1st & 10 | The Complete Blue Bombers QB Picture

[Jesse]

This is 100% false.  Strev and Wilson both ran around 90% on SY last year, both did a good job.  See stats Junkies table. Numbers tell the truth.  He gets a good push, he is fast, he is athletic and consistently good on SY.Wilson could develop into more.  Hasn't had enough reps to know what he is.  Agree good on SY.

Zach is still a top QB.  Need a above average OL, a solid run game and a couple deep threats.  No worries about him but he needs the horses to help him.  He can't carry us.  Time for the rest of the club to help him as he heads into his home stretch.  We have enough QB prospects in the pipe and if they don't work we can buy or trade for one.  Excited for next year but need to sign more vets.  I would like to see 75% Zach and 25% other options next year in terms of reps.

You'd really want a different QB playing an entire quarter every game?

[Blue In BC]

This is 100% false.  Strev and Wilson both ran around 90% on SY last year, both did a good job.  See stats Junkies table. Numbers tell the truth.  He gets a good push, he is fast, he is athletic and consistently good on SY.Wilson could develop into more.  Hasn't had enough reps to know what he is.  Agree good on SY.

Zach is still a top QB.  Need a above average OL, a solid run game and a couple deep threats.  No worries about him but he needs the horses to help him.  He can't carry us.  Time for the rest of the club to help him as he heads into his home stretch.  We have enough QB prospects in the pipe and if they don't work we can buy or trade for one.  Excited for next year but need to sign more vets.  I would like to see 75% Zach and 25% other options next year in terms of reps.

Nobody rotates QB's like that. Huge drop off between any # 1 and # 2. That makes it difficult to get playing time for the other QB's while a game is on the line. OTOH, if a game is won or lost by lopsided score, there are opportunities in a given season.

[Blueforlife]

Nobody rotates QB's like that. Huge drop off between any # 1 and # 2. That makes it difficult to get playing time for the other QB's while a game is on the line. OTOH, if a game is won or lost by lopsided score, there are opportunities in a given season.

Not entirely true, at times teams including ours has had packages for the #2.  Yes most run the #1 but there are other ways and yes the traditional garbage time.

You'd really want a different QB playing an entire quarter every game?

Nope but sprinkle them in.  Give packages.  Play backups when game out of hand.  Give backups reps when Zach is hurt.  Big fan of riding the #1 but now is the time to develop #2 and 3. Maybe 25% was a little high 15 to 20?  I'm dreaming as MOS won't do this but I can dream lol.

[LXTSN]

Not entirely true, at times teams including ours has had packages for the #2.  Yes most run the #1 but there are other ways and yes the traditional garbage time.
Nope but sprinkle them in.  Give packages.  Play backups when game out of hand.  Give backups reps when Zach is hurt.  Big fan of riding the #1 but now is the time to develop #2 and 3. Maybe 25% was a little high 15 to 20?  I'm dreaming as MOS won't do this but I can dream lol.

It was very fun to watch when we had a package for Streveler. He stayed in after a short yardage play to give the defense a different look.
I don't think it could be replicated, without having a top notch #2 short yardage QB that can scramble. We just don't have that right now.

[Blue In BC]

Not entirely true, at times teams including ours has had packages for the #2.  Yes most run the #1 but there are other ways and yes the traditional garbage time.
Nope but sprinkle them in.  Give packages.  Play backups when game out of hand.  Give backups reps when Zach is hurt.  Big fan of riding the #1 but now is the time to develop #2 and 3. Maybe 25% was a little high 15 to 20?  I'm dreaming as MOS won't do this but I can dream lol.

A few select option plays is not 25% and I see you back tracked that original amount. Even that is usually if the 2nd QB is the SY guy and stays in for part of that series.

If the # 1 QB is injured and the # 2 is starting, that might be the worst time to tinker giving the # 3 playing time. Having the # 2 QB win is more important and the harder thing to achieve.

That's true even when the # 2 QB is a veteran like Arbuckle or MBT.

[Blueforlife]

A few select option plays is not 25% and I see you back tracked that original amount. Even that is usually if the 2nd QB is the SY guy and stays in for part of that series.

If the # 1 QB is injured and the # 2 is starting, that might be the worst time to tinker giving the # 3 playing time. Having the # 2 QB win is more important and the harder thing to achieve.

That's true even when the # 2 QB is a veteran like Arbuckle or MBT.

It's a discussion.  I didn't back track on anything.  Collectively we can discuss what % we would like to see (simply threw some #s out there to see what others think, simply said maybe 25 was a little high, Jesse got me thinking about my # a bit).  It's one opinion on how much they would like to see the other QBs play.  I don't think MOS plays our backups enough.  There is merit in riding your #1 but I don't think that's a great plan when they are near the end of their career.  You suggested that nobody rotates their QBs like that which isn't true.  We have done it, other teams have done it (yes we don't give our backups many reps but does happen, other teams have done this alot, EDM comes to mind).  Doesn't mean it's right or wrong or works all the time but it has been done.  I wasn't talking about a few select options plays.  I am talking about giving our #2 (mostly) and #3 packages and development time.  If the #1 is hurt then the #2 get most the reps and the #3 can get a few as well.  My point was I want to see our QBs develop under Zach (ideally).  How much development time I would like to see depends on who our #2 and #3 and how they look in camp.  Way to early to know.  Just speculating.

Winning is always the #1 goal and that's what we all want.  However a little balance in winning now and developing our QBs and allowing them to make some mistakes and learn should be considered imo.  A little pain in the present often can help you in the future.  I want to be good for a decade not just next year.

If you don't believe in giving our #2 and #3 much reps that's all good.  The rest of us can debate how much we would like to see them play this year.

The downside of development reps is that it takes the ball our of your baller's hands at times.  It also can disrupt the flow.  Not an easy thing to do and like LXTSN has said takes a special skill set.  I also enjoyed watching Strev come in at times.  When it works it's magic.  Magic tricks are hard to be consistent at.  I have been a huge Zach supporter from the start and have defended him when he has been down.  His leadership and skill set is one that we could use not only to win but to download to the next gen.  Does that happen in games or just in practice, we shall see.

You originally said huge drop off between #1 and #2 which is generally true but not always.  We have seen teams with #1A and #1B guys.  Usually when neither is really any good LOL.  This year we seen some QBs step up and play pretty good that were not seen as #1 guys anymore.  It's more fluid than you suggest (sometimes).

My gut tells me we ride Zach unless hurt.  If our #2 shows incredible talent then MOS MIGHT give him a sniff.  My point is give them an extra sniff LOL.

My original 75% Zach 25% backups was based on reps over the season as a whole not per game.

[Blue In BC]

It's a discussion.  I didn't back track on anything.  Collectively we can discuss what % we would like to see (simply threw some #s out there to see what others think, simply said maybe 25 was a little high, Jesse got me thinking about my # a bit).  It's one opinion on how much they would like to see the other QBs play.  I don't think MOS plays our backups enough.  There is merit in riding your #1 but I don't think that's a great plan when they are near the end of their career.  You suggested that nobody rotates their QBs like that which isn't true.  We have done it, other teams have done it (yes we don't give our backups many reps but does happen, other teams have done this alot, EDM comes to mind).  Doesn't mean it's right or wrong or works all the time but it has been done.  I wasn't talking about a few select options plays.  I am talking about giving our #2 (mostly) and #3 packages and development time.  If the #1 is hurt then the #2 get most the reps and the #3 can get a few as well.  My point was I want to see our QBs develop under Zach (ideally).  How much development time I would like to see depends on who our #2 and #3 and how they look in camp.  Way to early to know.  Just speculating.

Winning is always the #1 goal and that's what we all want.  However a little balance in winning now and developing our QBs and allowing them to make some mistakes and learn should be considered imo.  A little pain in the present often can help you in the future.  I want to be good for a decade not just next year.

If you don't believe in giving our #2 and #3 much reps that's all good.  The rest of us can debate how much we would like to see them play this year.

The downside of development reps is that it takes the ball our of your baller's hands at times.  It also can disrupt the flow.  Not an easy thing to do and like LXTSN has said takes a special skill set.  I also enjoyed watching Strev come in at times.  When it works it's magic.  Magic tricks are hard to be consistent at.  I have been a huge Zach supporter from the start and have defended him when he has been down.  His leadership and skill set is one that we could use not only to win but to download to the next gen.  Does that happen in games or just in practice, we shall see.

You originally said huge drop off between #1 and #2 which is generally true but not always.  We have seen teams with #1A and #1B guys.  Usually when neither is really any good LOL.  This year we seen some QBs step up and play pretty good that were not seen as #1 guys anymore.  It's more fluid than you suggest (sometimes).

My gut tells me we ride Zach unless hurt.  If our #2 shows incredible talent then MOS MIGHT give him a sniff.  My point is give them an extra sniff LOL.

My original 75% Zach 25% backups was based on reps over the season as a whole not per game.

You followed up by saying maybe 25% was high and offered 15-20%. That's a back track by definition. MOS doesn't play his back ups enough and that becomes more of an issue with no clear # 2.

You can't really predict how much opportunity time there might be a season. So many games aren't decided until the final 3 minutes. I seriously doubt that any team saw the # 2 QB get significant time unless the # 1 was injured.

What team do you think did that? Elks demoted Ford before Fajardo became the starter but he wasn't seeing the field much before that demotion.

At this point none of us are really sure what our depth order will look like. For that matter we aren't sure who will be on the roster.

[gobombersgo]

Winnipeg Blue Bombers sign former Michigan State, Auburn QB Payton Thorne

https://3downnation.com/2025/12/23/winnipeg-blue-bombers-sign-former-michigan-state-auburn-qb-payton-thorne/

[Blue In BC]

Winnipeg Blue Bombers sign former Michigan State, Auburn QB Payton Thorne

https://3downnation.com/2025/12/23/winnipeg-blue-bombers-sign-former-michigan-state-auburn-qb-payton-thorne/

Well, I think we might actually get a real competition for the back ups at QB.

[Blueforlife]

You followed up by saying maybe 25% was high and offered 15-20%. That's a back track by definition. MOS doesn't play his back ups enough and that becomes more of an issue with no clear # 2.

You can't really predict how much opportunity time there might be a season. So many games aren't decided until the final 3 minutes. I seriously doubt that any team saw the # 2 QB get significant time unless the # 1 was injured.

What team do you think did that? Elks demoted Ford before Fajardo became the starter but he wasn't seeing the field much before that demotion.

At this point none of us are really sure what our depth order will look like. For that matter we aren't sure who will be on the roster.

I will go on record stating that 25% is my desired amount of playing time for our backups total over the entire season.  I am not back tracking on that.  Willing to discuss what others want and that's why I floated different numbers and was looking for a discussion on the matter.  Not asking for significant playing time.  Looking for our backups to get packages, garbage time and play when Zach is hurt.  You stated that other teams don't play their backups and they have and do.  I don't care what other teams did, what we normally do or what is "normal".  I believe getting our backups playing time next season is very desirable.  Best we move on.

Good point about us not having a clue what will happen and yes the league has parity and likely less garbage time going forward for a bit.  Days of the Kerwin Bell being blown out by 50 are behind us lol.

I will go on record as saying that I want the back-up QB to take 0% of normal offensive snaps.

Wow interesting, are you currently in line in a competition for a coaching mentorship under MOS.  You just checked the 1st box lol.

All joking aside I like this % game.  Hope others chime in.  Tells a story.

[Jesse]

I will go on record stating that 25% is my desired amount of playing time for our backups total over the entire season.  I am not back tracking on that.  Willing to discuss what others want and that's why I floated different numbers.  Not asking for significant playing time.  Looking for our backups to get packages, garbage time and play when Zach is hurt.  You stated that other teams don't play their backups and they have and do.  Best we move on.

I will go on record as saying that I want the back-up QB to take 0% of normal offensive snaps.

[Blue In BC]

I'd have no issue with back up QB's playing 25% of the time if situations allowed. The development time is essentially and it reduces the risk of injury to the starter.

Looking at the game scores from 2025 I only saw a couple of games where leads were insurmountable to create that opportunity. Hence deciding how much of a lead is ever enough is the catch / gamble.

[Blue In BC]

I will go on record as saying that I want the back-up QB to take 0% of normal offensive snaps.

LOL

[theaardvark]

I think Collaros would have benefitted from some "load management".

One series here and there, a package when the SY team comes in, and then stay in for a trick package.

Not sure 25% is the right number, but it should be more than only SY.

[Blue In BC]

I think Collaros would have benefitted from some "load management".

One series here and there, a package when the SY team comes in, and then stay in for a trick package.

Not sure 25% is the right number, but it should be more than only SY.

I agree. It helps when you have a big lead though.