I must have been watching a different Fajardo than you. The one I was watching moved the ball down the field well with some nice passes and kept the defense off balance with his rushing ability. I guess it depends on your definition of Star.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wobbler
The "I must have been watching a different ____" thing is pretty tired. You disagree with me - totally fine!Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely2005
What I hoped to see from Fajardo was an ability to make various situational throws. We all know he moves well and carries well. He did that and helped Whitaker to look like his old self. That's great! But... Fajardo didn't seem to read well or throw the ball well. He completed short passes, but I saw nothing to suggest that he could be special in the next year or two - which is all that matters in the CFL.
I haven't given up on him, but this was discouraging.
Well a lot of his passes were off target, even some completions. He was obviously tight and could have used more practice reps. But he lifted up the team as soon as he went in. That run where he destroyed the DB at the sidelines was a statement maker. The O-Line and the running game got better when Fajardo came in. Whitaker is perfectly suited for the read option, so is Coombs, we could suddenly have a running game on our hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwoods13
But Shatto is right, the play where that stiff Paden dropped the TD pass was a truly spectacular big-time football play. Spin-move from the rush, outrun three guys, unloading with something on it while running full speed to the left, threading the needle to an open guy in the endzone. There's not too many QBs on the planet that can make that play.
Fajardo's got tons of room for improvement, but i'm surprised that anybody would be "dismayed" by his performance.
I'm dismayed by your lack of perspective, Rich.
*Thoroughly* dismayed.
Seriously though - do you think Fajardo's performance has shown that he might reliably "put the ball where it needs to be" in the near future? I don't see it.
I agree with this. Fajardo threw for a whole 70 yards in the second half. You can't win games in this league if you can't throw the football. Hopefully Fajardo's passing prowess can improve over time as I like the other attributes that he brings to the table. Although the offence was better in the second half, that kind of offence isn't sustainable in this league. That is why Lefevour has never amounted to much.Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwoods13
I have never been a fan of Mathews but was willing to give him another chance. I know that he is only 25 or so but this is his fourth year in the league and I expected something better than what I saw in the first half of this game.
The defence looked very good and kept the Argos in this game but I can't think of one big play that the Argos made tonight on offence, defence or special teams. The longest play on offence IIRC was a 30 yard run by Whitaker.
I think this game actually raised more questions in regards to the young Argo QB's than it answered.
It's only one game but the "QB of the future" may not in fact currently be on the roster which in itself is concerning and confirms what many if not most suspected when this season started....it's Ricky Ray or bust this season (and maybe next).
Put it this way: I will be disappointed if he doesn't show any improvement in his next start. I can't believe people won't cut him a little slack. He's got some kinks to work out for sure, but remember he took the MINORITY of reps in practice this week. The guy has never taken starter's reps with this team. He should have taken them this week. By giving Mathews starter's reps and playing him for a half, the Professor made a serious mistake that may have cost this team a win IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wobbler
Sign Manziel!
Seriously though Fajardo showed enough that he's worth a look.
But that isn't the Argos way. Other than Bishop, who have we really developed?
Argos will stick with Ray, then bring in another veteran after he's done.
The east is so poor this year we can pretty much coast til the playoffs.
I think Fajardo has the tools to be a cfl qb, but I don't see the Argos going with a young qb as anything other than a temp solution while Ray is injured.
Collaros and Harris.Quote:
Originally Posted by Topshelf
People are just voicing their opinions based on watching him play, don't think anyone is writing the guy off just yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich
Matthews played pretty crappy as most expected, and while Fajardo can run around ane move the ball, he's not much of a passer IMO. He may develop into one if Trestman actually works with him, instead of giving Ray pretty much all the reps, and even splitting reps with Matthews, and he may not. Neither QB looks like the future as of right now, and the team is still keeping around Prukop and Bethel Thompson, so I wouldn't go so far as saying that the "QB of the future" isn't on the roster currently.
Personally I really like Prukop, but he needs to be developed, even if developed he may not be the guy either. One thing is for sure IMO, Trestman needs to change his ways, and ensure that he develops the next QB after Ray - we all know what happened in Montreal with Calvillo getting all the reps and playing every game.
We all see things from our own perspective. Only time will tell whose opinion is more appropriate but let's agree to accept the value of each other's opinion. At least we all seem to agree that Matthews performed poorly. Personally, as I have stated before, I thought Fajardo played very well, as he did what any good QB does and took advantage of what the opposition gave him. The 2 recalled TD's and the dropped ball in the end zone were hardly his fault and with better luck, IMO, he could have pulled this game out of the fire.
The next game against Montreal is a big one. Hopefully Ray will be fit for the game. Would be nice to see a good crowd for this game.
I like what I saw from Fajardo and I'm willing to give him a chance to start, like I was with Mathews before overly criticizing. Passing needs to be improved, of course, and you can see why they went with Mathews because of this. Too bad Mathews couldn't take advantage of this opportunity. Cody's final roll out, throw to the endzone reminded me of Dunigan.
The Argos didn't do themselves too many favors last night. Poorly timed penalties and dropped balls made life very hard for an unexperienced QB.
Admittedly, I don't know a lot about Prukop, except from game action. He's pretty darn fast and a good athlete. He made a great ST tackle last night.Quote:
Originally Posted by R.J
Both Mathews and Fajardo were not impressive. In terms of back-up QB's these guys are about 50-60% as good as Harris and Collaros were as Argo backup QB's.
The latter were able to step up and win games when Ray was injured.
Mathews and Fajardo will only lose games, as they are not ready, and frankly not good enough.
Only hope the Argo's have to make the playoffs is a healthy Ricky Ray
I guess not surprising that some people are prepared to write two QBs off based on half a game each. Neither guy has had anything like a chance to be "the guy." We know Trestman gives his No. 1 QB all the reps in practice (a method I fervently disagree with), but this past week the two guys apparently split reps. If one of them gets a sustained period of all/most reps AND plays a few full games, we'll have a better idea of what they are capable of.
I'd suggest that Fajardo will NEVER be a starting QB on a Grey Cup winning team. Mathews will float around the league, never be a full time starter.
Prukop is atheltic and a decent arm IMO, could be someone worth developing. That TD pass he threw in the pre season was a thing of beauty, although one pass does not make a qb lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArgoZ
Agreed on Matthews, TBH I see no point in wasting time on him. Jury is still out on Fajardo and the others IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by argonaut11xx
Yep, maybe still too early, but Matthews has been up here in the CFL for awhile, IMO should have progressed at least a little. You and I agree on Trestmans practice method.Quote:
Originally Posted by paulwoods13
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich
Agreed - Rich - that one play by Fajardo where he escaped, was on the run and threw a strike in the end-zone (dropped by Paden - this stiff plays while Noel or Jones sit on the bench ???) was a really nice QB play that shows the potential this guy has.
Would have been nice (and smarter) to see what Fajardo could have done with a full week of starter reps in practice; but oh well, the coaching staff is always right and they wanted a more experienced QB with more "arm strength" i guess.
IF Trestman is such a sharp offensive coach, he should be able to develop a game plan for a mobile, scrambling QB - it opens up the run game more for a quality back like Whitaker or Coombs with some carries, and the D backs worrying about coming up to stop a running QB should open up some deep passing game - a run game supplemented by plenty of medium to long bomb passing attack - love to see what that could do. But, IMO - a lot of CFL offensive coaching "thinkers" have little to no use for an applied ground game and are also afraid of deep passing.
If it's tired so be it. Thanks but I'll continue to speak as I see fit, within the rules of the site. I liked what I saw from Fajardo and if Ray isn't healthy I hope that he gets his First start on Saturday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wobbler