The Weekly Say: Who are your midway winners?

TORONTO — With the midpoint of the season quickly approaching we’re entering into the territory where it’s safe to start thinking about end-of-season award winners.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

MOP & MOC--Rourke, better numbers on a developing team
ROY-- Schoen, no question
DEF--still up for grabs , can't really decide

MOP........ probably Collaros - Wnp but could be Roarke -BC
MOC........100% Roarke - BC
ROY.........100% Schoen - Wnp
OL...........probably Bryant - Wnp
DEF.........somebody from out West
ST............probably Grant - Wnp
COY........either O'Shea - Wnp or Campbell - BC

For those that didn't notice , I predict a Wnp / BC heavy theme for this years award .

1 Like

Rourke has the numbers but Collaros has a proven team around him. We haven't seen enough to know if the Lions will revert to their '19 and '21 disappointments. MOP for Rourke, unquestioned. Collaros has experience but is not as efficient as Rourke.

Stats wise the MOP is Rourke but at the halfway point it has to go to Collaros. As stated, he won the head to head. We’ll know a lot more about Rourke after this weekend. Unfortunately his remaining two games against Collaros may not have any meaning and could be full garbage time games. The year end MOP is still up for grabs.

Quarterbacks should be judged by efficiency rating instead of team performance which includes defense, special teams and offense. Relevant measures matter.

ROURKE for the top offensive player and MVP

Jeffcoat for best DL

You do know their is two more games between the Lions and Bombers? The MOP us the best player, not the best QB on the team with the best record, which could still end up being Rourke.

Yes I said there are two more games left between the two. We just don’t know whether they will have any meaning or even whether either will play much or at all. They are the Bombers last two games.

Rourke didn’t disappoint yesterday but head to head Zach beat him handily. To me that’s worth more than beating up on Edmonton. We’ll see how it plays out.

lol i’ve literally watched every CFL game this year and i’m sorry but anyone who picks Collaros over Rourke at this point (week 10) is a winnipeg homer because it’s not even close. both eye-test and stats back it up. the head to head argument is weak. the MOP is not judged like that. also, quarterbacks don’t actually go head to head because duh they don’t play defence. Rourke’s stats vs Winnipeg we’re fine.


I have also watched every CFL game this year. I also didn’t pick Zach over Rourke but merely pointed out that he took him to the tool shed in their only head to head match up. I said that we will see how it plays out. I think the jury is still out.

If you look at stats alone then Rourke wins hands down so far. I point out that his stats that were “fine” against Winnipeg were achieved in garbage time. The only game Rourke played other than that against a top team was this past weekend against Calgary, in which he ultimately led them to victory after a poor start. And Calgary is hardly Winnipeg. Zach lost only his second game this past weekend in two years plus. And that was after another clutch drive to put them in position for a game winning chip shot. Unfortunately he doesn’t kick field goals.

Rourke is the real thing and may accumulate the stats to win MOP without too much trouble. He does not yet, however, have the pedigree or resume that Zach does in the big games. As I said, we’ll see how it plays out. Right now I would still take Zach in a big game head to head and not because I am a Bomber fan. I could just as easily say that your position is taken because you are a homer BC fan and that you ignore Rourke’s failure against the best as a result. They may not play a meaningful game against each other until the playoffs. I don’t know at this point how it will play out but there are valid arguments on both sides. The fact is that the sample size remains too small.

I also point out that Rourke by consensus has had the best receiving corps in the league since the start of the season. Zach by consensus had the worst receiving corps at the start of the year and now many think it is the second best. Is that because everyone was wrong about their receivers? Ellingson was “washed up” I recall hearing. Rookie of the year Dalton Schoen was whiffed on by eight other GM’s if he is so great. I think Zach deserves more than a little credit for the fearsome receiving corps that exists in Winnipeg after losing Lawler and Adams and having Ellingson miss three games.

The BC kid is something very very special. Raw talent, miles ahead of anyone else. Bo Levi who became Calgarys all time passer (far from the best Stamps QB in history) looked like an amateur in comparison.

Jon, Collaros DID NOT take Rourke to the tool shed in their contest. Wpg scored 7 points on a return by Grant & 9 more points on ST's by Legghio or, in other words, 1 more TD was engineered by Collaros. The Winnipeg TEAM beat the BC TEAM but Rourke & Collaros are not on the field for ST's & do not play defence. Rourke & Collaros in fact put up pretty much the same offensive numbers.

The MOP award was re-jigged from MVP years ago to recognize who is the most outstanding player, not the most valuable to his team. And if the Bombers were to go 3-0 vs the Lions that is 3 games out of 18 & it matters how each of them play the other 15 vs common opponents, regardless of their play vs each other. You don't base the MOP on 3 games but over 18 games. While Rourke set records for completion % vs the hapless Elks, statisticians were ALSO looking through the records for the last time a QB won a game while completing only 7 passes vs another team - in this case the same hapless Elks. If you want to look at head to head, look at the other 15 games vs common opponents too.

Individual stats are what determine the MOP, NOT what the team does. Warren Moon went to 6 Greg Cups & only won 1 MOP, the year they lost, when Edmonton was 8-8 & only 3 teams had a worse record. He won because he was the top passer in the league. Despite the Patriots record # of divisional titles & Brady's 7 Super Bowls, he won only 3 MOP's, twice for leading the league in passing & once, when they didn't even make the big game, for leading the league in QBR. In other words, for individual accomplishments not because the team did well.

Much as you like to trot out the team win/loss record, it counts for nothing in individual awards, nor should it. At the halfway mark Nathan Rourke is on track to break the CFL record for QB efficiency & passing %. He is well over 400 yds ahead of Collaros with 2 less games played. Pedigree & resume??? Rookies are not excluded from MOP awards. If you want to give awards for pedigree then give it to Bo Levi Mitchell & ignore his stats this year, or last year. His career TEAM record is much better than Collaros as is his resume. Ricky Ray never won an MOP despite leading his team to 3 GC appearances his 1st 3 years in the league, despite throwing for 5,500 yds & winning the Cup in 2005, despite his "pedigree" & "resume". Labelling a BC fan as a homer is a bit rich, Jon.

As for the receiving corps, how is it that Zach has made your receiving corps the 2nd best but you don't recognize that Rourke has made the BC corps the BEST? Mike Reilly was a pretty good QB. Only 2 other QB's have ever thrown for over 5,500 yds 3 times or more - Flutie & Calvillo. Only Flutie & Reilly did it 3 consecutive times. Burnham, Rhymes, Whitehead, Cottoy were ALL with BC last year. How good were they with Reilly? You think Rourke isn't responsible for them being THAT much better this year? That argument doesn't wash. Same WR's, same OL, same RB but Rourke in full control. :sunglasses:

I could see an arguement for either, I do like the comparison to Manning/Brady for Rourke/Collaros. All that matters is winning another championship and continuing to win the big game. We'll see if the Manning/Brady trend holds in the playoffs as well.

Pants, you sure like to discredit WPG. I'll counter your long winded post:

  1. ZC's stat line was significantly better than NR's, this is FACT so you're argueing sementics on the term "toolshed" 77% completion rate vs 64%, a stat you held in high regard. To me though more importantly ZC had more total yards and went 3 TD 0 INt vs 3 & 2. Those 2 INTs were critical parts of the game so yes 1 vs 1 the vet rose above the phenom.
  2. Was it not you who had claimed that our WR corp was one of the worst? I'd say most would be surprised to see that the Bombers have not missed a beat without Lawler & Adams, and going thru major injuries to startes for practically the whole year. ZC deserves some of that credit, even you have to give him that. Burnham, Rhymes, Whitehead & Cottoy is a group most expected to be the best. And is it the same OL for BC, because I'm pretty sure they had injuries there lastyear and have been much better this year, the opposite for WPG.
1 Like
  1. My main point was that you don't base MOP on 1 game, regardless of how you read the stat lines. Rourke has won 5 Player of the week awards in the 8 games he's played. To say he's NOT the best player in the league to this point is, as Jon likes to say, illogical. Three head to head games over an 18 game season, regardless of result, are irrelevant as far as individual awards go.

  2. Yeah I did say that. The Bombers sit 6th in passing yds/game so is that top notch?As for BC, nobody knew how good Rourke was going to be & the BC group was rated behind a couple of groups with Calgary & Saskatchewan as 2 that come to mind. Schoen has been a very pleasant surprise but guys behind him have played fewer games. Not a knock so don't get excited. Ellingson has been what's expected. Bailey, who was supposed to fill the void left by Lawler or Adams, has been a major disappointment. I'll take the much younger Lawler over Ellingson. As for Adams, he has over 100 yds more in 2 less games than Bailey so if you want to want to say you would take Ellingson & Bailey over Lawler & Bailey, I'll take that trade any day. Whoever gets the best player wins & that's still Lawler. :sunglasses:

I can agree with your 1st point, but my issue is that you took to the keyboard to shoot down Jon. All he was doing is countering the post that "anyone that picks Collaros over Rorke at this point is a WPG homer". All Jon did was say it was still debatable. Another great game by Rorke has shifted that somewhat, and I would agree he is currently the favorite, but Zach is still in contention.
They both have a player of the month FYI.
2: The CGY & Sask group would only have been rated behind BC's due to the QB experience. Solely as a group, anyone would take BC's WRs.
I agree that Bailey has been a disapointment to date, but The rise of Schoen has taken the sting off losing Lawler. Its not so much as Lawler/Adams> GE/Bailey, but that Lawler/Adams= GE/DS
I'd like to add that Zach has had games with GE and ND out, our other backup NI out, Agudosi coming in and looking like a star, then going out. Its been a revolving door for our WRs and yet Zach still puts up stats & wins.
That is why he is in contention, whether you like to admit it or not. :cowboy_hat_face:

1 Like

[quote="LetsGoBlue, post:17, topic:79982"]
... the sting off losing Lawler. Its not so much as Lawler/Adams> GE/Bailey, but that Lawler/Adams= GE/DSI'd like to add that Zach has had games with GE and ND out, our other backup NI out, Agudosi coming in and looking like a star, then going out. Its been a revolving door for our WRs and yet Zach still puts up stats & wins.That is why he is in contention, whether you like to admit it or not.

You know what Blue. The MOP voter doesn't care who is out or in. The Bombers aren't the most injured team this year. Everyone has injuries &, as every coach will tell you, you make no excuses for injuries. So we should make allowances & give the Bombers a handicap as in golf in the voting? We're so unfair to the Bombers. Tell you what. Give the Riders a handicap when you play them & have your team play Collaros with a brace & sit out your #2 & 3 receiver to even things out for Moore & Evans not being available. In fact, sit out your entire DL as the Riders had to do for a couple of games. The reason Zach is in contention is because you have to have a contest for MOP or any other award. You aren't "anointed". I'll agree Zach belongs in the conversation for that reason. But Rourke's production far exceeds Zach's in 2 less games. If the award was given out after 10 games, as Zach has played, It would be a landslide for Rourke IMO or there should be an investigation. Again FIVE Top Performer nods in 8 weeks already.

As for Jon, I quoted Jon on the "wood shed" comment so it's fair game, no? It's an insult to Rourke. And Jon also said this to a poster " I could just as easily say that your position is taken because you are a homer BC fan and that you ignore Rourke’s failure against the best as a result." Yes, everyone else is so biased. If you want to talk about homers............... No offence intended but it's kinda obvious. And if you think I am biased to my own team, then tell me this - who is my home team? And if you think you know, read my comments about them sometimes & tell me I'm biased. With respect. :sunglasses:

As for the receivers all you are actually admitting is that the BC offence is better than the Winnipeg offence. Well, there is some progress.

I could care less if you call me a homer. The Bombers are my team, and I'll defend them against posters like you who try to come up with "resasons" why they are not so good.
As far as making excuses, none were made by me, I simply said Zach has done what he's done INSPITE of injuries. And there have been plenty. I'll leave it to you to try and compare. Making excuses is what you did with your Green team (yes, I know who you cheer for, the Bomber envy is thick).

Yes, BCs offence is better, I am a reasonable guy. But the Bombers have a better D. Now I'll wait for you to tell me about how yards against are more important than points against.


Nope - not on Team Green. Sorry. Like them about as much as the Bombers. I've left lots of hints but no more guesses for you. Take care, Blue. Nuff said on this thread. :sunglasses: