Reilly or McPherson: Best Candidate for Starting QB?

[Blue In BC]

All new QB's are going to show warts and weaknesses. Yes Elliott and Brink have shown more but they've played more but at times have played fairly well and progressed.

I don't recall all of Reilly's bad game but IIRC a strip for a defensive TD, multiple sacks and many near picks. Just about what you'd expect from a QB still learning.

Even Lulay is still showing weaknesses of a QB still learning. Red zone production in the WDF and in many games?

How much of problems we attribute to QB's is really on them and not due to other issues on the team? Using Winnipeg for an example, there were significant coaching issues / playcalling, OL being developed, muscial chairs at receiver and RB due to injuries.

One of the Bomber sites suggests Elliott is on the trading block. No idea whether that is true or what it will mean. Some Bomber posters are gaga about Reilly and think we should sell the farm to sign him, so some Lions fans are not alone.

Regardless. I find it hard to believe anybody would suggest Reilly getting a $200K contract based on what he's shown to date.

I stand in the " show me " group before I believe Reilly or any of the guys mentioned can become great starting QB's.

I'm not slamming Reilly and he has shown some good things but he has shown some weaknesses as well. Comparing him to Doug Flutie or referencing his college stats is a bit much. QB's with great college stats is not an unusal thing but doesn't automatically equate to great success in either the CFL or NFL. If it did, then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

EDIT: Just checked the Calgary game. BC gave up 8 sacks and Reilly fumbled 3 times. It was mentioned that he still had a good completion %. While that is true much of it came after the LIons were long out of the game. Garbage time stats can pad the observation.

I hope he's as good and his future is as bright as some think. The CFL needs more bright your QB's.

[WestCoastJoe]

Bombers' QB plan a 'roll of the dice'

By Paul Friesen, QMI Agency

Head coach Tim Burke doesn’t expect the Winnipeg Blue Bombers will be able to repeat what the Toronto Argonauts did last off-season.

Where the Argos traded for proven quarterback Ricky Ray and marched all the way to a Grey Cup championship, the Bombers are likely going to have to roll the dice on a quarterback with less experience.

“It’s always going to be a roll of the dice,” Burke told the Winnipeg Sun, Wednesday. “You’d always love to be able to find a Ricky Ray or a Henry Burris who has a proven track record. But there doesn’t seem to be those guys out there this year. And to make a trade for somebody, there’s only so many guys who are Grey Cup calibre quarterbacks.

“Just looking at the field right now, you’d have to say you’re probably going to have to go with a guy who hasn’t proved that he’s a Grey Cup calibre quarterback, yet.”

Burke’s comments would appear to diminish the chances of the Bombers swinging a trade with Calgary for veteran Kevin Glenn.


More likely, Winnipeg would pursue a younger quarterback on the free agent market, like, potentially, B.C.’s Mike Reilly.

“There are some guys out there that we’d definitely have a look at,” Burke said, declining to comment on specific players still under contract. “The trouble with the free agents that might become available is there’s not a lot of playing time for those guys.”

One quarterback almost certain to be in the mix next season is Buck Pierce.

Just where Pierce fits in remains to be seen.

“His durability is a factor,” Burke said. “Can Buck be the starter or does he have to be relegated to a backup’s role? It’s going to take a while to sort itself out.”

Burke wants Pierce back, and says Pierce told him he’ll return in whatever role the Bombers need him.

There may not be room for all of Pierce’s backups from last season, though.

Burke says while a decision hasn’t been made on Joey Elliott or Alex Brink, he’d like the Bombers to re-sign pending free agent Justin Goltz and give him a legitimate chance.

“I just have a gut feeling that Justin has a lot of the intangibles... he’s a highly skilled guy, he can run, he’s got a really good arm,” the coach said.

Burke said the maximum number of quarterbacks to take a good look at in training camp is three.

Before making a call on his quarterbacks, Burke is looking to hire a defensive co-ordinator. He’s talked to three candidates, believed to include former Saskatchewan head coach Greg Marshall, and wants to make a decision within a couple of weeks.

He’s also preparing for the possibility of hiring a new special teams co-ordinator to replace Kyle Walters.

Walters is a candidate for Winnipeg’s assistant GM position, vacant since the end-of-season firing of Ross Hodgkinson.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Football/CFL/ ... 93746.html

[Hambone]

I wouldn't touch MacPherson with a 110 yard field. There is something wrong with the guy (at least in terms of ambition) For him to voluntarily remain behind AC for so long shows he really has no interest or desire in a number 1 job. Which means he really has no interest or desire to keep a number 1 job. This is not the kind of indifference you want in your starter. Heck he has been the back up guy so long his 30th birthday has come and gone. If AC hangs them up this off season Jim Popp is not going to like his in-house QB options.
I think Reilly is the real deal, the most promising QB prospect in the league today.

I don't think that's a fair assessment of McPherson. There's this thing called a contract. Since he first signed with Montreal he's only had 1 opportunity to voluntarily leave the Montreal organization to pursue what might be a better opportunity. He signed his last extension with the Larks prior to the 2011 season and a few weeks after free agency started. I can't recall but believe he was a FA at the time. I would submit his Montreal situation after 2010 looked to be as good an opportunity for a backup QB to realize his goal of being a starter as any in the league given AC's age, health issues and AM's familiarity with the organization. AC was 38. He'd just won back-to-back GCs and other than maybe taking care of a straggling Damon Allen record had nothing else to prove. Obviously that McPherson is still there indicates Montreal does like something about his potential. If not they'd have done a lot more to upgrade over McPherson than they have to date. I don't in anyway take the way McPherson's career has unfolded to date as indication he has any less of a burning desire to be a starter than he did the first day with Montreal.

[notahomer]

All new QB's are going to show warts and weaknesses. Yes Elliott and Brink have shown more but they've played more but at times have played fairly well and progressed.

I don't recall all of Reilly's bad game but IIRC a strip for a defensive TD, multiple sacks and many near picks. Just about what you'd expect from a QB still learning.

Even Lulay is still showing weaknesses of a QB still learning. Red zone production in the WDF and in many games?

How much of problems we attribute to QB's is really on them and not due to other issues on the team? Using Winnipeg for an example, there were significant coaching issues / playcalling, OL being developed, muscial chairs at receiver and RB due to injuries.

One of the Bomber sites suggests Elliott is on the trading block. No idea whether that is true or what it will mean. Some Bomber posters are gaga about Reilly and think we should sell the farm to sign him, so some Lions fans are not alone.

Regardless. I find it hard to believe anybody would suggest Reilly getting a $200K contract based on what he's shown to date.

I stand in the " show me " group before I believe Reilly or any of the guys mentioned can become great starting QB's.

I'm not slamming Reilly and he has shown some good things but he has shown some weaknesses as well. Comparing him to Doug Flutie or referencing his college stats is a bit much. QB's with great college stats is not an unusal thing but doesn't automatically equate to great success in either the CFL or NFL. If it di, then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

EDIT: Just checked the Calgary game. BC gave up 8 sacks and Reilly fumbled 3 times. It was mentioned that he still had a good completion %. While that is true much of it came after the LIons were long out of the game. Garbage time stats can pad the observation.

I hope he's as good and his future is as bright as some think. The CFL needs more bright your QB's.

I don't disagree with what you've said (especially in this post). This thread was in particular about Reilly or McPherson, I thought. You brought up Elliot and that is a totally different question, IMO. Elliot vs Reilly? This is where I agree with your post/ideas. But McPherson has been around for a few years and some of what AC has learned must have rubbed off. STILL, IMO, he looks awkward. So, I would take Reilly or Elliot, IMO before McPherson, although McPherson's years in the league, working with AC are probably postives in his favour.

No question short periods are not worth betting a franchise on in regards to your starter. I thought Ryan Dinwiddie looked pretty good for a rookie starter in his initial start (yes I was cheering for the Bombers that day for a lot of reasons ). Dinwiddie has not looked that great, IMO, since. Where and who is around him probably impacts his play but eventually it is on him, IMO.....?

I also feel a true Lions fan would not be upselling (OOPS I breaking my cardinal rule here, discussing what a TRUE fan feels). Okay strike that.

A fan blinded by orange coloured glasses would probably would sell Reilly as the second best CFL QB even over all teams starters. Obviously I doubt many, if any, (certainly not me) Lionbackers feel that way. In fact for selfish reasons I don't want to lose him. Lulay or Reilly? Still think the juries out on that one for the long term but if forced to choose...Travis. Selfishly I hope the Lions can keep as many top flite QB's for themselves/out of opponents hands. But realistically and for the competitive strength of the league, I hope the talent gets spread.

[Blue In BC]

McPherson seems to be an odd situation. He's been in the league for a long time but hardly ever plays. I think I read he's only thrown 175 passes so far in his entire CFL career.

OTOH his coach, GM and AC must think he's ot something worth keeping as long as they have.

The best I can say is that because of that " time spent in the CFL " he might be considered the guy mostly likley to get a shot as a starter. If AC retires it will happen in Montreal. How he will do is a giant question mark.

Personally, I don't want him in Winnipeg so in that sense I'd rather sign a guy like Reilly if the money was right. However, I see Reilly as a guy that might challenge for a # 2 spot or end up as the # 3 guy anywhere besides BC. Unless teams jetison some QB's, any new QB is not going to come out of TC beating out players already with the team for several years.

[JohnHenry]

The Bombers may be the only team currently looking for a QB (with Q. Porter and A. MacPherson also being Free Agents). If Cavillo retires or the Esks jettison Jyles/Joseph, then Reilly's value goes up. I could see him signing for a $200k base salary with a shot at being the starter next season.

Teams don't sign a QB with Reilly's relative inexperience to a $200K base salary for a "shot" at starting. $200K is, for lack of a better term, entry-level starter money. If you offer that you are telling the player the starting job is his to lose, not to win, and he comes to came pencilled in at #1.

I had predicted Reilly will sign in the $175k to $225k range and I stand by that. No team is going to hand him the starter's job. Entering his 4th year in the CFL, he'll have to beat out somebody in training camp. But that won't stop teams projecting him as their starter and paying him entry-level starters money...which will prevent him from signing with a competitor. If Mike bombs out, his contract isn't guaranteed and could face being cut (or taking a salary reduction like the Bombers forced LeFors to do).

It was reported that the Lions paid Buck "over $200,000 salary with over $100,000 signing bonus" to be the backup to Dickenson (I believe Buck's bonus would be included in his salary and that could be he "maximum" salary, not base). So it's not unprecedented to pay a young QB a sizable salary, albeit Buck had more game action that Reilly has. But is that Mike's fault the Lions wouldn't play him?

I realize that Reilly has little experience and he'd be a gamble for any team to sign. But some of the other alternatives, like Jyles, Brink, Elliot, MacPherson, Porter, may be more proven, but the GM's still might not like what they see.

[Hambone]

Personally, I don't want him in Winnipeg so in that sense I'd rather sign a guy like Reilly if the money was right. However, I see Reilly as a guy that might challenge for a # 2 spot or end up as the # 3 guy anywhere besides BC. Unless teams jetison some QB's, any new QB is not going to come out of TC beating out players already with the team for several years.

Catch 22. Current #2 QBs with CFL experience on their resumes such as McPherson, Reilly, Brink/Elliott, Porter etc won't be interested in a situation if it doesn't offer them at least a lateral move i.e. come in pencilled in as #2 and preferably with a better chance of climbing to #1 than their previous situation held. It wouldn't make sense for any of them to leave a situation where they already are #2 to go elsewhere to have to compete for #2 or #3. The flip side is teams who might have serious interest won't be in a position to attract such free agents without first clearing the decks of some of the QBs they had last season. Lots is going to happen prior to Feb.15 that would make the QB landscape much clearer for all.

Using the Bombers as an example the only way they have interest in any of the above is because they've already decided to part ways with at least 1 of Pierce, Brink or Elliott. It would serve the Bombers no purpose to trying attacting prospective FAs into what is already a logjam. Certainly FAs won't be interested in such a situation. Edmonton would be the same. For them to pursue one of the above they would have to first clear the decks. Effectively by making such roster decisions well before free agency they will be declaring if they are or aren't in the QB FA market. If they haven't made some room well before Feb.15 they will be declaring they have no interest in the potential FAs.

[Hambone]

It was reported that the Lions paid Buck "over $200,000 salary with over $100,000 signing bonus" to be the backup to Dickenson (I believe Buck's bonus would be included in his salary and that could be he "maximum" salary, not base). So it's not unprecedented to pay a young QB a sizable salary, albeit Buck had more game action that Reilly has. But is that Mike's fault the Lions wouldn't play him?

I realize that Reilly has little experience and he'd be a gamble for any team to sign. But some of the other alternatives, like Jyles, Brink, Elliot, MacPherson, Porter, may be more proven, but the GM's still might not like what they see.

If I recall that was an entirely different situation. Pierce was extended right around Grey Cup 2006. There was also bigtime SMS implications then as all teams were making moves to get guys locked up prior to the SMS kicking in properly at the end of that calendar year. Players were being signed left, right and centre around GC 2006 because whatever money was paid in bonuses for new deals prior to the end of 2006 would not count against 2007 SMS. When you hear of CFL signing bonuses it generally means a portion of the salary is paid up front. i.e. $200K in salary with $100K being paid upfront. When the Lions did that they were already pencilling Pierce in to take over from Dickenson who had not been able to get through a full season since 2003. The only reason BC could offer such a deal was because they could pay so much up front without having it come under the SMS. For SMS purposes it only cost them $100K for 2007.

[pennw]

I know Reilly hasn't had a lot of games , but he has shown some pretty good abilities when he has played . I would definitely choose him over McPherson . I however wouldn't mind seeing McPherson penciled in as a starter over in Edmonton . From what I've seen of him , and it is limited , but I would say he's a significant downgrade from Jyles . As far as the Als keeping him around , well lets see if they make him a starter should AC retire . I'll be surprised to see that .

[Blue In BC]

If it was up to me I'd cut Pierce. He may have some talent but he can't stay healthy and for that reason he's too big of a risk to have on the team in any capacity. He's had trouble lasting to half time in many games. So even as a back up what would the point be of keeping him.

The rumor is that the Bombers are looking to trade Elliott and want to keep Pierce. I can't understand any of that but it would seem to suggest that the expect Pierce to be # 1 in 2013 and aren't happy with their # 2 guy?

They better figure it out because Pierce was injured in the 1st game of 2012 and was essentially done by game 3. It sounds like a giant gamble to continue down this road.

So. Maybe they do plan to take a chance on trying to sign Reilly and jetisoning some of the current back up QB's and perhaps demoting Pierce to the # 2 spot and going with younger potential. Or maybe they will bring in some QB with significant NFL experience.

I don't have too much confidence in most of the CFL's # 2 guys. We may not see J Jackson, K Joseph or Jyles still in the CFL in 2012. McPherson might get a shot somewhere but he might not be given long to prove he's the guy.

I still look at question # 1 is what does AC do. Then it becomes a potential domino effect. If he's going to play in 2013 he'll probably announce that very soon after Xmas and then other players and teams may start formulating their plan.

My guess is that McPherson signs elsewhere if AC plays in Montreal another year. If so, Montreal might be interested in a current # 2 QB that is on the upside not downside of their careers.

[notahomer]

...
I still look at question # 1 is what does AC do.
...

I thought he was going to call it a career 3-4 seasons go. Trestman sure seems to have got him wanting to play again. Every off-season I think 'this is it for AC' but I'm wrong. At least it doesn't have a youknowwho ex-packer QB feel to it. He never said he's retiring but I am sure that when he does, he'll stay retired....

[Hambone]

If it was up to me I'd cut Pierce. He may have some talent but he can't stay healthy and for that reason he's too big of a risk to have on the team in any capacity. He's had trouble lasting to half time in many games. So even as a back up what would the point be of keeping him.
.

Totally agree. As much as I love his abilities and grit no team can afford to be in a situation where their QB position is in a constant state of flux due to the health of their QB. If it was a case of a couple years of bad luck after a relatively healthy string of 3 or 4 seasons you take the gamble. However he's really never had any sort of sustained injury-free stretch going back to his early college days. Relatively speaking Sami Salo has been an ironman compared to Buck.

[WestCoastJoe]

If it was up to me I'd cut Pierce. He may have some talent but he can't stay healthy and for that reason he's too big of a risk to have on the team in any capacity. He's had trouble lasting to half time in many games. So even as a back up what would the point be of keeping him.
.

Totally agree. As much as I love his abilities and grit no team can afford to be in a situation where their QB position is in a constant state of flux due to the health of their QB. If it was a case of a couple years of bad luck after a relatively healthy string of 3 or 4 seasons you take the gamble. However he's really never had any sort of sustained injury-free stretch going back to his early college days. Relatively speaking Sami Salo has been an ironman compared to Buck.

I said this years ago.

It seems to me that in his early football training Buck was taught to ignore pain, to give it up for the team, to sacrifice his body, and to leave it all on the field. Short term, short sighted coaching. And Buck could never bring himself to slide. Old school thinking ...

And a shame. Because Buck had all the attributes one could want in a QB. Except an instinct for self preservation. Would that a coach had instilled in him the belief that the team is much better off if he saves his body. A little enlightened self preservation. "And that's an order. If you don't slide, I will take you out of the game." And then he would slide.

[Toppy Vann]

The Bombers need to fix their blocking and schemes to prevent these blind side hits and open shots on Pierce.

How can you fault Pierce for the head shot? You guys honestly think that the only QB in the game today who would be knocked out of a game on that hit would be Buck?

The Bombers need to do 3 things:

1. fix the blocking schemes and run offenses like Mtl and Tor. where they cut Boyd the CFL no. 2 rusher as they want blocking and they used tight ends in the GC to protect the assest they got in Ricky Ray.

2. Get Buck a QB coach who understands the hits are not going to happen - Damon Allen - would be ideal. He took as many hits in 19 or 20 years as Buck took in 2. He is like Gretzky - not many huge hits.

3. Get Buck to really come to terms that to be their top guy or even #2 he can't take hits as that is not smart. He has to play different today.

Okay, get a medical check up at 4.

I am not sure that Buck was taught to ignore the big hits and pain. That has been his character and make up.

He has proven he can learn an offense and read a D.

By the way if a Ricky Ray or AC or Burris were FAs and wanted to play - I suspect even Glenn who would like to start - would all not go to the Bombers if they keep uncommitted to protecting the QB.

[Blue In BC]

Toppy. I agree that not of all of Pierce's injuries were necessarily his fault due to poor blocking schemes and slow developing plays. OTOH, when Elliott or Brink play they tend to get hit less often and sacked less often. You can almost predict that Pierce will get sacked very early in games and then it's downhill ( fumble, int or lousy field position ) and the other team up 14 points before everyone is sitting in their seats after the kickoff

Having said that, Pierce is glass. He gets hit and he gets hurt all too often. Drew Tate seems to be falling into this same type of senario in his brief career.

It's one thing for a QB to take a hit to make a big play. Other times QB's get hit because their timeclock doesn't understand when to get rid of the ball for an incompletion or take protect yourself from the sack. Courage is one thing but playing smart is another. Not all sacks and hits can be attributed to any OL.

That was partially why I mentioned Reilly being sacked 8 times and having 3 fumbles in the Calgary debacle. It's something you expect from a QB making his first starts and beyond. Starting QB's aren't generally made after a few brief appearances.

In the past 2 seasons Reilly has only 77 pass attempts. Not much to go on really. Potential yes but I'd also say that QB's that have been in the CFL for longer such as McPherson in all probably will do better sooner. The problem is determing which has the most upside and how much risk is their in letting him start soomer than later.

Using D Durant as an example, the Riders didn't have much to lose in letting him start. He was behind career back ups and showed potential. Several seasons later he's still showing potential and has grown in skill. At this point he can still be hot and cold and nobody is calling him a HOF QB quite yet. It takes time and the right opportunity.

Personally I think Reilly's best opportunity is to stay in BC if BC can afford to pay more than his current contract. Something that is equitable for both but not a ridiculous gamble SMS wise.