I think a dominant performance against Hamilton will stop a lot of this crap being posted.

You line up against whoever the schedule puts there.   Bombers are getting the job done.  Deal is to just keep doing it.  Hamilton on the road, will be a good test. 

When you're the best, everyone is inferior to you. 

7 minutes ago, Brandon said:

I think a dominant performance against Hamilton will stop a lot of this crap being posted.

Or will people just say Hamilton hasn't beaten anyone good and lost to Montreal as well so it doesn't count?

I posted this in "Monday Morning Musings" but maybe it is more appropriately re-posted here in light of the discussion of quality of teams:

Here are some numbers to chew on when trying to decipher where the CFL teams really stand so far, in terms of strength of competition. I'll just give you the raw data, make of it what you will.

I will first list the overall record and winning percentage of each team's opponents, along with the number of games against an opponent with a .500 or better record. I will then provide the "adjusted" record and winning percentage as determined by what the opponent's record was at the time the game was actually played, to possibly reflect that's opponent's strength at that point in time (example, the Bombers have beaten Ottawa twice, a team with a 2-3 record, so a .400 winning percentage and no games against a .500 or better opponent - but at the point in time the Bombers played them, the RedBlacks were 2-0 and then 2-2, for a .667 winning percentage and 2 of 2 games against a .500 or better team). When considering the "at this point in time" record of the team to establish a game against a .500 or better team, I did NOT count week 1 where everyone was 0-0. So the number of games against a .500 or better team in that category ignores playing a team at 0-0. Only Toronto did not factor into this adjustment, and Hamilton in fact had two games reduced because of this factor. All totals are complete through week 6.

BC's opponents have an overall record of 16-14 (.533), and 4 of 6 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-7 (.364) with 2 of 5 opponents at .500 or better.

Calgary's opponents have an overall record of 9-17 (.346), and 1 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-9 (.308) with 1 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Edmonton's opponents have an overall record of 13-14 (.481), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-6 (.400) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Saskatchewan's opponents have an overall record of 10-16 (.384), and 2 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 3-7 (.300) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Winnipeg's opponents have an overall record of 8-18 (.308), and 1 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 6-5 (.545) with 3 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Hamilton's opponents have an overall record of 11-14 (.444), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 2-4 (.333) with 1 of 3 opponents at .500 or better.

Montreal's opponents have an overall record of 16-9 (.640), and 4 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 10-2 (.833) with 4 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Ottawa's opponents have an overall record of 18-7 (.720), and 4 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 7-3 (.700) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Toronto's opponents have an overall record of 15-11 (.577), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 6-7 (.462) with 3 of 5 opponents at .500 or better.

58 minutes ago, TrueBlue4ever said:

I posted this in "Monday Morning Musings" but maybe it is more appropriately re-posted here in light of the discussion of quality of teams:

Here are some numbers to chew on when trying to decipher where the CFL teams really stand so far, in terms of strength of competition. I'll just give you the raw data, make of it what you will.

I will first list the overall record and winning percentage of each team's opponents, along with the number of games against an opponent with a .500 or better record. I will then provide the "adjusted" record and winning percentage as determined by what the opponent's record was at the time the game was actually played, to possibly reflect that's opponent's strength at that point in time (example, the Bombers have beaten Ottawa twice, a team with a 2-3 record, so a .400 winning percentage and no games against a .500 or better opponent - but at the point in time the Bombers played them, the RedBlacks were 2-0 and then 2-2, for a .667 winning percentage and 2 of 2 games against a .500 or better team). When considering the "at this point in time" record of the team to establish a game against a .500 or better team, I did NOT count week 1 where everyone was 0-0. So the number of games against a .500 or better team in that category ignores playing a team at 0-0. Only Toronto did not factor into this adjustment, and Hamilton in fact had two games reduced because of this factor. All totals are complete through week 6.

BC's opponents have an overall record of 16-14 (.533), and 4 of 6 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-7 (.364) with 2 of 5 opponents at .500 or better.

Calgary's opponents have an overall record of 9-17 (.346), and 1 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-9 (.308) with 1 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Edmonton's opponents have an overall record of 13-14 (.481), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 4-6 (.400) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Saskatchewan's opponents have an overall record of 10-16 (.384), and 2 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 3-7 (.300) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Winnipeg's opponents have an overall record of 8-18 (.308), and 1 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 6-5 (.545) with 3 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Hamilton's opponents have an overall record of 11-14 (.444), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 2-4 (.333) with 1 of 3 opponents at .500 or better.

Montreal's opponents have an overall record of 16-9 (.640), and 4 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 10-2 (.833) with 4 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Ottawa's opponents have an overall record of 18-7 (.720), and 4 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 7-3 (.700) with 2 of 4 opponents at .500 or better.

Toronto's opponents have an overall record of 15-11 (.577), and 3 of 5 are currently .500 or better. "At the time" record is 6-7 (.462) with 3 of 5 opponents at .500 or better.

You lost me at "numbers", but I admire your dedication. 

 

Seriously tho, great work!

https://www.cfl.ca/2019/07/22/quarterback-index-silencing-doubters/

Quote

MATT NICHOLS WPG
THIS WEEK: 1 | LAST WEEK: 2

Matt Nichols is making a masterpiece out of 2019, completing 73 per cent of his passes while averaging 9.1 yards per attempt — both career benchmarks. There’s no doubt the 32-year-old is surrounded by a talented cast in Winnipeg, but his play has been a central reason for the Bombers’ 5-0 start.

 

And then named a top performer for week 6: https://www.cfl.ca/top-performers/

Quote

QB | MATT NICHOLS | WINNIPEG BLUE BOMBERS

Matt Nichols and the Winnipeg Blue Bombers improved to 5-0 for the first time since 1960 after defeating Ottawa 31-1 on Friday night.

The native of Redding, Calif., was highly efficient, converting 25-of-29 passes (86.2%), while adding two touchdowns and zero interceptions. He also rushed for 10 yards against the REDBLACKS.

His first touchdown pass came in the second quarter to cap a nine-play, 75-yard drive. Nichols connected with a wide-open Andrew Harris as he ran a wheel route for a 15-yard major. His second came on the Bombers’ next possession; he found Kenny Lawler across the middle who took it to the house for the 54-yard touchdown. The game marked Nichols’ fourth multi-touchdown performance of the year.

The product of Eastern Washington has now recorded 19 consecutive completions, setting a new benchmark for the Blue Bombers.

This season, he has passed for 1,150 yards, 12 touchdowns and has completed 73.2% of his passes.

That's my kind of "game manager"...

Yup...some pretty good managing going on...had to laugh at Cutberts comment too going into a commercial of "Nicols seems to be managing just fine"...or something to that effect

Now what? 

It is games like this that make it so frustrating to watch Nichols..not because he had a poor game,he did but it happens. It is more for me that they have a  BACKUP qb that can mix it up when Nichols is struggling and MOS refuses to do so. But MOS aint ever gonna change so we lose when our QB is sub par. We lost we move on..better Nichols has the odd poor game now rather than later....

49 minutes ago, bb1 said:

It is games like this that make it so frustrating to watch Nichols..not because he had a poor game,he did but it happens. It is more for me that they have a  BACKUP qb that can mix it up when Nichols is struggling and MOS refuses to do so. But MOS aint ever gonna change so we lose when our QB is sub par. We lost we move on..better Nichols has the odd poor game now rather than later....

You guys are putting way too much value on streveler. Yes he can run but he’s not an accurate passer.  And very  few coaches would pull there veteran #1 qb in this game when it was as close as it was. Don’t blame O’Shea and call him stubborn. He’s doing what most coaches would do. 

2 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

You guys are putting way too much value on Streveler. Yes he can run but he’s not an accurate passer.  And very  few coaches would pull there veteran #1 qb in this game when it was as close as it was. Don’t blame O’Shea and call him stubborn. He’s doing what most coaches would do. 

I do not think that it makes any sense to continue to put an obviously struggling quarterback out onto the field when he continues to fail, the game is still within reach, and the team has a viable alternative.

2 minutes ago, Tracker said:

I do not think that it makes any sense to continue to put an obviously struggling quarterback out onto the field when he continues to fail, the game is still within reach, and the team has a viable alternative.

Obviously O’Shea doesn’t have that same confidence in streveler to run the offence. Great short yardage guy but so far he hasn’t shown me he’s much more than that. 

11 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

You guys are putting way too much value on streveler. Yes he can run but he’s not an accurate passer.  And very  few coaches would pull there veteran #1 qb in this game when it was as close as it was. Don’t blame O’Shea and call him stubborn. He’s doing what most coaches would do. 

Well Hamilton sucks against the run so... It likely would have helped but i dont think much as lapo is not suddenly gonna change his stupid game plan. It would have been Strevs out there over throwing guys instead but argument could be made that Strevs is more likely to just take off instead of throwing 2 yard passes always if guys aren't open. 

We still lose likely... But there's a possibility a change of pace sparks the O.

Edited July 27, 20195 yr by Goalie

2 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

Obviously O’Shea doesn’t have that same confidence in streveler to run the offence. Great short yardage guy but so far he hasn’t shown me he’s much more than that. 

Nichols wasn't much more than that today either tho so

1 minute ago, B-F-F-C said:

Obviously O’Shea doesn’t have that same confidence in streveler to run the offence. Great short yardage guy but so far he hasn’t shown me he’s much more than that. 

Certainly Streve needs work,,,,but if you don't work him he might as well move on...That was the perfect game to let him get game experience...What do we do ....let a struggling qb. continue when he himself said he was crap...

1 hour ago, bb1 said:

It is games like this that make it so frustrating to watch Nichols..not because he had a poor game,he did but it happens. It is more for me that they have a  BACKUP qb that can mix it up when Nichols is struggling and MOS refuses to do so. But MOS aint ever gonna change so we lose when our QB is sub par. We lost we move on..better Nichols has the odd poor game now rather than later....

That is what worries me.... if Nichols starts the grey cup game with some two an outs .....  I'm not sure he can handle that pressure

23 minutes ago, Goalie said:

Well Hamilton sucks against the run so... It likely would have helped but i dont think much as lapo is not suddenly gonna change his stupid game plan. It would have been Strevs out there over throwing guys instead but argument could be made that Strevs is more likely to just take off instead of throwing 2 yard passes always if guys aren't open. 

We still lose likely... But there's a possibility a change of pace sparks the O.

Sucks against the run?  Didn’t look like that tonight.  

7 minutes ago, B-F-F-C said:

Sucks against the run?  Didn’t look like that tonight.  

Harris had 8 runs.. 6 yard average. It didnt look that way cuz we only ran 12 times all game. Our o known for being unpredictable was predictable tonight. 49 pass attempts vs 12 runs. 

Edited July 27, 20195 yr by Goalie

Jammie knew we’d abandoned the run - could see that on the last few drives

 

4 minutes ago, Mr Dee said:

 

Yup. Maybe instead of 49 12 it should have been 30 25. 

Lapo overthinks again

Nichols **** the bed,  it was bound to happen.  The guy was playing way above his normal level so it's not surprising that he stunk the joint up.  

I'm just more so concerned that when it was obvious that he wasn't bouncing back with good play that they didn't sit him for a few series. 

It's not about whether or not Streveler is ready....it's about having confidence in your starter, who's been arguably the best QB in the league so far this year. You give him the benefit of the doubt and the opportunity to work his way out of it.