It hurts to say because I'm a big fan of Matt, but Streveler is the guy I think right now. 

and I feel like I've been fooled by Nichols just 1 to many times, glimpses of what could be followed by mediocre, at best, play and disappointing losses... all things being equal? I'll admit that I'd rather lose with Streveler if we're destined to lose anyway... at least I think I would never feel like we're out of the game, or, just sitting back waiting for the doom to appear as we've grown accustomed to with Nichols... for some, a winning record for the season is enough... I'd rather enjoy watching the games for the entire season... may lose more but I doubt there would be a lack of excitement while doing so...

12 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

and I agree with you that the rules 'back in the day' allowed a more physical type of game play... however, those guys, as tough as they were, were not the physical beast that today's players have become... not to say they were strong, mean, aggressive, and at times even played dirty, lol... but you would also see these guys sitting in the locker room smoking too, lol... today's players are bigger, faster, and stronger than those of days gone by... they also play more games than those before them...

truth be told, it's probably hard to compare the two eras fairly... but you don't see today's professional running backs have the length of career that a lot of running back of the past had...  but regardless, I don't think any modern player can approach 300 to 400 touches a year for many seasons without blowing something out... a lot of todays professional running backs have already seen similar action at the college level, a lot have been used like a loaned out mule already by the time they make the pros, lol...

if nothing else, it's worth knowing and watching how it pans out...

Well, it's interesting for sure. I think football at its core is the same as it was 30 years ago. A collision sport & not a contact sport. The only positions you see bigger players from that era are on the lines. Receivers, O & D backs as well as  linebackers are still the same.  It's a cool discussion, though.

7 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

however, if you were to compare Bo Levi Mitchell and Nichols career numbers you'd see that BLM also has more INTS, but, he also has a win/loss record of 70-16 compared to Nichols 43-28... which QB do you take?

Still Nichols. Mitchell is so self-interested and conceded it's obnoxious.

5 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

Alright I'm out of ammo... agree to disagree I guess, this is pointless.

I'm not trying to beat you down here, so I apologize if it comes across that way, lol... this is a forum, a place people discuss things... just enjoying a discussion with you is all...

1 minute ago, Eternal optimist said:

Still Nichols. Mitchell is so self-interested and conceded it's obnoxious.

Or is it just super confidence?

1 minute ago, Eternal optimist said:

Still Nichols. Mitchell is so self-interested and conceded it's obnoxious.

seriously? lol... that is interesting to say the least... it goes to show you that for some, it's about more that just your typical results...  and I get that actually, being an 'older' adult myself, I remember a time when 'team' was as important to the fan as the results were...

1 minute ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Or is it just super confidence?

how does that saying go? "it's not bragging if I can back it up"...???  lol...

7 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Well, it's interesting for sure. I think football at its core is the same as it was 30 years ago. A collision sport & not a contact sport. The only positions you see bigger players from that era are on the lines. Receivers, O & D backs as well as  linebackers are still the same.  It's a cool discussion, though.

but, wouldn't it be cool if as a fan you could actually have teams from the past, in their prime, play teams from today? we can only dream of such match ups...

Bo was interviewed last week here in Calgary. He says he knows how he is perceived.  He says that arrogance is just confidence & that a qb has to have that confidence to be a leader & to inspire his teammates to be successful.

4 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

seriously? lol... that is interesting to say the least... it goes to show you that for some, it's about more that just your typical results...  and I get that actually, being an 'older' adult myself, I remember a time when 'team' was as important to the fan as the results were...

Mitchell is definitely the better QB, though I'd argue that's attributable much more to the team surrounding him than his individual abilities as a QB. He is the straw that stirs the Stamps' drink on offense, but they've also had fantastic D and STs over the last decade or so. Besides, even if we could've coaxed him over here, his contract would've been even more massive than what CAL paid for him, we wouldn't be fielding the same level of team... other areas would suffer.

1 minute ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Bo was interviewed last week here in Calgary. He says he knows how he is perceived.  He says that arrogance is just confidence & that a qb has to have that confidence to be a leader & to inspire his teammates to be successful.

and I doubt that he cares what any fan or media member would have to say about his game in a negative way... I think that I recall hearing that BLM has not lost games back to back in his career yet? does that sound right?

1 minute ago, Eternal optimist said:

Mitchell is definitely the better QB, though I'd argue that's attributable much more to the team surrounding him than his individual abilities as a QB. He is the straw that stirs the Stamps' drink on offense, but they've also had fantastic D and STs over the last decade or so. Besides, even if we could've coaxed him over here, his contract would've been even more massive than what CAL paid for him, we wouldn't be fielding the same level of team... other areas would suffer.

agreed… in my short time of following the CFL I find that Calgary is more of a 'reload' team than a 'rebuild' team... they seem to have a knack for finding good, young talent that is ready to play, or, they have had a system that seems to get the most of their players...

I do think that it would be tough for Nichols to have a better all around cast of supporting players than he does this year... so for me, if he can't get it done this year I would have serious doubt of him ever being able to do so... I honestly think that we have assembled a championship caliber team, talent wise... of course, chemistry and luck also have a say in some of it...

3 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

and I doubt that he cares what any fan or media member would have to say about his game in a negative way... I think that I recall hearing that BLM has not lost games back to back in his career yet? does that sound right?

Well, back in 2017 they ended their regular season on a 3-game skid. Though they likely already had first locked up (13-1-1 before losing streak), so I think that technically counts, but really they were in cruise control gearing up for the playoffs... those games practically meant nothing to CAL.

1 minute ago, Eternal optimist said:

Well, back in 2017 they ended their regular season on a 3-game skid. Though they likely already had first locked up (13-1-1 before losing streak), so I think that technically counts, but really they were in cruise control gearing up for the playoffs... those games practically meant nothing to CAL.

and in one of those last 3 games the Bombers played them at Calgary in a cold, wintery bluster which matched us up against young Mr. Arbuckle... it was LeFevour vs Arbuckle, which we won... ah... good times...

I had a lot of hope for our 2017 season... thought we had a good chance to win it that year... I actually have a ball that was caught for our first TD in the WSF game from that year...

58 minutes ago, Ripper said:

I know, but replacing him as a Canadian is another issue

We have another Canuck, Johnny Augustine who looks to be quicker and more elusive than Harris but probably not as powerful or experienced but his hands are unknown. I think we're ok there but its hard to replace an all-star. We also have Brady Oliviera on the IR and gone for the year but he looked very good in his brief stint.

2 minutes ago, Tracker said:

We have another Canuck, Johnny Augustine who looks to be quicker and more elusive than Harris but probably not as powerful or experienced but his hands are unknown. I think we're ok there but its hard to replace an all-star. We also have Brady Oliviera on the IR and gone for the year but he looked very good in his brief stint.

Oliviera's injury was unfortunate... not to mention it looked pretty nasty... hope he has a full recovery...

27 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

and I doubt that he cares what any fan or media member would have to say about his game in a negative way... I think that I recall hearing that BLM has not lost games back to back in his career yet? does that sound right?

Probably. That sounds about right.

It would be very nice if a local media person would actually do an in depth interview with the coaches or Nichols.   Maybe ask to see if the dump offs to Harris are by design or a safe out because the receivers are being covered. 

13 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

Oliviera's injury was unfortunate... not to mention it looked pretty nasty... hope he has a full recovery...

Foot surgery is tricky with so many bones. The recovery is long as well.

15 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Probably. That sounds about right.

 

44 minutes ago, 66 Chevelle said:

and I doubt that he cares what any fan or media member would have to say about his game in a negative way... I think that I recall hearing that BLM has not lost games back to back in his career yet? does that sound right?

Just back-to-back Grey Cups (2016, 2017) lol.

4 minutes ago, Eternal optimist said:

 

Just back-to-back Grey Cups (2016, 2017) lol.

and one of those was all on Mr. Mitchell with a very poorly underthrown ball that was intercepted in the endzone… 

I feel like, if they had to, they could run Demski in Harris's place. He's not as good a runner, but he does a lot of similar things in the offense and CAN play RB if needed... 

7 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I feel like, if they had to, they could run Demski in Harris's place. He's not as good a runner, but he does a lot of similar things in the offense and CAN play RB if needed... 

Similar to how, if I had to, I could hitchhike to work tomorrow.

6 minutes ago, Noeller said:

I feel like, if they had to, they could run Demski in Harris's place. He's not as good a runner, but he does a lot of similar things in the offense and CAN play RB if needed... 

Demski can't block for ****, which is why he was the first of the Bison triumvirate to make the move to receiver and has never played special teams aside from returning.

He can carry the ball but there's no way in hell they'd run a straight drop back with him as the 6th blocker.