patrickmcgroin
Footballguy
Do you not start him again because of the 0 points yesterday? Pick someone more reliable up (if there is such a thing)? Or are you too scared not to start him and lose out on good potential points from him?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
So you have Aaron Hernandez for your TE..... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter patrickmcgroin
- Start date
Giants4Life
Footballguy
I'm not sure why anyone is shocked by his 0. The Pats have completely different game plans week to week and if you are starting any Patriot, you are signing up for inconsistency.
If you can handle the fluctuations, then by all means start him, but I've wanted no part of him from the get go
If you can handle the fluctuations, then by all means start him, but I've wanted no part of him from the get go
Macdaddy_2004
Footballguy
I don't understand Belicheck - I know enough to stay away from NE RB's and WR's - now I gotta stay away from the TE's?
Hernandez had 2 TD's the week before.
Hernandez had 2 TD's the week before.
Touchdown There
Footballguy
Here is what I read this morning:
__________________________________________
(Rotoworld) Aaron Hernandez was held without a catch in the Week 10 win over the Steelers.
Analysis: It was a terrible night for Hernandez owners. He appeared to be benched at the beginning of the game, though he said he wasn't and it was just part of the "gameplan." He then watched fellow tight end Rob Gronkowski blow up with a three-touchdown game. Hernandez didn't help his cause with another drop in this one after three drops last week. We still like his upside more than Gronkowski's going forward, but it's hard to consider Hernandez a stable play after tonight's showing.
__________________________________________
Since it was the Sunday night game, many of us saw Tom Brady on the sideline in Q1 getting the team straight after some drops. I think Hernandez was made an example of (and was benched). Considering Gronkowski's performance, this has to make you wonder if Hernandez will fully recover his role. I have Hernandez in a few leagues and the subscriber contest. High level of concern.
__________________________________________
(Rotoworld) Aaron Hernandez was held without a catch in the Week 10 win over the Steelers.
Analysis: It was a terrible night for Hernandez owners. He appeared to be benched at the beginning of the game, though he said he wasn't and it was just part of the "gameplan." He then watched fellow tight end Rob Gronkowski blow up with a three-touchdown game. Hernandez didn't help his cause with another drop in this one after three drops last week. We still like his upside more than Gronkowski's going forward, but it's hard to consider Hernandez a stable play after tonight's showing.
__________________________________________
Since it was the Sunday night game, many of us saw Tom Brady on the sideline in Q1 getting the team straight after some drops. I think Hernandez was made an example of (and was benched). Considering Gronkowski's performance, this has to make you wonder if Hernandez will fully recover his role. I have Hernandez in a few leagues and the subscriber contest. High level of concern.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
No offense, but wouldn't this thread http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...mp;hl=Hernandez have sufficed?
It's only one game, I wouldn't go making any crazy conclusions based off of it. People have said they kept their better blocking TEs in because of the Pitt D which makes sense. Wasn't Hernandez near the team lead in targets (and snaps) up to this point, if not leading? I'd start worrying a little if he puts up another bagel while Gronk continues to put up big numbers next week.
Macdaddy_2004
Footballguy
I'm not too concerned going forwrad I'm just mad cause it cost me my fantasy matchup this week.
Go DC Yourself
Footballguy
I can see why you depended upon Hernandez. The Pittsburgh D is just like the Cleveland D, so last night was quite surprising.
I'm tempted to pick up Gronk and play them both in an effort to average out my downside and try to lock in some TE and flex value. The problem is that with so many TE injuries this year to top TE's there's not much proven depth left. I've already mowed through (trades and injuries) Clark, Findley, Keller and now Hernandez while passing on Tamme due to not enough roster space. Not trying to tell you guys what I ate for lunch but my next move is either Gronk, McMichael or a player TBD. You guys are right about NE/Belichik in that he loves to spread it around to the RB/WR and now TE. I thought things stabilized with Moss and Welker but that's done and he's changed it up and gone back to his old ways. Now watch him go back to Hernandez next week just to keep his opponents from game planning correctly.
THE SNOWMAN
Footballguy
With Hill coming back I got lucky and snagged up Pettigrew (which obviously I played over Hernandez). With that said, it will be very tough for me to start him again until he proves he can get yards or if Det has a horrible matchup.
Last edited by a moderator:
patrickmcgroin
Footballguy
No, I knew he wasn't "inactive". This thread was for Hernandez owners only.JohnnyU said:
Macdaddy_2004
Footballguy
It's not even that - Hernandez was leading the team in receiving yards, targets and snaps.Belicheck is evil.Go DC Yourself said:
THE SNOWMAN
Footballguy
So what has this turned into? A guessing game on which TE to play every week? One week is Hernandez then the next is Gronkowski(sp?)?
Black
Footballguy
If you saw how well NE protected Brady, it can only be assumed that Gronk was in b/c he is the better blocker. With Gronk in, when he sneaked out, he got targets (and TDs).
I didn't predict it, that's just how it played out.
Branch looked to be healthier and got more targets, as did Welker. They threw deep at Tate (who even had a Red Zone look). The Patriots have not been doing well with just throwing to Hernandez, so it makes sense that they tried to spread it around.
That being said...I have no idea whether to continue carrying Hernandez behind Witten (who's had stinkers of his own the last two weeks).
I didn't predict it, that's just how it played out.
Branch looked to be healthier and got more targets, as did Welker. They threw deep at Tate (who even had a Red Zone look). The Patriots have not been doing well with just throwing to Hernandez, so it makes sense that they tried to spread it around.
That being said...I have no idea whether to continue carrying Hernandez behind Witten (who's had stinkers of his own the last two weeks).
Macdaddy_2004
Footballguy
I had Collins in my 2nd QB spot and he went down to injury - I just needed a lousy 6-7 pts out of my TE this week
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
I have them both in the Subscriber Contest (also have Finley) so I'm covered there but I have Hernandez in 2 other regular leagues and I'm concerned as well. What I saw last night, with him not even being in the game is not good. Is that supposed to make me feel better that him being on the sideline is part of the game plan? Really, it's also part of the game plan for the other bums to be on the sideline too? That's hilarious, part of the game plan was for him to be out of the game like that's good. Notice how part of the game plan was NOT for Tom Brady to be out of the game plan. What's worse for Hernandez is that game plan worked for the Patriots!I have a little room at WR and RB so I will be sending out some reasonable trade offers. But when I think about it, who do I really want? Of course I want Gates, but that owner isn't get rid of him, unless I mortgage the farm. All I know is I can't have my starting TE not even be a guy that's on the field and then have him tell people with a straight face that him being on the sideline was the Patriots game plan like that's a good thing for him. Guess what Hernandez, the game plan was for me to be on the sideline too!
And none before that.They have always used all their tight ends every game, the reason hernandez doesnt get targetted in the red zone is because hes not in on the plays in the redzone, hes a terrible blocker, whereas Gronkowski is a great blocker and isnt as good of a receiver as hernandez but hes as good as most tight ends.Macdaddy_2004 said:
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
The first TD that Hernandez caught last week was actually thrown to Gronkowski, it bounced around and Hernandez ended up catching it in the endzone. The 2nd TD was legit in that it was intended for him.
I've seen nothing semi-official saying he was benched. They mentioned that the Pats were going with Gron/Crumpler for blocking. They went with 2 TEs a lot.Hernandez isn't a TE, he's a big WR. He can't block worth a ####. The Pats are going to change it up depending on the matchup. Hernandez will have his big games, he'll have his 0 games too. Against that 3-4 defense the 2 TE sets were perfect. Hernandez was just the odd man out.So I'm not buying this "benching". He just wasn't in the game plan like he said, because he can't block.
And it was a great save, doesnt change their situation, Hernandez is their open field deep ball TE, hes obviously a wr that plays TE as opposed to a TE who can play WR.
He dropped an easy catch last night that seemed to bother Brady a lot in addition to the Steelers rush they needed people who could block.
Iwannabeacowboybaby!
Footballguy
It's more than the drop. The drop didn't even take place till a little later in the game. Hernandez wasn't even starting last night. It's not like he dropped the ball, then all of a sudden he disappeared. He didn't disappear because he never appeared last night. The drop didn't help his case but he was already doing nothing at that point.I keep hearing about the drop, even if he catches that pass, Pittsburgh was right on him, he would have gained about 3 yards. It looked bad because it was close to a lateral (which is wasn't) but it didn't make him look good potentially being the cause of a big turnover. They did go right back to him after that on a deep pattern that really wasn't close to completing.
Similar threads
