It might be just a select few posters I'm seeing do this, but man some of these criticisms just get so old.  Sure it's all warranted and good to rip the guy when he throws bad passes or makes a bad decision, but now it's rip him even when he completes a deep ball to Matthews that was called back, or the one to Whitehead that stood?  I mean, what is this?  Some Nichols witch hunt where he can do no right or something?

I'm not going to pretend that Nichols was all good, but on series's where our offense was off he wasn't the only one who made the errors.  Andrew Harris was not good either outside his TD catch and had as much to do with the struggles, as did Fenner on defense, Adams and some of Lapo's play calls that 17to85 talks about.

Nichols isn't above criticism and he doesn't necessarily deserve heaps of praise on his head.  But it's absolutely ridiculous to assume that he single-handedly wins or loses games.  That's not how Mike O'Shea's team works.

And his passing yards are meaningless.  You can rack up yards all day against bend but don't break defenses, but if you don't get TDs out of them, you are overrated.  Yup, I said it.  Passing yards are completely meaningless.

Edited June 29, 20196 yr by USABomberfan

17 minutes ago, Booch said:

considering that the only free agents next year are Arbuckle..Streveler...most likely Bridge and other random back-ups...whom else do you suggest the Bombers sign??...Nichols is already under contract regardless, so he will be here...possibly re-structured, but Strev will be signed with incentive, and caveat that if he wins out as starter, he will get proper compensation for first time starter contract...can deal with the Nichols issues then after camp

Masoli but he will be coming off a ACL tear

I wonder why some find it so unreasonable for others to expect the highest paid person on the team to actually earn his pay check...

1 minute ago, 66 Chevelle said:

I wonder why some find it so unreasonable for others to expect the highest paid person on the team to actually earn his pay check...

HE GOT A WIN!!!!!!!!

2 minutes ago, Noeller said:

HE GOT A WIN!!!!!!!!

that's a pretty bold comment given the fact that the offense actually scored 0 points... again, what did Nichols do to earn his pay check, the biggest one of the team in a TEAM win?

Well he never turned ball over...got us in position to kick 2 field goals...another where we failed on 3rd and short...and put up 33 some odd minutes of time of possesion...effectively keping Cgy off the score board...there is that aspect that can't be understated

Maybe it's football gods shining down on him for many many many games in 2016 and 2017 where he put up over 30 points as the QB and we lost because our defense couldn't stop a JUCO offence consistently

Edited August 9, 20196 yr by Booch

do we blame Nichols because the punt return team turned two potential offensive series into automatic TDs??

 

Just now, Noeller said:

do we blame Nichols because the punt return team turned two potential offensive series into automatic TDs??

Do we blame him for dropping a pass perfectly into a receivers hands in the end zone but it gets bobbled? 

 

2 minutes ago, Noeller said:

do we blame Nichols because the punt return team turned two potential offensive series into automatic TDs??

No, but some folks want to say he's a good QB because we won even tho it was because of 2 kick returns.

Nichols is only adequate. Down after down, he is predictable. Changing him up, now and then with Streveler, increases his effectiveness. When the Coaching staff finally realizes we can use BOTH QBs, this team will have reached a higher level. 

Do it.

and, just for the record, I'm not absolving Nichols of anything or saying he's the second coming of Tom Brady, but Jesus.....some of you are so far out too lunch and just CONSUMED by negativity. I've seen enough 3-15's to last a lifetime.....I'm gonna enjoy 6-2, thanks.

do we blame him for only being able to get the offense into the opponents red zone twice during the entire game? And one of those times was due to a penalty being called on Calgary and if not, would have been another punt as the pass was complete yet short of the first down... 

 

17 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

Nichols is only adequate. Down after down, he is predictable. Changing him up, now and then with Streveler, increases his effectiveness. When the Coaching staff finally realizes we can use BOTH QBs, this team will have reached a higher level. 

Do it.

adequate [ ad-i-kwit ]

adjective

 

as much or as good as necessary for some requirement or purpose; fully sufficient, suitable, or fit 

 

 

 

As long as there is a plan for inserting Streveler into the game, I have no problem with it.  I'm not sure it's fair to him if it's on a willy-nilly basis (not saying you're suggesting that).  

is it not reasonable to be concerned about our offense moving forward when you consider that almost half, 8 of 18, completions were to our running back? that our running back was the most targeted receiver and had twice as many targets than the any of our receivers (8 Harris, 4 Matthews)? that half, 9 of 18, completions resulting in 67 of his 177 total passing yards were passes thrown on average 1 foot, (12"), each?    

nope hahahahahha

1 minute ago, 66 Chevelle said:

is it not reasonable to be concerned about our offense moving forward when you consider that almost half, 8 of 18, completions were to our running back? that our running back was the most targeted receiver and had twice as many targets than the any of our receivers (8 Harris, 4 Matthews)? that half, 9 of 18, completions resulting in 67 of his 177 total passing yards were passes thrown on average 1 foot, (12"), each?    

It's reasonable to be concerned.  It's not reasonable to suggest that you bench the starting quarterback of the team with the best record in the league in the first week of August.

1 minute ago, Booch said:

nope hahahahahha

ok, I'm good with that then... at least someone willing to be reasonable and objective as to why there is concern... it when the others try to say we're crazy that makes it intolerable, at least to me...

1 minute ago, Wideleft said:

It's reasonable to be concerned.  It's not reasonable to suggest that you bench the starting quarterback of the team with the best record in the league in the first week of August.

I don't believe you will find anywhere here that I've suggested that Nichols should be benched in favor of anyone... but, don't you find it a little suspect when the game is on the line that the coach send Streveler out to secure the game instead of Nichols? 

1 minute ago, 66 Chevelle said:

I don't believe you will find anywhere here that I've suggested that Nichols should be benched in favor of anyone... but, don't you find it a little suspect when the game is on the line that the coach send Streveler out to secure the game instead of Nichols? 

Not you, but there's a whole thread dedicated to it. Streveler being in was not suspect when everyone knew that the Bombers weren't going to throw the ball (that's on Lapo).  Just made the run play a little more difficult to defend.  

5 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

I don't believe you will find anywhere here that I've suggested that Nichols should be benched in favor of anyone... but, don't you find it a little suspect when the game is on the line that the coach send Streveler out to secure the game instead of Nichols? 

Nope and it's been said on here many times that the coach wanted the dual running threat with Streveler and Harris. One of the few good  things Lapo did last night.

Edited August 9, 20196 yr by B-F-F-C

so nobody believes that it had anything to do with Nichols not being able to get a first down in like situations in games past? ok, lol...

1 minute ago, 66 Chevelle said:

so nobody believes that it had anything to do with Nichols not being able to get a first down in like situations in games past? ok, lol...

So he's going to leave him in the game for 59 minutes and then pull him in the last minute because he doesn't have confidence in him to get a first down?  Sounds suspect to me.

well then that's pretty sad then, if your best shot of securing victory doesn't include your highest paid player, not only on offense but the entire team, and you would rather have a back up out there getting it done... don't care why the reason... 

6 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

well then that's pretty sad then, if your best shot of securing victory doesn't include your highest paid player, not only on offense but the entire team, and you would rather have a back up out there getting it done... don't care why the reason... 

Highest paid player has nothing to do with it.  I've provided my reasoning and defended it but there's obviously nothing I say that's going to change your mind. 

✌️ out

 

3 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

Highest paid player has nothing to do with it.  I've provided my reasoning and defended it but there's obviously nothing I say that's going to change your mind. 

✌️ out

 

honestly not trying to be difficult or argumentative, just looking for perspective from those that feel differently than I do... that's all...

26 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

ok, I'm good with that then... at least someone willing to be reasonable and objective as to why there is concern... it when the others try to say we're crazy that makes it intolerable, at least to me...

Dont worry, you're not the only crazy one.

Edited August 9, 20196 yr by Bigblue204