22 minutes ago, Nickthesizz said:

While I agree with you, I don't think Streveler will be a passer in this league. Liked what I saw from Mcguire in the preseason, hopefully he turns out.

And I understand it's hard to get them meaningful playing time.... but at some point they need a chance to move the offence if it s stalling repeatedly in a game. 

12 hours ago, Mark H. said:

Some of the stats quoted above do not compute.  Apparently we have 23 offensive TDs & 25 overall TDs.

We had 2 TDs from special teams last game and the D has at least one pick 6 - what gives? 

25 total TDs was prior to last weeks game... You can now make it 27 total TDs, 23 O, 1D, 3 kick...

Aand still tops in the league 😁😁

RABBLE RABBLE BUT NOT THE LAST 3 GAMES NICHOLS TEH SHITS!!11!

37 minutes ago, Booch said:

Aand still tops in the league 😁😁

Aannd trending downward.

BUT ....If we score 2 or more offensive touchdowns are we trending back upward?

I would think that if you lead a league in TD's from start..to current point..and continue to do so...you must be in a positive trend???...or am I wrong

 

Just now, Booch said:

BUT ....If we score 2 or more offensive touchdowns are we trending back upward?

I would think that if you lead a league in TD's from start..to current point..and continue to do so...you must be in a positive trend???...or am I wrong

 

Must be. We have three threads going on about how terrible this team is. O, D, QB and Coaching. 

26 minutes ago, Booch said:

BUT ....If we score 2 or more offensive touchdowns are we trending back upward?

I would think that if you lead a league in TD's from start..to current point..and continue to do so...you must be in a positive trend???...or am I wrong

 

We didn't score 2 more offensive TD's so the question doesn't make any sense.

The long term data shows we are currently on top. If we continue the downward trend then we will soon lose the lead.

36 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

We didn't score 2 more offensive TD's so the question doesn't make any sense.

Makes perfect sense if you read it correctly. If we score 2 more, as in this week score 2 more is the trend upwards.

It would be nice to just score and talk for at least one week about how Matthews had a break out game and how Whitehead was giving the ball in open field to utilize his speed etc....

22 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Makes perfect sense if you read it correctly. If we score 2 more, as in this week score 2 more is the trend upwards.

You're using a 'What if' that didn't happen then saying it makes sense. It doesn't.

FTR: If we scored 2 more TD's, the trend would be upwards. Because we didn't happen, it doesn't matter. It's Moo Point as they say. 😎

And  is it trending upwards.... or is it simply getting back to the level you were at ?.... 

This poll is ridiculous imo.  It's set up to give the appearance that every responder is in favor of getting rid of one of Lapo or Nichols. I would wager that the vast majority of Bomber fans would pick neither if it were an option....but then that doesn't advance anyone's agenda does it.

Honestly, we have a 6-2 team and we have a select few old men yelling at clouds. Fire a coach or QB of a 6-2 team....smoke some more crack.

Edited August 13, 20196 yr by gcn11

 

51 minutes ago, TBURGESS said:

You're using a 'What if' that didn't happen then saying it makes sense. It doesn't.

FTR: If we scored 2 more TD's, the trend would be upwards. Because we didn't happen, it doesn't matter. It's Moo Point as they say. 😎

Are you intentionally being daft or what? It's not about last week, it's about this week. As in if they score a couple td against BC is the trend upward again.

Seriously pay attention.

Edited August 13, 20196 yr by 17to85

17 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

Are you intentionally being daft or what? It's not about last week, it's about this week. As in if they score a couple td against BC is the trend upward again.

Seriously pay attention.

This week or last week or the week before... it's the same 'argument'. It's a moot point. The only difference is the tense of the statement.

Edited August 13, 20196 yr by TBURGESS

You know you could just admit you read the original comment wrong instead of doubling down on your ignorance.

7 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

You know you could just admit you read the original comment wrong instead of doubling down on your ignorance.

Or, you could admit that what if's aren't real arguments.

It's not what ifs, it's asking for insight into one's thought process.

It's eerie on how similar TBURGESS and 17to85 are despite having a difference in opinion on the QB.....

33 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

It's not what ifs, it's asking for insight into one's thought process.

'If we' and 'what if' are the same thing. You know that when folks bring up 'what ifs' that aren't Bomber positive.

26 minutes ago, Brandon said:

It's eerie on how similar TBURGESS and 17to85 are despite having a difference in opinion on the QB.....

veteran keyboard pugilists.......quite the spectacle

55 minutes ago, Brandon said:

It's eerie on how similar TBURGESS and 17to85 are despite having a difference in opinion on the QB.....

Has anyone ever seen them in the same place at the same time?  

 

2 minutes ago, MC said:

Has anyone ever seen them in the same place at the same time?  

 

My god man, have you never watched an episode of Star Trek?  You do not put matter and anti-matter together in the same place ever!