seeking fantasy football guru

[Peter Gozintite]

Peyton is really the only player I'd want from your team.

Stacy is a gamble, there are rumors that tre mason is challenging for a bigger share of offensive snaps.

Chris Johnson went from a bad offense to a terrible one. Teams will stack the box against geno and I doubt he'll beat the defense with his arm. If the jets can find a way to create holes with genos legs, then Chris Johnson might be good, but I'm not sure the oc there is that creative. Cj also goes down way too easily.

Ryan Matthews always gets hurt. Even last year he got hurt in the playoffs.

I like Roddy white and jordy Nelson are solid wr2s, but neither will be a wr1.

I think Crabtree sucks, Gates is done, and nobody on your bench is worth that much.

I think you took a back up QB too early.

You're going to need another record breaking year from Peyton to contend.

As for rich's team, I think Cruz just got an oc that will favor him in the offense. There will be a lot of dink and dunk passes that will allow Cruz to catch the ball and make people miss in the open field. Andre also did well last year with a terrible version of Schaub and case keenan. I honestly think fitzy will be better than both were last year. Lynch and Lacy are 2 borderline elite rbs that if they stay healthy will make rich's team the best with running backs. Add Morris as the flex, and he really doesn't need elite Wrs. Cam is actually my least favorite player of his starters, but you act like cam has had someone to throw to since he got to Carolina. I don't consider Steve smith a great option because of his age since cam got there and cam has been top 5 every year.

You say you won a league with Peyton and foles last year? That's cool, but I beat Peyton in the playoffs in two money leagues last year, so I won't use last years leagues as an identifier as how this years will go.

what the fuck ever. i dont even know where top start with giant pile of bullshit.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

what the fuck ever. i dont even know where top start with giant pile of bullshit.

I also left out Bradford's injury allowing opposing teams to stack the box.

Anyway, sorry to crap on your team. I've done a lot of research for a few money leagues and you took a lot of players I am avoiding. Anyway, Im just excited for the season to start.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

Right and praised players i intentionally stayed away from. We'll see what happens, i reached on some players, but am expecting a couple sleepers to come through, and didnt get to draft all the way to the end like i would have with position restrictions. Its also tough to have the early pick. i pick second, and sit there while everyone in the top 20 is gone. not sure what i was supposed to do differently.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Right and praised players i intentionally stayed away from. We'll see what happens, i reached on some players, but am expecting a couple sleepers to come through, and didnt get to draft all the way to the end like i would have with position restrictions. Its also tough to have the early pick. i pick second, and sit there while everyone in the top 20 is gone. not sure what i was supposed to do differently.

Well I'm vehemently against taking a QB that early. Peyton is probably favored to lead all of fantasy in points, but you lose a lot of depth by not taking a running back at 2. People like to cite the huge gap between Peyton and the next QB as a reason to take him, but you're not just sacrificing points from your top rb, you're also sacrificing points at rb 2, wr1, wr2, and flex when you take a QB with your first pick, especially that early.

Personally, I would probably take Peyton after the top 6 RBs and Calvin are off of the board.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

Well I'm vehemently against taking a QB that early. Peyton is probably favored to lead all of fantasy in points, but you lose a lot of depth by not taking a running back at 2. People like to cite the huge gap between Peyton and the next QB as a reason to take him, but you're not just sacrificing points from your top rb, you're also sacrificing points at rb 2, wr1, wr2, and flex when you take a QB with your first pick, especially that early.

Personally, I would probably take Peyton after the top 6 RBs and Calvin are off of the board.

Until that RB get's hurt or faces a tough defense. The school of thought is always RB first- but how did that work out for all those that drafted A. Foster/C. Johnson in years past. While drafting a top QB first might take away from that boom or bust potential- taking a Manning, Brees, Rodgers is smart too. IMO.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

Well I'm vehemently against taking a QB that early. Peyton is probably favored to lead all of fantasy in points, but you lose a lot of depth by not taking a running back at 2.

I won two out of three league last year just because of that.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

If you got a shot at one of the elite QBs, take him over anyone. Once outside the elite then go WR. FK the running back position as it is not what it once was.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

If you got a shot at one of the elite QBs, take him over anyone. Once outside the elite then go WR. FK the running back position as it is not what it once was.

There is no position as consistent as QB. They touch the ball every single play.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

If you got a shot at one of the elite QBs, take him over anyone. Once outside the elite then go WR. FK the running back position as it is not what it once was.

That's the worst advice anyone could get regarding fantasy football, and if you asked the people on the fantasy football board on here they all would agree. If you have a shot at an elite work horse running back, you take him. Just because those players are much harder to come by doesn't make it smart to ignore running back. Philip Rivers was the number three QB last year on espn leagues and he was taken much later than the top 2. This year he's taken at 110+. You can get QB value later on in the draft. You cannot get much runningback value after the 3rd round. I like taking two semi elite passers and playing match ups. If done correctly, I think it feeds you just as many points as an elite QB while filling out your roster much more effectively. Taking 2 of romo, rivers, cutler, Brady, and Ryan and choosing the match ups will most likely give you as many huge games as Peyton or Brees does if done correctly.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

there are a lot of different schools of thought. I've been Mr. Running Back in leagues I have been in for years and it hasn't served me all that well. Of course, in our league I spent like my top 3 choices on RBs so I guess I'm not taking my own medicine even still. My other league I am in this year I went away from the RB-or-else school and I actually like that team better.

Clearly, elite RBs are rare jewels, but drafting the right one is the problem. Last year I went with Ray Rice. Oops! At least with elite QBs you are more or less guaranteed major points at a key position. The thing with this year is that in 10 team leagues, the RBs are the only spot that flat out runs out of guys. My other league I am in a 16 team league where suddenly the QB pool is not deep enough, so that changed the dynamics a lot.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

there are a lot of different schools of thought. I've been Mr. Running Back in leagues I have been in for years and it hasn't served me all that well. Of course, in our league I spent like my top 3 choices on RBs so I guess I'm not taking my own medicine even still. My other league I am in this year I went away from the RB-or-else school and I actually like that team better.

Clearly, elite RBs are rare jewels, but drafting the right one is the problem. Last year I went with Ray Rice. Oops! At least with elite QBs you are more or less guaranteed major points at a key position. The thing with this year is that in 10 team leagues, the RBs are the only spot that flat out runs out of guys. My other league I am in a 16 team league where suddenly the QB pool is not deep enough, so that changed the dynamics a lot.

Yeah, my argument is with the second pick, you should pick up one of McCoy, Charles, and ap. I got Charles at 6, which is unheard of. I'm in a few money leagues and in each league, the top 6 picks were McCoy, Charles, ap, forte, lacy, and lynch, and rightfully so. The way I draft is I separate the players into tiers. In the elite tier of running backs are those 6 running backs and 1 or 2 other guys. Then there are 6 Wrs in the elite tier, 3 QBs, and 1 tight end. With my first 2 or 3 picks I try to get as many elite players on my team starting with runningback, then wide receiver, then QB, then TE. To me, QB and TE are vanity positions. They put up sexy points, but unless you get some serious sleepers (which is definitely possible, but I don't think was accomplished in our league) then you're whole team will suffer and gives you even less depth in case of injuries.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

That's the worst advice anyone could get regarding fantasy football, and if you asked the people on the fantasy football board on here they all would agree. If you have a shot at an elite work horse running back, you take him. Just because those players are much harder to come by doesn't make it smart to ignore running back. Philip Rivers was the number three QB last year on espn leagues and he was taken much later than the top 2. This year he's taken at 110+. You can get QB value later on in the draft. You cannot get much runningback value after the 3rd round. I like taking two semi elite passers and playing match ups. If done correctly, I think it feeds you just as many points as an elite QB while filling out your roster much more effectively. Taking 2 of romo, rivers, cutler, Brady, and Ryan and choosing the match ups will most likely give you as many huge games as Peyton or Brees does if done correctly.

If done correctly is the key, same could be said about running backs. I got no elite RB guys so, i'll play the match up game with them. If done correctly then my strategy will work as good as yours.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Manning will double the points of any elite back. The top 5 scorers will all be QBs. WRs get as many points as RBs in todays FF. You old school guys better change with the times.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

That's the worst advice anyone could get regarding fantasy football, and if you asked the people on the fantasy football board on here they all would agree. If you have a shot at an elite work horse running back, you take him. Just because those players are much harder to come by doesn't make it smart to ignore running back. Philip Rivers was the number three QB last year on espn leagues and he was taken much later than the top 2. This year he's taken at 110+. You can get QB value later on in the draft. You cannot get much runningback value after the 3rd round. I like taking two semi elite passers and playing match ups. If done correctly, I think it feeds you just as many points as an elite QB while filling out your roster much more effectively. Taking 2 of romo, rivers, cutler, Brady, and Ryan and choosing the match ups will most likely give you as many huge games as Peyton or Brees does if done correctly.

There is only one peyton manning, period.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

Yeah, my argument is with the second pick, you should pick up one of McCoy, Charles, and ap. I got Charles at 6, which is unheard of. I'm in a few money leagues and in each league, the top 6 picks were McCoy, Charles, ap, forte, lacy, and lynch, and rightfully so. The way I draft is I separate the players into tiers. In the elite tier of running backs are those 6 running backs and 1 or 2 other guys. Then there are 6 Wrs in the elite tier, 3 QBs, and 1 tight end. With my first 2 or 3 picks I try to get as many elite players on my team starting with runningback, then wide receiver, then QB, then TE. To me, QB and TE are vanity positions. They put up sexy points, but unless you get some serious sleepers (which is definitely possible, but I don't think was accomplished in our league) then you're whole team will suffer and gives you even less depth in case of injuries.

Charles is a good player, but hasnt been consistent, and the chiefs in general suck. They went what 8 and 0, and shit the bed down the stretch when they has some decent competition. I stayed away from Charles intentionally. McCoy would have been the only player that i took over Peyton.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

If done correctly is the key, same could be said about running backs. I got no elite RB guys so, i'll play the match up game with them. If done correctly then my strategy will work as good as yours.

There are a few problems with this statement. First of all, after the first and second round you run into running backs that will be part of a committee, or have no chance of running on anyone. Second, it's much easier to predict QBs big games then it is rbs. running backs are much more apt to go off on good defenses than QBs are. Also, you'll probably end up predicting games at more than one rb, which leaves you more open to duds.

Your next post says manning will double the points of any elite back. That's just flat out wrong. Let's stick with the facts.

And let me get one thing straight. I'm not going to draft a running back in the first just because they are important. If I have a top 5 pick (I'm not particularly high on lynch), I'm taking a running back. The advantage of having an elite running back greatly out weighs having an elite QB. However, as you said there aren't many left in the NFL, but knowing this wouldn't that drive up the price of elite work horse running backs? I honestly don't see your argument there.

As I have said before, taking a QB real early doesn't just set you back from having a top level rb1, but it also sets your rb 2 and flex back. Unless you draft a wr next, you probably won't get a stable elite wr1 in most leagues as well, which will most likely set back both your wr positions. If you do draft a wr next, you're going to be stuck relying on low level rb2s and flex rbs. Therefore, you're not just setting back one position by picking manning that early, you're setting yourself back in 5 positions.

Now, I can't argue with taking a QB after all the elite RBs and Calvin are off the board, but pick 2 is way way too early. I'd start considering manning around 7 or 8. Fantasy is usually won with good Wrs and rbs. Manning gives you a little more room for error at these positions, but he also keeps you from getting the truly elite players at these positions.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Charles is a good player, but hasnt been consistent, and the chiefs in general suck. They went what 8 and 0, and shit the bed down the stretch when they has some decent competition. I stayed away from Charles intentionally. McCoy would have been the only player that i took over Peyton.

You're not betting on the Kansas City cheifs though, you're betting on Charles. After the Cheifs started sucking, Charles continued to be an elite back. When picking running backs, it's important to look at the offensive mastermind behind them. Coaches like Reid, Trestman, and Chip Kelly will usually produce fantasy stars at RB. In case you forgot, Reid's running backs include Westbrook who had great years under him, McCoy who had one below average year (he got a lot of yard when he played, but no TDs and then got injured), and now Charles, who was by far the best rb last year, even in the second half of the season. Reid's offense will almost always produce elite running backs, no matter if they are a good team or not.

I also don't know why everyone is so down on AP. He's got an offensive mastermind for the first time in his career and nobody wants to take him first.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

There is only one peyton manning, period.

Yep, he's the greatest regular season QB of all time, but let me ask you this. How did he follow up that record setting 49 TD performance he had in 04? He's got a tougher schedule this season, I think it's pretty far fetched to expect the same stats he put up last year.

 

[Peter Gozintite]

You're not betting on the Kansas City cheifs though, you're betting on Charles. After the Cheifs started sucking, Charles continued to be an elite back. When picking running backs, it's important to look at the offensive mastermind behind them. Coaches like Reid, Trestman, and Chip Kelly will usually produce fantasy stars at RB. In case you forgot, Reid's running backs include Westbrook who had great years under him, McCoy who had one below average year (he got a lot of yard when he played, but no TDs and then got injured), and now Charles, who was by far the best rb last year, even in the second half of the season. Reid's offense will almost always produce elite running backs, no matter if they are a good team or not.

I also don't know why everyone is so down on AP. He's got an offensive mastermind for the first time in his career and nobody wants to take him first.

Your condescending tone is what pisses me off more than anything. No shit Im not betting on KC. I dont like a rb on a team that I think will be trailing most of the time. I know hes a threat out of the back field, but in case you forgot, (i hope i sound like as big of an ass as you) 4 of his 7 receiving tds came in one freak game against Oak. He only had 4 games over 100 yds rushing. He's really good, but i can stalk the waiver wire, like i always have, and pick up someone, when someone else gets hurt. I picked up Knowshon last year on waivers in three leagues and he was a gold mine. So keep pretending that you know everything as fact, and that if you draft the best rb the seasons is a lock for you.
There is a level of luck that comes into play also. If get on the bad or good side of it, thats where you stay sometimes.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Brian has a strategy and he is sticking to it. I think it's a out dated strategy but well see in the end I guess.