Fantasy Football News and Rumors

[averagejoe]

He did have over 200 touches, but 174 of those were in the first 9 games and he only had 46 the rest of the season while getting beat out by Ito Smith (61 touches) and Brian Hill (53 touches) both of whom the Falcons thought so highly of that they aren't on their team anymore. I don't know how anybody at this point can think those knees have anything left in them. I mean he only averaged 3.5 yards per carry for the season and the only reason he had any value early was all the touchdowns inside the 5 he was getting (all 9 touchdowns were also in the first 9 games).

You may be right.
But another sceanrio may be that since the Falcons were only 3-12 and weren't going anywhere, perhaps they wanted to see what else they had on their bench for the future? In those first 9 games, Gurley did have an 80-yard game vs Chicago and 121-yard game vs Carolina. His numbers were not all that terrible even if his ypc started to decline.
Maybe I'm looking at him with a glass-half-full?

 

[TREFF]

Pretty sure Rodgers in Denver would be a very good couple of seasons. But it’s getting late fast. Rodgers missing this time in Green Bay may be no big deal, but it’s useful for a new team.

Oh I'd hate hate hate hate it in '22-say '25 or so..but obviously Rodgers is eventually gonna force his way out, Gruden isn't going to step up and get him...Denver obviously is willing to go get him...so drama that might rip apart both franchises and leave Rodgers image tarnished, is the best I can hope for...I'm rooting for the chaos theory here

 

[TREFF]

And just as if on cue..Gurley visits the Ravens...focker

 

[Trudem]

I bet the offensive philosophy doesn't drastically change at all, just some of the target share gets distributed a bit more fairly vs so heavily tilted to Adams.

I agree with Treff, with Rodgers gone and LaFleur more in control of things on offense, I expect that to drop Adams value and increase Jones

Pump the breaks sir. Rodgers isnt gone just yet.

 

[TREFF]

Pump the breaks sir. Rodgers isnt gone just yet.

But he will be at some point in the next 18 months..best embrace the Love

 

[Trudem]

But he will be at some point in the next 18 months..best embrace the Love

Love was great yesterday. Ive always said the out was after the '21 season. If I get one more year and then a haul for a disgruntled Rodgers im happy.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Love was great yesterday. Ive always said the out was after the '21 season. If I get one more year and then a haul for a disgruntled Rodgers im happy.

at this point i am still giving it a 70/30 that he will return with the packers.. He still SHOULD be back...

 

[Bandit]

Love was great yesterday. Ive always said the out was after the '21 season. If I get one more year and then a haul for a disgruntled Rodgers im happy.

So obviously since there is a very good chance that the Packers can make it and win the Super Bowl with Rodgers as their quarterback, of course you want him to play, but just out of curiosity, if you knew beforehand that the Packers weren't going to win the Super Bowl this year no matter who the quarterback was (I'm not saying they can't, but for this, just humor me) would you rather have one more year with Rodgers or go ahead and see what you have in Jordan Love. Really what I'm saying is, Super Bowl or not, would you rather get to enjoy watching one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time one more season or start developing what you hope is the quarterback of the future? I think one of the biggest problems everybody had with the Love pick was that if they were committed to Rodgers for the next two years, then that only gives them one year to evaluate Love to make the decision on his fifth year option, which they would have to do before his 4th season. At least if he was the quarterback this year you would get two years to evaluate him before having to make that decision.

 

[Trudem]

So obviously since there is a very good chance that the Packers can make it and win the Super Bowl with Rodgers as their quarterback, of course you want him to play, but just out of curiosity, if you knew beforehand that the Packers weren't going to win the Super Bowl this year no matter who the quarterback was (I'm not saying they can't, but for this, just humor me) would you rather have one more year with Rodgers or go ahead and see what you have in Jordan Love. Really what I'm saying is, Super Bowl or not, would you rather get to enjoy watching one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time one more season or start developing what you hope is the quarterback of the future? I think one of the biggest problems everybody had with the Love pick was that if they were committed to Rodgers for the next two years, then that only gives them one year to evaluate Love to make the decision on his fifth year option, which they would have to do before his 4th season. At least if he was the quarterback this year you would get two years to evaluate him before having to make that decision.

I get what you were saying. I didnt like the Love pick at the time. Ive been seeing more and more they traded up for a WR and Minny then took for Jefferson, who they were targeting. Same thing for Aiyuk. I think they kinda got caught up in the moment and went with a raw talented QB that needed time to develop, which they thought they had.

To answer you question, you suck btw because this is a tough one, I think I would ride out one more year with Rodgers. I went this way for multiple reasons:

1. another year of Rodgers is obvious
2. trade value post draft is way crappier
3. I need one more year to stick it to the asshole fans openly mocking the Packers because of the Rodgers situation. - hey I am allowed to be petty sometimes.

I think both sides have fault in the situation. Packers rely on Rodgers and his brilliance too much and take it for granted while ignoring the WR position. Rodgers enjoys being paid alot of money so he cant really hold it against the team. He deserves every peny dont get me wrong but if you want to continue to talk about things you have to put your money where your mouth is IMO.

Ive been at 75% Rodgers plays in GB this year all along. The comments from James Jones recently reinforced my feelings on that.

 

[averagejoe]

Pump the breaks sir. Rodgers isnt gone just yet.

I applaud you, sir.
You are one of my favorite Packers fans.

Side point...
As an old person, I was having a conversation with a 20-something regarding things he could not fathom. Like:
Taking Coke bottles back to the store for 15 cents.
Not having to dial your area code when making a local call.
Packaging that wasn't tamper-proof (aka Tylenol).

I'm sure there are a vast majority of fans who do not remember the Packers without a HOF QB (before 1992).
Life after Bart Starr (and prior to Favre) was anything but stable.
In 21 seasons (1971-1991), the Packers had 18 different starting QB who collectively went 126-180-8.

As a fantasy enthusiast, I respect Aaron Rodgers. He is a game-changer. If the knock is that he would like to have more offensive talent on the team, one could argue that Rodgers alone is already elevating the offensive talent in GB. Anyone on the field with Rodgers is already better.
As a casual NFL fan, I feel this situation is just another thing that is wrong with absurd salaries. Forfeiting large chunks of money to make a point. Expecting others to cave in to your demands.
As a Bears fan, I hope Rodgers sticks it to the Packers and they spend another 21 years looking for a starting QB. The icing on the cake would be that Rodgers wins a Super Bowl on his next team too.

 

[Trudem]

I applaud you, sir.
You are one of my favorite Packers fans.

Side point...
As an old person, I was having a conversation with a 20-something regarding things he could not fathom. Like:
Taking Coke bottles back to the store for 15 cents.
Not having to dial your area code when making a local call.
Packaging that wasn't tamper-proof (aka Tylenol).

I'm sure there are a vast majority of fans who do not remember the Packers without a HOF QB (before 1992).
Life after Bart Starr (and prior to Favre) was anything but stable.
In 21 seasons (1971-1991), the Packers had 18 different starting QB who collectively went 126-180-8.

As a fantasy enthusiast, I respect Aaron Rodgers. He is a game-changer. If the knock is that he would like to have more offensive talent on the team, one could argue that Rodgers alone is already elevating the offensive talent in GB. Anyone on the field with Rodgers is already better.
As a casual NFL fan, I feel this situation is just another thing that is wrong with absurd salaries. Forfeiting large chunks of money to make a point. Expecting others to cave in to your demands.
As a Bears fan, I hope Rodgers sticks it to the Packers and they spend another 21 years looking for a starting QB. The icing on the cake would be that Rodgers wins a Super Bowl on his next team too.

I read something yeterday that talked about the Rodgers situation. It said he isnt really upset about the players coming it but moreso the players that were let go ala Nelson, Cobb and MFing Touchdown Jesus(Kumerow for those playing at home). The last one I just cant fathom but whatever.

I am all for Rodgers having input he should. He has carried that team several times on his own or near to it. However a player should not have final sy. I think there is a happy middle ground and I believe they will find it.

Side note: This is helping the Packers next year cap situation little by little lol. Its moot if Rodgers isnt on the team though.

Alos thanks Joe, you are one of my favorite Bear fans too.

 

[SteelersPride]

looks like lev bell has been having hissy fits lately............perhaps he should do better on the field...........i mean darrell williams leap frogged him

 

[Bandit]

looks like lev bell has been having hissy fits lately............perhaps he should do better on the field...........i mean darrell williams leap frogged him

Yeah this might be the first time I've seen somebody say something bad about Andy Reid, especially a running back. Doesn't bode well for him landing anywhere else either.​

​

Le'Veon Bell says he'd retire before playing for Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid in social media post​

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- The Kansas City Chiefs showed no interest in re-signing running back Le'Veon Bell, and the feeling seems to be mutual.
Bell, responding to a comment on Instagram about his time with the Chiefs in 2020, said, "I'd never play for Andy Reid again ... I'd retire first.''
Bell didn't specify his complaint with Reid, the Chiefs' coach.
The Chiefs signed Bell last year after his release from the New York Jets, but he played sparingly. Bell played in nine games, starting two, and rushed for 254 yards and two touchdowns.
By season's end, he wasn't much of a factor for the Chiefs. Despite the absence of injured starter Clyde Edwards-Helaire, Bell got the ball just twice in the Chiefs' divisional-round win over the Cleveland Browns.
He was inactive for the AFC Championship Game against the Buffalo Bills, and though he was in uniform, did not play in Super Bowl LV against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
Bell is a free agent but has not signed with any team.

 

[SteelersPride]

Yeah this might be the first time I've seen somebody say something bad about Andy Reid, especially a running back. Doesn't bode well for him landing anywhere else either.​

​

Le'Veon Bell says he'd retire before playing for Kansas City Chiefs coach Andy Reid in social media post​

KANSAS CITY, Mo. -- The Kansas City Chiefs showed no interest in re-signing running back Le'Veon Bell, and the feeling seems to be mutual.
Bell, responding to a comment on Instagram about his time with the Chiefs in 2020, said, "I'd never play for Andy Reid again ... I'd retire first.''
Bell didn't specify his complaint with Reid, the Chiefs' coach.
The Chiefs signed Bell last year after his release from the New York Jets, but he played sparingly. Bell played in nine games, starting two, and rushed for 254 yards and two touchdowns.
By season's end, he wasn't much of a factor for the Chiefs. Despite the absence of injured starter Clyde Edwards-Helaire, Bell got the ball just twice in the Chiefs' divisional-round win over the Cleveland Browns.
He was inactive for the AFC Championship Game against the Buffalo Bills, and though he was in uniform, did not play in Super Bowl LV against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.
Bell is a free agent but has not signed with any team.

yep, the jets, the steelers, now reid......yikes.....

Hes gonna be starter somewhere soon.......lol , he hasnt done jack since 2017

 

[TREFF]

Meh..I'd still take him over Edmonds, Conner, Gaskin, maybe Mike Davis too.

But, his attitude might be becoming too caustic for teams to bother with.

 

[SteelersPride]

Meh..I'd still take him over Edmonds, Conner, Gaskin, maybe Mike Davis too.

But, his attitude might be becoming too caustic for teams to bother with.

I still cant see why, all thoae players have performed better ovee the last few years, and thats not sying much. Further indictment of bell, and not support for the others.

 

[TREFF]

I still cant see why, all thoae players have performed better ovee the last few years, and thats not sying much. Further indictment of bell, and not support for the others.

It's actually very simple, but requires stripping away of everything outside of pure ability. Take away the attitude, the contract, anything else, except raw, physical talent and what someone has proven what they can and cannot do, consistently, on the field, ever aspect of what a RB would be asked to do,, inside the tackles outside the tackles,, pass pro,, pass catching, route running...everything..and Bell outclasses them all...easily. Sure someone might be better at one aspect or another, but all around, they pale in comparison, in a purely, physical talent...not potential, but proven, physical talent, level.

Case in point, I took a quick drive to the grocery store this morning, NFL radio guys were discussing how he could easily come in and beat out Gaskins

 

[SteelersPride]

It's actually very simple, but requires stripping away of everything outside of pure ability. Take away the attitude, the contract, anything else, except raw, physical talent and what someone has proven what they can and cannot do, consistently, on the field, ever aspect of what a RB would be asked to do,, inside the tackles outside the tackles,, pass pro,, pass catching, route running...everything..and Bell outclasses them all...easily. Sure someone might be better at one aspect or another, but all around, they pale in comparison, in a purely, physical talent...not potential, but proven, physical talent, level.

Case in point, I took a quick drive to the grocery store this morning, NFL radio guys were discussing how he could easily come in and beat out Gaskins

But your going off of 2017 and prior. Guys do lose it. When in the last 3 years has he been better than those guys? He would of played had he been….

they can say that, and maybe? But why wasnt he producing? Why wouldnt teams bring him in then? I dont think it's because they just “dont want to upgrade” ….they dont think its an upgrade.

Even last year. A superbowl team with their starter out, and another rb out, hes leap frogged by darrell williams. The chiefs …there was a reason for that.

 

[TREFF]

But your going off of 2017 and prior. Guys do lose it. When in the last 3 years has he been better than those guys? He would of played had he been….

they can say that, and maybe? But why wasnt he producing? Why wouldnt teams bring him in then? I dont think it's because they just “dont want to upgrade” ….they dont think its an upgrade.

Even last year. A superbowl team with their starter out, and another rb out, hes leap frogged by darrell williams. The chiefs …there was a reason for that.

That reason was Darrel Williams was in the system for 2 years, not 2 months. He had everyone's trust, and was much more up to speed with every audible, every adjustment, every Mahommes ad lib, in no way is it because he was a better RB than Bell.

Bell could lose a leg and still be a better RB than Williams, Edmonds and Gaskins (yes, exaggeration, I know). Maybe there's been a little loss, but honestly, we're talking about time with the Jets, who were all around putrid, and a 9 game sample with the Chiefs, where he was added mid-season, and will never be mistaken for having a decent ground game either. I'm sure there has been some degradation, but given the situations, I'm not sure how much weight to give to father time, and how much weight to give to where he was, how he was used, to really quantify where that's at. What I do know is that there at least WAS something special about Bell's game, and there is nothing special, nor exceptionally likely to be special, about Gaskins, Edmonds, or Conner's (not discounting that Conner's story is extremely special, admirable, and amazing) and go ahead and toss in Mike Davis, Sony Michel, Damien Harris too.
I'd much rather see a team fail at trying to improve their team by signing this guy and finding out that he is done, then by muddling in the apathy of mediocrity

 

[Barilko]

well as usual you guys have broken it down rather thoroughly solid analysis

maybe its just a simple case of too much me me me

there is no "I" in team i know basic math however.....

bye now back to ....................