application for OC, has been summarily rejected Damn. Sooo close. ddanger 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
do or die Posted November 20, 2018 Report Share Posted November 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Tracker said: Damn. Sooo close. Buy a Harley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now