Go Bombers Go!!!!!!!!!!!

1 minute ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

I remember reading that Nichols wanted some preseason snaps in order to settle down- apparently he gets really amped up in the beginning of each game at the start of the season.

Maybe he needed a quarter to get settled in. Sure looks like it to me. 

No doubt. A lot of guys are like that, and its odd for QBs. Some need to get hit before they get their head into it 100% (damon allen), all kinds of issues and ways to flip that switch. 

Hard to fault the coaching staff though. They weren't exactly running out a prime oline. 

He needed a quarter to settle in, like a good vet. They made the right decision. 

4 minutes ago, JCon said:

Hard to fault the coaching staff though. They weren't exactly running out a prime oline. 

He needed a quarter to settle in, like a good vet. They made the right decision. 

He had time... he was just missing his throws. 

5 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

 

Mike... I can't remember a game where Nichols threw for 300+ yards and went 1-2 against any defence, let alone against a good defence. Maybe I'm miss remembering, but your million dollar bet isn't worth the time it took you to type it, so I'm not going to go through the stats and try to find one then cross reference that against what I typed around here.

 

NICHOLS, Matt

24/33

72.7%

358

2

0

Calgary week 20  last year 

Calgary had a decent D last year I'd say...

6 hours ago, TBURGESS said:

Mike... I can't remember a game where Nichols threw for 300+ yards and went 1-2 against any defence, let alone against a good defence. 

 

Why does throwing for 300+ mean anything? Why does a QB have to throw for 300. Yes it looks great on the stats sheet and looks impressive overall but dont wins mean more than stats? Reiley threw for over 300 and lost. Mitchel threw for 275 and lost. I see plenty of QBs throw for 300 and still lose the game. 

As long as we are running for 100 - 150 as a team then I don't think the 300  mark really matters.   I'm more concerned when we have to many two and outs and/or when we can't complete basic routine passes. 

8 hours ago, Bomber_fanaddict said:

Why does throwing for 300+ mean anything? Why does a QB have to throw for 300. Yes it looks great on the stats sheet and looks impressive overall but dont wins mean more than stats? Reillly threw for over 300 and lost. Mitchel threw for 275 and lost. I see plenty of QBs throw for 300 and still lose the game. 

Agreed. The Riders has a horribly inept offence last year and still managed to stagger into the playoffs only to be destroyed by the Bombers.

10 hours ago, Geebrr said:

NICHOLS, Matt

24/33

72.7%

358

2

0

Calgary week 20  last year 

Calgary had a decent D last year I'd say...

You got the 300+ yards right, but he went 2-0, not 1-2, and it doesn't prove Mike's point unless I didn't give Nichols his due that day. IIRC I doubt that I said he played a bad game that day, but go back and check if you want.

10 hours ago, Bomber_fanaddict said:

Why does throwing for 300+ mean anything? Why does a QB have to throw for 300. Yes it looks great on the stats sheet and looks impressive overall but dont wins mean more than stats? Reiley threw for over 300 and lost. Mitchel threw for 275 and lost. I see plenty of QBs throw for 300 and still lose the game. 

Stats are just a starting point, not the end of the argument. That being said, throwing for 300+ yards isn't easy. QB's who are 'off' or playing badly don't throw for 300 yards very often. Sometimes it's a function of being behind and having no choice but to throw deep often. Garbage time yards. Sometimes it's because the defence is playing like crap. That wasn't the case in the Bomber game. Mostly it's cuz the QB is throwing the ball where it needs to be. I'd suggest that when a QB throws for 300+ yards and his team lost, that the loss wasn't because the QB played badly that game.

Why do folks keep bringing up wins when they aren't a QB only stat?

QB's often play average or below average and still win games. Dominic Davis threw 0 TD's and 4 ints and 275 yards last week and won. That doesn't make him a good QB that day. BLM threw for the same number of yards with 1 TD and 1 INT. That doesn't make him a good QB that day either.

Edited June 19, 20196 yr by TBURGESS

You are exhausting 

Some people prefer big yardage numbers with lots of turnovers, some people prefer efficiency with lots of touchdowns. Only one approach is a winning one but hey, whatever floats your boat.

TBurg 10 seconds after the Bombers win the Cup:

TBurgess after the Bombers win the cup and Nichols throws for 185 and 3 TDs

Edited June 19, 20196 yr by Gotmilt

Nah, Burgess will be like me.  Spending the day after the Cup, fretting about ....how we will defend it.....................

Edited June 19, 20196 yr by do or die

5 minutes ago, do or die said:

Nah, Burgess will be like me.  Spending the day after the Cup, fretting about ....how we will defend it.....................

I like the way you think.

40 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

You are exhausting 

And yet...  you keep it going.

Stats are misleading sometimes. The turnovers gave the bombers a shorter field so less yards to be gained from the get go. Then you get the strong run game too.... why use passing yardage? Look at the actual performances in the game. Nichols was in complete control and throwing an moving well. He played a real good game.

25 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

And yet...  you keep it going.

Your point was clearly the 300 yard barrier, as it has been the whole time.

It is the basis of your entire argument that Reilly had a good game.

Despite throwing for 100 yards in the 2nd half. And half the 200 coming off busted coverage and missed tackles.

Edited June 19, 20196 yr by Geebrr

Ball  control, run game is (I'm told) more fun for the O line than Pass protection)  helps defence , keeps high scoring opposition O off the field, scores points, uses up the clock, reduces turnovers, probably opens up some long pass chances too..  

Edited June 19, 20196 yr by Mark F

39 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

Your point was clearly the 300 yard barrier, as it has been the whole time.

It is the basis of your entire argument that Reilly had a good game.

Despite throwing for 100 yards in the 2nd half. And half the 200 coming off busted coverage and missed tackles.

There you go again. Restating you premise to keep the stupid argument going. Talk about exhausting. 🙄

My argument wasn't and isn't the 300 yard barrier. Reilly had a good game because he was putting the ball where it needed to me most of the time despite a complete lack of a running game and constant pressure. Pro Tip: All Int's aren't the QB's fault. His first int was a good ball and a better defensive play. His second was a bad ball thrown when they were down by 10 with 4ish minutes left on the clock. Without a running game, what's he supposed to do other than pass?

Did Nichols, who we all agree had a good game, throw for more than 100 yards in the second half?

16 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

There you go again. Restating you premise to keep the stupid argument going. Talk about exhausting. 🙄

My argument wasn't and isn't the 300 yard barrier. Reilly had a good game because he was putting the ball where it needed to me most of the time despite a complete lack of a running game and constant pressure. Pro Tip: All Int's aren't the QB's fault. His first int was a good ball and a better defensive play. His second was a bad ball thrown when they were down by 10 with 4ish minutes left on the clock. Without a running game, what's he supposed to do other than pass?

Did Nichols, who we all agree had a good game, throw for more than 100 yards in the second half?

I didn't mention interceptions at all, so cool story.

Pro tip: you have yet to actually make a compelling point that Reilly had a good game , give that a go.

His 50% completion rate shows what a great game he had. 

You would never give Nichols this kind of excuse.

Keep struggling

1 hour ago, do or die said:

Nah, Burgess will be like me.  Spending the day after the Cup, fretting about ....how we will defend it.....................

Who are you kidding. Like me, you will be so completely stinking drunk and hoarse from yelling that itll take you 3 days to recover. 🙂

1 minute ago, J5V said:

Who are you kidding. Like me, you will be so completely stinking drunk and hoarse from yelling that itll take you 3 days to recover. 🙂

 

1 minute ago, J5V said:

Who are you kidding. Like me, you will be so completely stinking drunk and hoarse from yelling that itll take you 3 days to recover. 🙂

Ah memories. After the 84 cup, I crawled into a kids snow igloo for a snooze. Fortunately it was a very small fort, so 75% of my body stuck out and I was easily found by friends. 

3 minutes ago, J5V said:

Who are you kidding. Like me, you will be so completely stinking drunk and hoarse from yelling that itll take you 3 days to recover. 🙂

I am quite adept at multitasking.   Although we might get the longest O+S in history.....

Bye weeks are tough

...and long....