Blue Bombers Forum
December 16, 2018, 01:14:21 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Why Aren't The Bombers Winning Grey Cups?  (Read 2229 times)
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 20883


« Reply #75 on: November 28, 2018, 08:55:57 PM »

If Nichols was making $100K less, I'd want to keep him for sure.

If Streveler wasn't our backup, I'd want to keep Nichols even with the stupid contract. That's not to say that I think Streveler is a lock to be the next great CFL QB. I like what I've seen so far and I think he could win enough games with our team to get us to the playoffs next year, but I'd want to bring in another young QB with upside to hedge my bet. We'd likely have an extra $100K or so to upgrade another position.

As Nichols was only a difference maker in one game after the Montreal game, I wonder if we'd have won as many games with Streveler starting.

Streveler win loss was 1 - 3 in his 4 starts. Not all on him but IMO we'd have won less games with him starting more games. OTOH it could have been said that it would have better prepared him to become a starter.

The problem is that no team will throw away a season and hope it pays off " later ".
Logged

No more excuses.
Blue In Edmonton
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1657



« Reply #76 on: November 28, 2018, 09:37:36 PM »

If this was the 2015 Bombers, heading into 2016, and Chris Streveler had 4 starts and some significant spot duty under his belt, then I'd be all in on the "make Streveler the starter now and endure the growing pains" path. But we're not the 2015 Bombers. We are not hoping to make the playoffs finally. We are the 2018 Bombers heading into 2019 having won 10+ games in each of the last three seasons. We have a roster (pending FA of course) of talented Canadian players at both skill and grunt positions. We are one of the top teams in the league. The expectations are to win a championship.

If the team decides to go with Streveler, notwithstanding how good he looked in the limited packages that were designed for him, I can't help but think that the team goes backwards.

Now the caveat to this is such: As a long-time fan of the Kansas City Chiefs, I wasn't exactly sure that letting Patrick Mahomes have the reigns this year was going to be good in the immediate short term.

Could Streveler be the CFL's Mahomes? I've often compared Nichols to Alex Smith.
Logged

Posting Live From Home

If we score more points than them, we will probably win.
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 27805


Fort Hew


« Reply #77 on: November 29, 2018, 01:51:57 PM »

Could Streveler be the CFL's Mahomes? I've often compared Nichols to Alex Smith.

Maybe. But to find out, Walters and co. better get him all the weapons he needs to maximize his chances. The receiving corps needs an upgrade.

I agree on the Nichols and Smith comparison. It's pretty spot on, IMO.
Logged

#forthew

#risetogether

You can't fix stupid.
Pigskin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3844


« Reply #78 on: November 29, 2018, 11:03:08 PM »

So let's look at Strevelers record of 1-4.

L to Edmonton when the D couldn't stop a beach ball.
W over Montreal. Streveler put up 56 points.
L to Hamilton. The whole team was terrible.
L to Edmonton when we were playing our 2nd. and 3rd string players against there starters. Also Streveler only played the 1st. half.
Logged
dd
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7017


« Reply #79 on: November 29, 2018, 11:45:32 PM »

If this was the 2015 Bombers, heading into 2016, and Chris Streveler had 4 starts and some significant spot duty under his belt, then I'd be all in on the "make Streveler the starter now and endure the growing pains" path. But we're not the 2015 Bombers. We are not hoping to make the playoffs finally. We are the 2018 Bombers heading into 2019 having won 10+ games in each of the last three seasons. We have a roster (pending FA of course) of talented Canadian players at both skill and grunt positions. We are one of the top teams in the league. The expectations are to win a championship.

If the team decides to go with Streveler, notwithstanding how good he looked in the limited packages that were designed for him, I can't help but think that the team goes backwards.

Now the caveat to this is such: As a long-time fan of the Kansas City Chiefs, I wasn't exactly sure that letting Patrick Mahomes have the reigns this year was going to be good in the immediate short term.

Could Streveler be the CFL's Mahomes? I've often compared Nichols to Alex Smith.
agree that the 2018 bomber roster is much stronger and in better position than when Walters took over, HOWEVER, we still struggle at the Qb and #1 receiver position...we solve those problems, we ll have ourselves a Grey Cup, until then, we'll be competitive but not good enough to win it.
Logged
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5508



« Reply #80 on: November 30, 2018, 12:54:15 AM »

If Nichols was making $100K less, I'd want to keep him for sure.

If Streveler wasn't our backup, I'd want to keep Nichols even with the stupid contract. That's not to say that I think Streveler is a lock to be the next great CFL QB. I like what I've seen so far and I think he could win enough games with our team to get us to the playoffs next year, but I'd want to bring in another young QB with upside to hedge my bet. We'd likely have an extra $100K or so to upgrade another position.

As Nichols was only a difference maker in one game after the Montreal game, I wonder if we'd have won as many games with Streveler starting.

That would be a huge gamble for Walters to take, no logical reason to endanger the entire mother-ship betting on a rookie in order to save an extra $100k.  I predict Nichols will put up another 10+ win season next year, if he does so, how do you justify dumping him?  If he doesn't play well, fine Streveller has his window of opportunity to steal the job.  He had a window in the second half of the Banjo Bowl and almost perfectly duplicated Nichols poor performance. 

NICHOLS, Matt   10/20   50.0%   165   0   3   38
STREVELER, Chris   10/20   50.0%   160   1   2   40
« Last Edit: November 30, 2018, 01:12:29 AM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 20883


« Reply #81 on: November 30, 2018, 01:02:17 AM »

So let's look at Strevelers record of 1-4.

L to Edmonton when the D couldn't stop a beach ball.
W over Montreal. Streveler put up 56 points.
L to Hamilton. The whole team was terrible.
L to Edmonton when we were playing our 2nd. and 3rd string players against there starters. Also Streveler only played the 1st. half.

Many of the losses Nichols had the defense couldn't stop a beach ball either.

Either way. A win or a loss is never only on the QB. You're willing to give Streveler a pass on his losses but seem to want to put all the blame on Nichols for his losses.

It's a team game.
Logged

No more excuses.
Blue In BC
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 20883


« Reply #82 on: November 30, 2018, 01:03:36 AM »

That would be a huge gamble for Walters to take, no logical reason to endanger the entire mother-ship betting on a rookie to save an extra $100k.  I predict Nichols will put up another 10+ win season next year, if he does, how to you justify dumping him?  If he doesn't play well, fine, Streveller has his window of opportunity to steal the job.

We just barely made the play offs with Nichols and 10 wins. How can you predict how many wins we'll get or need in 2019?
Logged

No more excuses.
Throw Long Bannatyne
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5508



« Reply #83 on: November 30, 2018, 01:11:28 AM »

We just barely made the play offs with Nichols and 10 wins. How can you predict how many wins we'll get or need in 2019?

I don't consider this past season to be a good example of what this team or Nichols can achieve, and I expect they will play better next season.

« Last Edit: November 30, 2018, 01:43:02 AM by Throw Long Bannatyne » Logged
dd
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7017


« Reply #84 on: November 30, 2018, 03:27:18 AM »

Many of the losses Nichols had the defense couldn't stop a beach ball either.

Either way. A win or a loss is never only on the QB. You're willing to give Streveler a pass on his losses but seem to want to put all the blame on Nichols for his losses.

It's a team game.
Let?s not sugar coat things or sweep dirt under the carpet here...Ya, it?s a team game, but when we had our losing streak this past season, Nichols absolutely stunk the joint out and literally gave the riders the banjo bowl.
Logged
Cool Spot
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 88


« Reply #85 on: November 30, 2018, 04:11:00 AM »

If your point is that Nichols is better than Willy, then I agree. If your point is that Nichols was a positive difference maker in 2017, then I agree.

Great, then it seems like we're 60-70% aligned!

Quote
We win because of turnovers, short fields, Andrew Harris, our OL and a defense who mostly played great over the last 6 weeks of the season. All Nichols did, in most games, was throw for 175 to 250 yards a game and not turn the ball over. That's enough for us to win because the rest of the team is good enough to win without great QB play.

And this is where we diverge.

Turnovers, short fields, Andrew Harris, and our OL are why I don't worry too much that Nichols doesn't have many 300+ yards. There are other strategies the Bombers can use to win, and you mention them, and a high-passing QB is not a pre-requirement. What I think matters more is low interceptions (cough, Kevin Glenn, cough), because as you say, the two Sask games were more-or-less caused by Nichols with all those interceptions.

Now, I will certainly grant you that Nichols isn't blowing the lights out; I will say he's controlling the game well enough to win and to me that's good enough. But as long as we're laying blame, I'd say the Bombers special teams this year was a far greater concern, continually giving up field position due to a lack of kick return gains, and giving up too many on their own kick returns and losing the field position battle. I'd say that's a bigger problem to remedy than anything Nichols is responsible for.

I understand your point, but I think it's overstated relative to other areas that need addressing first, and the fact that the Bombers' offense doesn't rely upon a high-passing, dominating QB.
Logged
Pigskin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3844


« Reply #86 on: November 30, 2018, 04:23:17 AM »

So it's a double standard, when Streveler starts and the team loses it is fault, but Nichols starts and the team loses it's the teams fault.
Logged
Bluehawk
Full Member
***
Posts: 154


« Reply #87 on: November 30, 2018, 04:46:37 AM »

Its quite simple.
Nichols is a good quarterback
Unless we have a lights out defence we need a great quarterback to win.
BLM was great...they won.
Logged

I'd rather be a Bomber than a .....
kkc60
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3058


« Reply #88 on: November 30, 2018, 05:35:02 AM »

I don't consider this past season to be a good example of what this team or Nichols can achieve, and I expect they will play better next season.


But really so much more falls into that than just Nichols. Other teams will improve. This past year we finished with a D that could win a cup and an offence that couldn't. Past 2 years? The opposite.

Statistically, and just simply looking at it, Nichols regressed. Sure you could argue it was a down year. But remember when Collaros was a year in year out MVP favorite? Or when Jennings was a guy who some thought might go to the NFL or be one of the leagues top QBs? Things happen. Some guys play into their late 30s and other top out after a couple years
Logged
blue_gold_84
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 27805


Fort Hew


« Reply #89 on: November 30, 2018, 01:13:58 PM »

So it's a double standard, when Streveler starts and the team loses it is fault, but Nichols starts and the team loses it's the teams fault.

No, it's not. It's a team game regardless of who's starting behind centre. Nobody gets a pass.
Logged

#forthew

#risetogether

You can't fix stupid.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!