Not sure where to post this... Bombers free-agent list per (3DownNation) 

Offense:
QB Collaros
QB Streveler
QB Nichols
OL Bryant
OL Hardrick
OL Neufeld*
OL Couture*
RB Augustine*
WR Adams
WR Wolitarsky*

Defense
DE Jefferson
DE Roh  
DT Nevis
DT Thomas*
LB Thomas 
LB Jones
DB Rose
DB Sayles
DB Maston
DB Taylor
DB Fenner
DB Hecht*
DB D.Jones*
DB Gaitor (I think he should be in the list)
 

I think we make Collaros a decent offer. Not over the top, saving room for the OL, D and a good increase for Streveler.

Whatever verbal deal Collaros may have had with TO, may have changed after winning the lat 4 games without getting his bell rung and going into offseason with the GC win.

 

If not, I think we roll with Strevy and McGuire. McGuire look promising, but so does just about every other backup we've ever had. Strevy keeps learning and improves passing game, he could be very very good. It may be his time.

 

 I've watched new QBs like Evans, Adams etc run around, escape pressure and chuck the ball downfield for a big gain or TD. Unfortunately that doesn't happen when Nichols get's pressure. 

I like Nichols and I appreciate his contribution to the team so far. Emotions aside I think it's time to move on.

32 minutes ago, Booch said:

But if he has no intention of not signing here but in T.O then he's out of the question

Arbuckle is not the answer and a huge risk...he's a second year QB with minimal experience...So Matt may be the best choice as we season Strev...

He has never said he doesn’t want to sign here so I have no idea where you’re getting this info from. If he’s told you personally tell us.

2 minutes ago, Marshall said:

I think we make Collaros a decent offer. Not over the top, saving room for the OL, D and a good increase for Streveler.

Whatever verbal deal Collaros may have had with TO, may have changed after winning the lat 4 games without getting his bell rung and going into offseason with the GC win.

 

If not, I think we roll with Strevy and McGuire. McGuire look promising, but so does just about every other backup we've ever had. Strevy keeps learning and improves passing game, he could be very very good. It may be his time.

 

 I've watched new QBs like Evans, Adams etc run around, escape pressure and chuck the ball downfield for a big gain or TD. Unfortunately that doesn't happen when Nichols get's pressure. 

I like Nichols and I appreciate his contribution to the team so far. Emotions aside I think it's time to move on.

Going in with only Streveler and McGuire wOils be crazy. We need a clear number 1 qb who can push the ball down field.

We will have to pay, and commit term, and lose our 1st to get Collaros.

I'm not sure we are in a hurry to do that. l

3 minutes ago, Nickthesizz said:

Going in with only Streveler and McGuire wOils be crazy. We need a clear number 1 qb who can push the ball down field.

I think Streveler can be that guy. 

 

4 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

We will have to pay, and commit term, and lose our 1st to get Collaros.

I'm not sure we are in a hurry to do that. l

No question he was brought in as a rental for the playoff run. Things change and I think anyone would give up a first rounder for a GC. He earned a contract offer. 

14 minutes ago, Marshall said:

I think we make Collaros a decent offer. Not over the top, saving room for the OL, D and a good increase for Streveler.

Whatever verbal deal Collaros may have had with TO, may have changed after winning the lat 4 games without getting his bell rung and going into offseason with the GC win.

 

If not, I think we roll with Strevy and McGuire. McGuire look promising, but so does just about every other backup we've ever had. Strevy keeps learning and improves passing game, he could be very very good. It may be his time.

 

 I've watched new QBs like Evans, Adams etc run around, escape pressure and chuck the ball downfield for a big gain or TD. Unfortunately that doesn't happen when Nichols get's pressure. 

I like Nichols and I appreciate his contribution to the team so far. Emotions aside I think it's time to move on.

So go into the season only with a qb who has a handful of starts and the back up being a qb who has 3 throws all together? Yikes 

5 minutes ago, Marshall said:

No question he was brought in as a rental for the playoff run. Things change and I think anyone would give up a first rounder for a GC. He earned a contract offer. 

I'm not totally against it. 

What impact does that have on the rest of the roster though? 

It is a dilemma 

We have to have Nichols or ZC.  Not willing to run with 2 prospects at QB

we need a vet...and Strev...who the vet will be is the million dollar question

I can't see tho if Zack isn't signed prior to free agency that why we would have to give up a pick then...cause he is a free agent then...If BC or Sask or whoever signed him if not us wouldn't be giving up no pick..Pretty sure that only is if we sign him before he gets to free agency

7 minutes ago, Booch said:

we need a vet...and Strev...who the vet will be is the million dollar question

I can't see tho if Zack isn't signed prior to free agency that why we would have to give up a pick then...cause he is a free agent then...If BC or Sask or whoever signed him if not us wouldn't be giving up no pick..Pretty sure that only is if we sign him before he gets to free agency

maybe they can have an agreement in place and then comes the first hour of free-agency he will sign. 

Lotta revisionist history about Nichols. He took deep shots and completed deep shots before he was injured. During that 7-2 run, we had the highest-producing offense in the league and our red zone production was off the charts. 

1 minute ago, M.O.A.B. said:

maybe they can have an agreement in place and then comes the first hour of free-agency he will sign. 

I don't see Walters doing that. What he (and others) have built so far with this organization seems based on integrity 

37 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

We will have to pay, and commit term, and lose our 1st to get Collaros.

I'm not sure we are in a hurry to do that. l

We could always draw up a contract that both parties are good with. Put the contract in a drawer....

Then let Zach "hit free agency" and sign him then. 

Boom- Zach and a first rounder...

 

All the above totally depends on the language in the agreement of the trade...

my guess, Nichols Streveller and McGuire back next season.

28 minutes ago, Booch said:

we need a vet...and Strev...who the vet will be is the million dollar question

I can't see tho if Zack isn't signed prior to free agency that why we would have to give up a pick then...cause he is a free agent then...If BC or Sask or whoever signed him if not us wouldn't be giving up no pick..Pretty sure that only is if we sign him before he gets to free agency

It is a good question, but it would open the door to waiting one minute into Free Agency and re-signing here.

It would reek of fuckery

12 minutes ago, wanna-b-fanboy said:

We could always draw up a contract that both parties are good with. Put the contract in a drawer....

Then let Zach "hit free agency" and sign him then. 

Boom- Zach and a first rounder...

 

All the above totally depends on the language in the agreement of the trade...

Yeesh that is going to look bad.

It is a super small league, don't think you want to get that reputation.

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by Geebrr

4 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

Yeesh that is going to look bad.

It is a super small league, don't think you want to get that reputation.

Yeah... I guess you are right. That would go against everything that the Canadian Mafia is about. Integrity.

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by wanna-b-fanboy

6 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

Yeesh that is going to look bad.

It is a super small league, don't think you want to get that reputation.

The reputation of maximizing gains? I'd want that reputation. If the mutually agreed upon wording of the deal allows this... then savvy play by Walters, and a goof-up on Clemons part. TS to anyone that can't shark-proof their own deals, I say!

10 minutes ago, MOBomberFan said:

The reputation of maximizing gains? I'd want that reputation. If the mutually agreed upon wording of the deal allows this... then savvy play by Walters, and a goof-up on Clemons part. TS to anyone that can't shark-proof their own deals, I say!

The reputation of collusion and not making deals in good faith.

Hard enough to make trades. You don't make it easier ******* a team around.

37 minutes ago, Mark F said:

my guess, Nichols Streveller and McGuire back next season.

That's my guess too. I'd prefer Collaros over Nichols, but, I think Collaros will be in the east. I think Walters will do short, incentive laden contracts for both Nichols and Streveler, because there are concerns around both (Nichols - recovery from throwing shoulder surgery; Streveler - cool dude, tough competitor, but will he be a top tier CFL QB ever?). McGuire is a wildcard. Throws a great ball; athletic enough - he could ultimately be the best of the three. 

Edited November 27, 20196 yr by M.Silverback

12 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

The reputation of collusion and not making deals in good faith.

Hard enough to make trades. You don't make it easier ******* a team around.

And we would be livid if another team did that to us. 

Not much different than Durant f**king us over for a free payday.  Not technically against the rules, but a d-bag move nonetheless.

14 minutes ago, Geebrr said:

The reputation of collusion and not making deals in good faith.

Hard enough to make trades. You don't make it easier ******* a team around.

Let's say Collaros doesn't want to go back to TO (he probably does, let's suspend reality for a sec), or decides he wants to stay here... are we not allowed to offer him a contract lest we risk being seen as underhanded? Makes very little sense to me.

51 minutes ago, Noeller said:

Lotta revisionist history about Nichols. He took deep shots and completed deep shots before he was injured. During that 7-2 run, we had the highest-producing offense in the league and our red zone production was off the charts. 

We were the highest scoring TEAM in the league.  You can win with Nichols providing the competition is relatively average/poor and D/ST score a lot.  Sort of the Sask 2018 model with Collaros.  I don’t think you win a Grey Cup that way.

Our D and ST scored just under 9 points a game directly in our first 7 wins and handed the ball over to the O inside the red zone almost once a game in the 7 wins.  So that’s about 13 points per game on average from the D/ST, and we were scoring just over 30 in those games.

A good O on its own should put up 21-24 points a game and a great one is more like 27-28.  With Nichols we were well under 20 this season even in wins against mostly putrid opposition (Ottawa x2, BC x2, Edmonton, Toronto, Calgary Janarion night).

Nichols was pretty bad to close 18, worse in 19 and now coming off a devastating injury to his throwing shoulder.

To me at this point I’d bring in an OC who can scheme RPO and a great run/screen game and go all-in on Streveler with Nichols or Collaros backing up.

1 minute ago, bigg jay said:

And we would be livid if another team did that to us. 

Not much different than Durant f**king us over for a free payday.  Not technically against the rules, but a d-bag move nonetheless.

Glad you brought that up. Good example.... we held the door open for him, he walked through it. We should have worded our contract better. Bad move by Walters (at the time... really, let's be glad he left, we unearthed Streveler as a result). Durant is an ******* but he operated within the wording of that contract. TS for us.