Fantasy Football News and Rumors

[Barilko]

That'd be a tough one. most often the 'stars' on those teams would be the QB's, but if the measure of 'misdirect-planning to use the less relevant players' -then usage would be the stats to look at, yes? Touches. Keeping in mind that RB's always touch the ball about %75 more than receivers-an average day for a good starting RB these days is about 15-20 touches, average day for a #1 WR is somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-10 so the numbers are naturally skewed their direction anyways
Just quickly going down that list Monkey posted:

-The '20 Bucs had Brady, Evans, Godwin, AB, Gronk as their "stars" - Fournette and Jones touched the ball 20 and 12 times respectively, no receiver had more than 6 catches (Gronk)

- '19 Chiefs had Mahomes, Kelce, Hill - DAm. WIlliams touched the ball 21 times (and should have been the MVP, Hill had 9 Kelce 7

- '18 Patriots- Brady and Gronk, Edelman, Michel (short on stars offensively that year) - Michel 18 touches, Edelman 10, Gronk 6

- '17

YES! a hockey reference I can understand, cuase Hockey was actually relevant in everyday life during that era..I know most of those names!!

HOSER!

 

[Bandit]

I think the biggest thing now as opposed to the past is that you can't count on a running back to carry you to a Super Bowl no matter what. I looked back at the winners for the last 20 something years and the last team I can come up with that's star player was a running back was the '98 and '99 Broncos with Terrell Davis. Yes they had John Elway, but those were Terrell Davis's teams by that time in Elway's career. Every team since then was either quarterback driven or defense driven, except the 2017 Eagles as I don't even know what the hell to classify that team as. They were clearly quarterback driven while Wentz was healthy, but after that I don't know how they won. That was just a quick glance, so if you think I'm wrong it's possible. LOL.

 

[TREFF]

I think the biggest thing now as opposed to the past is that you can't count on a running back to carry you to a Super Bowl no matter what. I looked back at the winners for the last 20 something years and the last team I can come up with that's star player was a running back was the '98 and '99 Broncos with Terrell Davis. Yes they had John Elway, but those were Terrell Davis's teams by that time in Elway's career. Every team since then was either quarterback driven or defense driven, except the 2017 Eagles as I don't even know what the hell to classify that team as. They were clearly quarterback driven while Wentz was healthy, but after that I don't know how they won. That was just a quick glance, so if you think I'm wrong it's possible. LOL.

I agree %100. All I've ever claimed is that just because you no longer climb on the back of a big bruising RB 30-40 times a game, doesn't mean that the position is any less relevant than any other skill position, and who you have back there does matter and does make a difference. Unless you've got a unicorn at QB, you need a real RB to give some semblance of balance, and hodge podges of mediocre guys who just happen to play RB, don't cut it. Thats all I've ever claimed, all I've ever tried to get across, and by and large, that's the reality of it.

 

[TREFF]

• Cowboys RB Tony Pollard is expected to receive the franchise tag.​

  Pollard underwent surgery last month after going down in the Divisional Round. The injury hasn't changed the Cowboys' view on Pollard, with the expectation he'll be ready for the start of the season. Dallas plans to restructure Ezekiel Elliott and franchise Pollard, which would pay him $10 million in 2023. Tagging Pollard would give Dallas until July to reach a long-term deal.
  RELATED:
  

  ProFootball Network's Tony Pauline reports Cowboys RB Ezekiel Elliott is expected to take a "large pay cut" to remain with the team.​

  
  Cowboys GM Jerry Jones has said the team wants Elliott, who is scheduled to make $16.7 million, back for 2023. Releasing Elliott ($5M cap savings) remains in play but would come with $12 million in dead money. Elliott returning on a restructured deal may be the likeliest outcome, allowing Dallas to keep him on the roster at a reduced salary. The Cowboys also have an interest in bringing back free agent Tony Pollard this offseason.
  
  
  Dumb, dumb and dumb, on both counts. cut him, let him walk..invest in youth at the position, multiple options that can get the same job done available in this year's draft. Zeke is done as an effective main back and isn't exactly a stud at short yardage either, and Pollard has at best 2-3 years at a level worthy of a decent contract, and that's if he returns to form from the injury. Use that money rebuilding the Oline, a good space eating DT, or the secondary could use help virtually everywhere. If you strike out in the draft, plenty of cheaper alternatives available in free agency this year.
  

 

[averagejoe]

Dumb, dumb and dumb, on both counts.

As a Bears fan i can only hope more teams make these kind of decisions.

 

[TREFF]

As a Bears fan i can only hope more teams make these kind of decisions.

Monty is an impending UFA isn't he? Do da Bears re-sign him?

 

[averagejoe]

Monty is an impending UFA isn't he? Do da Bears re-sign him?

Locally, all the talk radio seems to suggest the Bears will focus on the lines - offense and defense. Guests on the sports radio shows echo the same thing.

I have heard only one radio guest, Field Yates (who does have a friendship with GM Ryan Poles), suggest Monty could be on another team.

 

[averagejoe]

I dont think anyone sees Monty as part of the problem. The phrase around town that seems to be gaining momentum is "We're considering all options."

 

[TREFF]

Josh Jacobs told Pro Football Talk he'd play on the franchise tag "if the team loaded up at all other positions and added players around him."​

So, if they acquire Aaron Rodgers, then? Jacobs added "if you want me to come back as the hero, you better pay me like a hero." It's a fair assessment of his value after he led the NFL in rushing last season. Jacobs also noted that he'd prefer to play somewhere tax free if things can't work out with the Raiders.

ok, so you know that D. Adams is getting outrageous money, and then he wants 'loading up at all other positions and adding players around him" and playing on the franchise tag of slightly over 10 million..so basically, in order to play on the franchise tag Josh Jacobs wants an Aaron Rodgers type QB , and apparently 'loading up at other positions would be what?? another top tier WR opposite D. Adams? So another 25-30 million, plus Adams, plus the high dollar QB, plus the over paid Waller..so he thinks he's gonna succeed with a minimum wage defense, what about the dudes blocking for him, or are they included in the 'loaded up"??

And if not there, he wants no state income tax..well states with no income tax who have an NFL franchise--Florida, Texas, TENN, Washington, and Nevada.
Cross off Nevada and the Raiders, you've got
Jaguars - nope they're set
Dolphins- nope haven't invested in a real RB in a decade or so, Ronnie Brown ('05) was the last real investment, got lucky with Lamar Miller and then sent him packing when it was time to re-sign him ('12-'15), so.. can't see them doing so now, even though they should, Jacobs would be great in that offense and would take a massive amount of pressure off Tua.
Buccaneers - maybe, but they have bigger worries and likely will be entering rebuild mode, you don't sign big name RB's in rebuild, you draft them
Cowboys - if they don't re-sign and re work Pollard and Zeke- maybe but I hope not
Texans - doubtful in their reset button mode
Titans- nope
Seahawks- highly doubtful with Walker entrenched

So unless you wanna be a Buccaneer, who also is currently QB-less, you might wanna re-think that requirement.

A nice 8-9 million average per year deal for the next 4-5 in Vegas is about the perfect deal for you and them, maybe they can still afford a decent QB and a compliment to Adams without breaking the bank and screwing the D completely

 

[TREFF]

Locally, all the talk radio seems to suggest the Bears will focus on the lines - offense and defense. Guests on the sports radio shows echo the same thing.

I have heard only one radio guest, Field Yates (who does have a friendship with GM Ryan Poles), suggest Monty could be on another team.

I dont think anyone sees Monty as part of the problem. The phrase around town that seems to be gaining momentum is "We're considering all options."

I would agree, Monty is right there on that line of guys who are perfectly capable of being "the guy", but at the same time, aren't all that special. I wouldn't expect a big time contract, so I can't imagine they'd be completely against it. It's not like he's going to command much more than a 4-6 million a year type deal, most likely less given the need in the market being minimal, and the supply higher than normal.
I think he'd be a great fallback option for the Cowboys after they've said adios to Zeke/Pollard if they don't get one of the two stud RB's in the draft. (assuming he doesn't sign in the first wave). But it appears that's all a pipe dream and half their cap is gonna go to RB's

 

[TREFF]

Josh Jacobs told Pro Football Talk he'd play on the franchise tag "if the team loaded up at all other positions and added players around him."​

So, if they acquire Aaron Rodgers, then? Jacobs added "if you want me to come back as the hero, you better pay me like a hero." It's a fair assessment of his value after he led the NFL in rushing last season. Jacobs also noted that he'd prefer to play somewhere tax free if things can't work out with the Raiders.

ok, so you know that D. Adams is getting outrageous money, and then he wants 'loading up at all other positions and adding players around him" and playing on the franchise tag of slightly over 10 million..so basically, in order to play on the franchise tag Josh Jacobs wants an Aaron Rodgers type QB , and apparently 'loading up at other positions would be what?? another top tier WR opposite D. Adams? So another 25-30 million, plus Adams, plus the high dollar QB, plus the over paid Waller..so he thinks he's gonna succeed with a minimum wage defense, what about the dudes blocking for him, or are they included in the 'loaded up"??

And if not there, he wants no state income tax..well states with no income tax who have an NFL franchise--Florida, Texas, TENN, Washington, and Nevada.
Cross off Nevada and the Raiders, you've got
Jaguars - nope they're set
Dolphins- nope haven't invested in a real RB in a decade or so, Ronnie Brown ('05) was the last real investment, got lucky with Lamar Miller and then sent him packing when it was time to re-sign him ('12-'15), so.. can't see them doing so now, even though they should, Jacobs would be great in that offense and would take a massive amount of pressure off Tua.
Buccaneers - maybe, but they have bigger worries and likely will be entering rebuild mode, you don't sign big name RB's in rebuild, you draft them
Cowboys - if they don't re-sign and re work Pollard and Zeke- maybe but I hope not
Texans - doubtful in their reset button mode
Titans- nope
Seahawks- highly doubtful with Walker entrenched

So unless you wanna be a Buccaneer, who also is currently QB-less, you might wanna re-think that requirement.

A nice 8-9 million average per year deal for the next 4-5 in Vegas is about the perfect deal for you and them, maybe they can still afford a decent QB and a compliment to Adams without breaking the bank and screwing the D completely

My bad..the 'Phins drafted Drake in the third..that's a qualifier in my book, so their last real attempt was 6 years ago, not a decade, I stand corrected by myself

 

[eaglesnut]

Josh Jacobs told Pro Football Talk he'd play on the franchise tag "if the team loaded up at all other positions and added players around him."​

So, if they acquire Aaron Rodgers, then? Jacobs added "if you want me to come back as the hero, you better pay me like a hero." It's a fair assessment of his value after he led the NFL in rushing last season. Jacobs also noted that he'd prefer to play somewhere tax free if things can't work out with the Raiders.

ok, so you know that D. Adams is getting outrageous money, and then he wants 'loading up at all other positions and adding players around him" and playing on the franchise tag of slightly over 10 million..so basically, in order to play on the franchise tag Josh Jacobs wants an Aaron Rodgers type QB , and apparently 'loading up at other positions would be what?? another top tier WR opposite D. Adams? So another 25-30 million, plus Adams, plus the high dollar QB, plus the over paid Waller..so he thinks he's gonna succeed with a minimum wage defense, what about the dudes blocking for him, or are they included in the 'loaded up"??

And if not there, he wants no state income tax..well states with no income tax who have an NFL franchise--Florida, Texas, TENN, Washington, and Nevada.
Cross off Nevada and the Raiders, you've got
Jaguars - nope they're set
Dolphins- nope haven't invested in a real RB in a decade or so, Ronnie Brown ('05) was the last real investment, got lucky with Lamar Miller and then sent him packing when it was time to re-sign him ('12-'15), so.. can't see them doing so now, even though they should, Jacobs would be great in that offense and would take a massive amount of pressure off Tua.
Buccaneers - maybe, but they have bigger worries and likely will be entering rebuild mode, you don't sign big name RB's in rebuild, you draft them
Cowboys - if they don't re-sign and re work Pollard and Zeke- maybe but I hope not
Texans - doubtful in their reset button mode
Titans- nope
Seahawks- highly doubtful with Walker entrenched

So unless you wanna be a Buccaneer, who also is currently QB-less, you might wanna re-think that requirement.

A nice 8-9 million average per year deal for the next 4-5 in Vegas is about the perfect deal for you and them, maybe they can still afford a decent QB and a compliment to Adams without breaking the bank and screwing the D completely

Sounds like you're saying Dolphins.

That would be a good fit.

 

[Bandit]

I dont think anyone sees Monty as part of the problem. The phrase around town that seems to be gaining momentum is "We're considering all options."

The "we're considering all options" thing cracks my ass up. What exactly is the alternative? "We really only looked at one option and even though it sucked, we decided to do it anyway, because what the hell, it's only the NFL."

 

[averagejoe]

The "we're considering all options" thing cracks my ass up. What exactly is the alternative? "We really only looked at one option and even though it sucked, we decided to do it anyway, because what the hell, it's only the NFL."

Maybe i didnt present it well?
It doesnt matter if the Bears are talking about acquiring free agents, trading their veterans, trading for veterans, or trading draft picks. Even Fields isnt sure if he will be a Bear next season. Could be a complete tear down.

In the context where i was answering Treff, local chatter (which might sound like an obvious logical plan, but cannot be confirmed as credible), seems to focused on just the lines.

I guess my long-winded point is that the Bears are not tipping their hand. No one seems to really know what they plan to do and who they plan to keep.

 

[TREFF]

Hey when I'm doing a fantasy draft on Madden..I always focus on the lines. Works for me, I approve

 

[averagejoe]

Saw that Carr wont accept a trade (to the Saints) essentially forcing LV to release him.

I get it. As an individual athlete, you'd hope your talents are respected and you get the perfect deal and the perfect landing spot.

But making stipulations to a non-playoff franchise that you were the leader of.... is he not seeing the picture that he himself has painted?

 

[Chef99]

Saw that Carr wont accept a trade (to the Saints) essentially forcing LV to release him.

I get it. As an individual athlete, you'd hope your talents are respected and you get the perfect deal and the perfect landing spot.

But making stipulations to a non-playoff franchise that you were the leader of.... is he not seeing the picture that he himself has painted?

Seems to me he's keeping all options open.

 

[TREFF]

Saw that Carr wont accept a trade (to the Saints) essentially forcing LV to release him.

I get it. As an individual athlete, you'd hope your talents are respected and you get the perfect deal and the perfect landing spot.

But making stipulations to a non-playoff franchise that you were the leader of.... is he not seeing the picture that he himself has painted?

Yeah, I'm with you Joe. I mean, it's a QB driven league, so he does have plenty of leverage being a better option that what 10-12 other teams have..but...
The dude had the NFL leading rusher, D. Adams, a plus oline, a plus TE, , and couldn't get the job done, so him making demands does have a bit of "what you talkin' bout Willis?" type of a vibe

 

[Chef99]

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports the Raiders will release QB Derek Carr prior to his contract becoming fully guaranteed on Tuesday.​

Carr exercised his no-trade clause to block a move to the Saints and will now reportedly become an unrestricted free agent on Tuesday. His $40 million contract with the Raiders is set to become fully guaranteed tomorrow at 4 pm EST, meaning his release is expected to come before that deadline. Carr is expected to garner immense interest on the open market from the multitude of quarterback-needy teams around the league. The Saints, Panthers, Jets, and Titans are amongst the leading candidates to pursue the nine-year veteran.

 

[wilwhite]

I don't think anybody who signs Carr, Geno or Tannehill will be appreciably better than they were last year.

Except the Jets.