Might not be the best QB in the cfl but what a difference it makes having a guy that can move around in the pocket and make a throw down field. We haven’t had that in a long time. 

I mean, the Brown trade is famously one of the biggest swindles in CFL history. Traded for a pick, which ended up being Jon Oosterhuis, who came to Winnipeg eventually and had a solid career. 

8 minutes ago, Tracker said:

When you consider the state of the team when those players arrived, they were absolute Godsends. They did not produce a Cup win, but they brought sorely needed credibility, and if it had been for Nichols, we would not have been in position for Collaros to take us to the cup game.

If we never got Nichols we probably would've been in on collaros previously. We saw a few qbs move like Reilly and Harris with out much competition. 

 Collaros was soo damaged and broken going into the 19 season. I'll never forget that interview he gave in Regina and how resigned and defeated he sounded before the season. 

I was 100 percent wrong and it seems the perfect conditions came to pass and he is having one of the greatest reclamation eras of any pro qb. He's a great person and player and it's great to see him over come the hard luck and dirty hit. 

 With out medlock if we had plop we mightve  still won last night. But not for certain. If we had Nichols I don't think we could've won that game. 

5 hours ago, wbbfan said:

If we never got Nichols we probably would've been in on collaros previously. We saw a few qbs move like Reilly and Harris with out much competition. 

 Collaros was soo damaged and broken going into the 19 season. I'll never forget that interview he gave in Regina and how resigned and defeated he sounded before the season. 

I was 100 percent wrong and it seems the perfect conditions came to pass and he is having one of the greatest reclamation eras of any pro qb. He's a great person and player and it's great to see him over come the hard luck and dirty hit. 

 With out medlock if we had plop we mightve  still won last night. But not for certain. If we had Nichols I don't think we could've won that game. 

I think last night was a classic LaPo/Nichols game. Ball control offence, heavy run game, control the time of possession. Collaros hardly lit it up, only 217 yards. Nichols would have produced the same, maybe even a few more yards as he would have engaged Oliviera in the swing pass game more (remember his one catch went for 21, so it worked the k e time they went to it). The big difference was Collaros extending plays with his scrambling, but honestly how well did it work?  Don’t recall any big plays out of nothing that often other than the one Demski catch after all the running around, lots of those passes went incomplete anyway, and he took a couple of sacks for big losses where Nichols should have swallowed a smaller sack or thrown it away, or run a controlled rollout. I will say Collaros’ ability to run for first downs was important and above what Nichols could achieve but again that was not a serious weapon he went to again and again. That game was won by the defence, having Nichols and LaPo in yesterday and it is the same result. 

I can see games where the Collaros’ style will win us games because we need to win a gun slinging shootout, but I can also see it costing us games. He was lucky in at least 2 throws not to be picked off. But I was hoping a Grey Cup win might get people to lay off on the Nichols/LaPo bashing. Guess some will be married to that narrative forever, and to me that is disappointing. They deserve better IMO. 

1 hour ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think last night was a classic LaPo/Nichols game. Ball control offence, heavy run game, control the time of possession. Collaros hardly lit it up, only 217 yards. Nichols would have produced the same, maybe even a few more yards as he would have engaged Oliviera in the swing pass game more (remember his one catch went for 21, so it worked the k e time they went to it). The big difference was Collaros extending plays with his scrambling, but honestly how well did it work?  Don’t recall any big plays out of nothing that often other than the one Demski catch after all the running around, lots of those passes went incomplete anyway, and he took a couple of sacks for big losses where Nichols should have swallowed a smaller sack or thrown it away, or run a controlled rollout. I will say Collaros’ ability to run for first downs was important and above what Nichols could achieve but again that was not a serious weapon he went to again and again. That game was won by the defence, having Nichols and LaPo in yesterday and it is the same result. 

I can see games where the Collaros’ style will win us games because we need to win a gun slinging shootout, but I can also see it costing us games. He was lucky in at least 2 throws not to be picked off. But I was hoping a Grey Cup win might get people to lay off on the Nichols/LaPo bashing. Guess some will be married to that narrative forever, and to me that is disappointing. They deserve better IMO. 

All of the longer completions downfield...were on rollouts...the Lawler TDs included. 

I know what you mean though - he is not afraid to try a 50/50 ball once in a while. 

5 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

All of the longer completions downfield...were on rollouts...the Lawler TDs included. 

I know what you mean though - he is not afraid to try a 50/50 ball once in a while. 

I recall some “running like a chicken with his head cut off” scrambles that ended with a log throw that went incomplete. But I may have conveniently forgotten some of the completions. He did seem to hold on to the ball longer than Nichols would have, and extending the play could become very valuable at times. I just hope he doesn’t need to use that escape valve as much as he did yesterday. Quick reads, rather than improvising, would give me more comfort with this offence. Anyway, glad to see some mobility back there, but I don’t think he made the difference where Nichols would not have yesterday. 

1 hour ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think last night was a classic LaPo/Nichols game. Ball control offence, heavy run game, control the time of possession. Collaros hardly lit it up, only 217 yards. Nichols would have produced the same, maybe even a few more yards as he would have engaged Oliviera in the swing pass game more (remember his one catch went for 21, so it worked the k e time they went to it). The big difference was Collaros extending plays with his scrambling, but honestly how well did it work?  Don’t recall any big plays out of nothing that often other than the one Demski catch after all the running around, lots of those passes went incomplete anyway, and he took a couple of sacks for big losses where Nichols should have swallowed a smaller sack or thrown it away, or run a controlled rollout. I will say Collaros’ ability to run for first downs was important and above what Nichols could achieve but again that was not a serious weapon he went to again and again. That game was won by the defence, having Nichols and LaPo in yesterday and it is the same result. 

I can see games where the Collaros’ style will win us games because we need to win a gun slinging shootout, but I can also see it costing us games. He was lucky in at least 2 throws not to be picked off. But I was hoping a Grey Cup win might get people to lay off on the Nichols/LaPo bashing. Guess some will be married to that narrative forever, and to me that is disappointing. They deserve better IMO. 

Nah it was pretty far removed from Nichols and plop. We weren't throwing half our passes to the flats or half way to the marker and expecting yac to bail us out. You didn't see the staples of that offense from the jet sweep to the trick plays or the screens. 

Collaros was on track for 350 and 4tds at the half. He single handedly pulled our offense out of a rut. When the run game got going it was used to kill the clock. Nichols wouldn't have come up either either td or most of the first downs in the first half. He made that happen with his legs and threw frozen ropes deep. 

It worked because the run game had already come back.

He took one big loss at the end of the half. You should go back and watch the game again. I watched it again today and he made a ton happen because of his legs. How do you miss that?

No chance Nichols throws either td pass. Or makes half the first downs happen. 

They both have exactly what they deserve. 

20 minutes ago, Mark H. said:

All of the longer completions downfield...were on rollouts...the Lawler TDs included. 

I know what you mean though - he is not afraid to try a 50/50 ball once in a while. 

Even bubbles could see how collaros legs were the difference maker. His running kick started our whole team. The d was much better after 3 plus possessions. 

9 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I recall some “running like a chicken with his head cut off” scrambles that ended with a log throw that went incomplete. But I may have conveniently forgotten some of the completions. He did seem to hold on to the ball longer than Nichols would have, and extending the play could become very valuable at times. I just hope he doesn’t need to use that escape valve as much as he did yesterday. Quick reads, rather than improvising, would give me more comfort with this offence. Anyway, glad to see some mobility back there, but I don’t think he made the difference where Nichols would not have yesterday. 

Even if his throws after those scrambles are not all complete, they will lead to less pressure at the LOS.  Teams will need to devote more coverage to guys like Lawler and Adams.  It's not just Harris as the safety valve now. 

If memory serves, it takes longer for an offence to gel than a defence, as the defence reacts to the offence, but the offence has to mesh very well to shine.

2 hours ago, Tracker said:

If memory serves, it takes longer for an offence to gel than a defence, as the defence reacts to the offence, but the offence has to mesh very well to shine.

We have the benefit of having guys who have played together for a long time already together. 

On 2021-08-06 at 12:21 AM, Arnold_Palmer said:

Might not be the best QB in the cfl but what a difference it makes having a guy that can move around in the pocket and make a throw down field. We haven’t had that in a long time. 

I genuinely think he is one of the best QBs in the CFL. I've thought so since he first established himself with Toronto. The perception of him being middle of the pack at best is mostly based on injury concerns due to concussions, understandably. If the games were played on PS5 with injuries turned off he's right near the top.

23 minutes ago, Y2C said:

I genuinely think he is one of the best QBs in the CFL. I've thought so since he first established himself with Toronto. The perception of him being middle of the pack at best is mostly based on injury concerns due to concussions, understandably. If the games were played on PS5 with injuries turned off he's right near the top.

The first while in Hamilton he was legit a top guy. The injuries did impact that though.

6 hours ago, Tracker said:

If memory serves, it takes longer for an offence to gel than a defence, as the defence reacts to the offence, but the offence has to mesh very well to shine.

Depends a bit but generally yeah. The offense is more about timing and rhythm. In a heavy match zone system on d it takes a while to get too. Some offenses are less based around timing routes etc but it's still a big group effort. 

On 2021-08-06 at 1:19 PM, bearpants said:

True... those trades were all modern era successes... but Khari, Brown, and Nichols produced exactly 0 grey cups... that would be the major difference...

I hear what you're saying for sure.

 

That said, coming off of 97/98 and Kerwin Bell unsurprisingly being a bust (I was never impressed with his work in Toronto) in 99 onward, and the financial state of the team I don't think it's a stretch to say Khari Jones saved the Blue Bombers.

12 minutes ago, Mr. Perfect said:

I hear what you're saying for sure.

 

That said, coming off of 97/98 and Kerwin Bell unsurprisingly being a bust (I was never impressed with his work in Toronto) in 99 onward, and the financial state of the team I don't think it's a stretch to say Khari Jones saved the Blue Bombers.

You just wanted to see this, don't lie: 

 

The only reason you brought him up 

2 hours ago, Geebrr said:

You just wanted to see this, don't lie: 

 

The only reason you brought him up 

Guilty as charged.

I think we'll see less uncontrolled scrambles the width of the field and back once some familiarity is established with Olivieira in terms of how to leak out and make himself an option for Collaros when the initial pocket is done.  Hopefully we see a bit of this as soon as next Friday.  Olivieira was great in protection but didn't really make himself available Collaros on scrambles.  Harris is a master of this.

On 2021-08-06 at 9:11 PM, TrueBlue4ever said:

I think last night was a classic LaPo/Nichols game. Ball control offence, heavy run game, control the time of possession. Collaros hardly lit it up, only 217 yards. Nichols would have produced the same, maybe even a few more yards as he would have engaged Oliviera in the swing pass game more (remember his one catch went for 21, so it worked the k e time they went to it). The big difference was Collaros extending plays with his scrambling, but honestly how well did it work?  Don’t recall any big plays out of nothing that often other than the one Demski catch after all the running around, lots of those passes went incomplete anyway, and he took a couple of sacks for big losses where Nichols should have swallowed a smaller sack or thrown it away, or run a controlled rollout. I will say Collaros’ ability to run for first downs was important and above what Nichols could achieve but again that was not a serious weapon he went to again and again. That game was won by the defence, having Nichols and LaPo in yesterday and it is the same result. 

I can see games where the Collaros’ style will win us games because we need to win a gun slinging shootout, but I can also see it costing us games. He was lucky in at least 2 throws not to be picked off. But I was hoping a Grey Cup win might get people to lay off on the Nichols/LaPo bashing. Guess some will be married to that narrative forever, and to me that is disappointing. They deserve better IMO. 

Nichols is toast.

5 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I think we'll see less uncontrolled scrambles the width of the field and back once some familiarity is established with Olivieira in terms of how to leak out and make himself an option for Collaros when the initial pocket is done.  Hopefully we see a bit of this as soon as next Friday.  Olivieira was great in protection but didn't really make himself available Collaros on scrambles.  Harris is a master of this.

Nichols is toast.

Let’s hope there is more controlled rollouts and less of the crazy scrambling. Nice weapon to have, but not make it a regular feature of the game. 

And yes, Nichols looks done. Pre-injury 2019 Nichols could have won the game against the Ticats IMO, but the current version would not have fared well at all. 

15 minutes ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I think we'll see less uncontrolled scrambles the width of the field and back once some familiarity is established with Olivieira in terms of how to leak out and make himself an option for Collaros when the initial pocket is done.  Hopefully we see a bit of this as soon as next Friday.  Olivieira was great in protection but didn't really make himself available Collaros on scrambles.  Harris is a master of this.

Nichols is toast.

Some play action boots could really cause fits for the defense. We faked it for ages but didn't really have a threat to throw on the run well. 

13 hours ago, JuranBoldenRules said:

I think we'll see less uncontrolled scrambles the width of the field and back once some familiarity is established with Olivieira in terms of how to leak out and make himself an option for Collaros when the initial pocket is done.  Hopefully we see a bit of this as soon as next Friday.  Olivieira was great in protection but didn't really make himself available Collaros on scrambles.  Harris is a master of this.

Once Oliviera gets better at that, they will have the dual threat of him as a safety valve, with the added possibilty of Collaros throwing downfield. 

Once Darvin returns and Nelson is sitting or just used for kick returns.. the O will get better. Thought Nelson was invisible. Darvin gets 2 to 4 catches and 50 60 75 extra yards. 

And Darvins blocking downfield is huge..as is his leadership and ability to get db's off their game and more concerned with chirping

13 hours ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

Let’s hope there is more controlled rollouts and less of the crazy scrambling. Nice weapon to have, but not make it a regular feature of the game. 

And yes, Nichols looks done. Pre-injury 2019 Nichols could have won the game against the Ticats IMO, but the current version would not have fared well at all. 

The crazy scrambling is part of his game. You don't want to tame his creativity. What you do want to tame is his risk of injury by getting hit. Scrambling can save him as well as hurt him. But that could be said for a pocket passer who stands in there & gets creamed. 

38 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Once Darvin returns and Nelson is sitting or just used for kick returns.. the O will get better. Thought Nelson was invisible. Darvin gets 2 to 4 catches and 50 60 75 extra yards. 

Nelson made a couple nice plays. One good catch at the 5 yard line. It was his first game with Collaros.

I'd like to see Darvin back too though. 

21 minutes ago, Booch said:

And Darvins blocking downfield is huge..as is his leadership and ability to get db's off their game and more concerned with chirping

My favourite quote from the Grey Cup. Darvin looking at the Hamilton sideline as he's coming off the field "where's my dog?" 

1 hour ago, Mark H. said:

Once Oliviera gets better at that, they will have the dual threat of him as a safety valve, with the added possibilty of Collaros throwing downfield. 

Hope he has good hands and the ability to run good routes- Harris was great at both.