Winnipeg Blue Bombers agree to terms with Reggie White Jr.: sources

[dd]

Garbage comment. Grow up.

Just being honest bro, take off your blue shades when you watch the game. I honestly thought Matt Nichols played as good as Collaros did last season, very inconsistent and throwing a ton of picks is what I remember.

[TecnoGenius]

Matt Nichols never looked as good as Zach Collaros.

I have a ton of games on PVR from '18 and '19 that say otherwise!!  You're being blinded by bias.  Zach had a ton of stinky clinkers in '23 and '24.  Including the GC(s).

[Sir Blue and Gold]

I have a ton of games on PVR from '18 and '19 that say otherwise!!  You're being blinded by bias.  Zach had a ton of stinky clinkers in '23 and '24.  Including the GC(s).

I can't speak to what's on your PVR and Collaros as he's got older and as defenses have had time to scheme him has been less effective (while still winning boat loads of games) but if you think that the two were equally talented I wholeheartedly disagree. They are two different tiers of players.

[blue_gold_84]

Just being honest bro, take off your blue shades when you watch the game. I honestly thought Matt Nichols played as good as Collaros did last season, very inconsistent and throwing a ton of picks is what I remember.

The irony of you accusing anyone else of being biased is comical. And you're not being honest at all.

Go look at the stats yourself. 2017 (103.8 QBR) and 2019 (107.2 QBR) are two examples where Nichols played very well. The latter was unfortunately short-lived due to injury.

Also: Nichols never threw more picks than TDs during his time with the Bombers. I'm no mathematician but 89 TDs to 42 INTs flies in the face of your dishonest claim.

Like I said: grow up and try being objective. Nobody likes liars, bro.

[Throw Long Bannatyne]

Just being honest bro, take off your blue shades when you watch the game. I honestly thought Matt Nichols played as good as Collaros did last season, very inconsistent and throwing a ton of picks is what I remember.

Two things Matt Nichols was allergic to, throwing picks and being sacked. He rarely threw 50/50 balls because LaPo programmed him to look for the safest route to the opposition 40, which was Medlock territory. Everything beyond 3 points was considered gravy.

[TecnoGenius]

I can't speak to what's on your PVR and Collaros as he's got older and as defenses have had time to scheme him has been less effective (while still winning boat loads of games) but if you think that the two were equally talented I wholeheartedly disagree. They are two different tiers of players.

I never said they were equally talented.  Zach always had that something "extra".  But Matty was a very good QB when his team was good and gelled around him.  We had long stretches of superb winning at home with Matty at the helm, with bucket tons of O.

I agree with everything you say here, what bugs me is some thinking Bad Zach is always better than Best Day Nichols.  It's not true.

[TecnoGenius]

Two things Matt Nichols was allergic to, throwing picks and being sacked. He rarely threw 50/50 balls because LaPo programmed him to look for the safest route to the opposition 40, which was Medlock territory. Everything beyond 3 points was considered gravy.

And that ideology lasted well into the Zach years.  It was when Meddie quit that we stopped that paradigm.  And that's too bad, as the "just get to the 40" was a superb game plan that won us a ton of games.

[dd]

Go look at the stats yourself. 2017 (103.8 QBR) and 2019 (107.2 QBR) are two examples where Nichols played very well. The latter was unfortunately short-lived due to injury.

Also: Nichols never threw more picks than TDs during his time with the Bombers. I'm no mathematician but 89 TDs to 42 INTs flies in the face of your dishonest claim.

In 2024, Collaros was ranked 9th out of 9 starting Qb's in the league, so last, threw 17 TD's and 15 picks, and don't include the Grey Cup stats as it would be 17 TD's, 19 picks...those are backup stats. Everyone likes to kick around Nichols, I was just pointing out our beloved Zachary looked bad at times this year, real bad. He started off like wild fire for us, but the last 2 years has struggled with playing consistent, clean football.

[TecnoGenius]

He started off like wild fire for us, but the last 2 years has struggled with playing consistent, clean football.

Yup, he's has great games ('24 WDF was good for example), and a whole lot more clinkers lately.  The D helped out drastically in '24 to get us those W's.

I think Zach can still do it, but we really need to get better on OL, and Zach really needs to up his game.  I want him to work on a faster wind-up.  He may be the slowest in the league and it gives DBs a chance to jump routes.

We need near-league-top OL to have a great Zach, and we need to start treating Zach more like a late-stage Ricky Ray -- just stay in the pocket and deliver the ball.

[Jesse]

I agree with everything you say here, what bugs me is some thinking Bad Zach is always better than Best Day Nichols.  It's not true.

It's just an odd point to make.

Every bad QB has had good games that are better than a good QBs bad games. What's the point?

And I'm not saying Marty was a bad QB. He was great for us, just not sure what point you're trying to make with that one.

[TecnoGenius]

It's just an odd point to make.

Every bad QB has had good games that are better than a good QBs bad games. What's the point?

And I'm not saying Marty was a bad QB. He was great for us, just not sure what point you're trying to make with that one.

Because it's not just one game here and one game there.  Matty's best season in WPG (2019?) probably had more "good QB" games than Zach's worst season in WPG (2024).

[dd]

Zac has suffered by a **** offensive line. Get some blocking and he will shine. Simple.

Agree, as much as we think our OL is good, last years OL was not that good, and ZC play suffered. He was not confortable or confident back there, and his passing stats took a beating. We need to replace all star Dobson and get an upgrade at centre to upgrade our OL

[dd]

Ya, I here ya, I thought he was slow and got beat with speed routinely. But he was a load and hard to move so could win the 1 on 1 strength battles, but any whips or stunts by the D line, he was beat easily.

[TecnoGenius]

Dobson was middling for a NAT guard.  Good enough, certainly.  But not 2021 WPG OL quality.  I think he may have been pushed in too soon.

Plus, we seem to try to turn mid / late level DPs into starting OL.  It doesn't and can't always work out.  Heck, even some of our early DPs don't turn out great (Gray).

I really think that our best option in terms of what we have here right now is starting Randolph at LG.

Stan - Randolph - Ko-man - Neuf - Lofton  (6th/7th: Eli, Wallace)

The only other thing I can see is luring some top LG away in FA.  Dunno who that might be.  But I'd sure be excited if it was announced tomorrow!!

I guess Ko-man is the next weakest link, but I think we can have a great OL even if it's him at C.  He improves every year and he seems to have a lot of heart and FIFO.

I don't want to even think about Stan/Neuf retiring... that's for '26+ hopefully.  Worry about this season right now.

[Blue In BC]

What's a FIFO?

First in first out.