Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Blue Thunder

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

29 Excellent

About Blue Thunder

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Arlington, TX

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Los Angeles Chargers

Recent Profile Visitors

2,802 profile views
  1. Well, to be fair, it does roll off of the tongue a little better than the Washington Prolate Spheroid Gatherers.
  2. I believe that DeeJay Dallas was selected by Seattle, not Miami. He is from the U, though.
  3. I read that one of the things that they are considering is to do it by conference. AFC has the extra home game one year and NFC has it the next year. Makes sense to me.
  4. Senior year of HS (Fall '87) at a small school in NW Okla (39 in graduating class and 250 students in 7-12th grades). I was the starting strong side DT in a 4-4-3 defense, so you know what that means - I was double-teamed on almost every play. At 6'1" and 235#, I was one of the 2 or 3 biggest and strongest players on the team. I was one of only two guys on the team that could leg press the entire stack (750#), so the coaches liked my chances at handling myself while being outnumbered. Most games, I would generally hold my own, making a few tackles here and there, but I had two "claim to fame" plays. The first one, we were playing a similarly matched team also with a strong defense and a so-so offense. Towards the end of the 3rd quarter, the opponents were on their own 15 yard line. When they snapped the ball, the right guard in front of me pulled to the left immediately. I had seen him do this earlier in the game and felt pretty sure that they were running a power lead off the left tackle. So I made a beeline for the RB and smacked him right as he got the hand off. He fumbled the ball and our SILB, who had followed me through the hole, fell on the ball. On offense, we drove the 10 yards to the end zone and ended up winning the game, 8-0. As luck would have it, this game ended up being the one that sent us to the playoffs due to a head-to-head tiebreaker over them. The second play happened during the final game of the season. We were playing one of our two main rivals and it was midway through the 4th quarter. We were leading 26-0 and the "bad guys" ran a sweep left (away from me) from their own 20. I disengaged from the OL in front of me and took off on a diagonal across the field, hoping to catch the RB about 15 or so yards down field and preserve the shutout. I almost caught him on the angle, but I ended up right behind him. Over the next 40 yards, I caught up to him and tackled him on our 20 yard line. We then clamped down on them for the rest of the game and preserved the shutout against our bitter rivals. I did also manage to block three punts that season (two in one game) and sack the QB twice. Not too bad for a DT. But those two plays above will always stand out in my mind. How did we fare in the playoffs? We lost, 41-6, in the first round to the eventual state champs. Oh, well. 6-5 is still a winning record and it was the first time that our HS had made the playoffs in eight years. My one "big memory" in baseball happened my senior year also. I had played LF my first three years and moved in to 3B my senior year due to my strong arm. I was an average (at best) hitter, but I was pretty decent in the field. Overall, we were a slightly below average team, I'd say. Not awful, but certainly not playoff worthy. Anyway, we had six pitchers on the team. Why does that matter? Well, there was one game towards the end of the year where we had gone through three pitchers, two other guys couldn't pitch because they had done so too recently, and our sixth (and last) pitcher got thrown out of the game for arguing with the umpire. He was called out sliding into second base for the third out and he was sure he was safe. He wasn't. But he wouldn't let it go and he got tossed. Now we had one more inning to go and no pitchers... and guess who got called to the mound? I had never even thrown a ball off of the pitchers mound and now, suddenly I was taking my eight warmup pitches to try and somehow finish the game. I put the first three throws well over the catcher's head and into the backstop. Then, I finally realized that throwing from the mound is nothing like throwing across the diamond. So I took a little something off of my throws in order to get a little better control. It helped some, but I still didn't get any of the eight warmup throws across the plate. I'm sure the first batter was wondering what he had gotten himself into. He takes the first pitch, which happens to be my first strike thrown in nine throws. He ends up drilling the 2-1 pitch on a one-hopper to the shortstop, who throws it to first base in time. One down. The next guy up was a free-swinger and I struck him out swinging on four pitches. Two down, one to go. For guy #3, the first pitch I throw a fastball (because that was all I had, LOL) on the inside corner and he hits it right off of his hands weakly right back to me. I scoop it up and toss it to first in plenty of time. Three up, three down. So now I have a high school pitching career ERA of 0.00. It was definitely the best pitching performance of the night as we lost the game, 19-1 (no run-rule back then).
  5. I wouldn't be surprised to see them go to 17 games, add a second bye week, and cut to two preseason games now. Start the preseason games two weeks later and keep week one of the regular season on the same starting weekend that it is now (right after Labor Day). Then, have the Super Bowl two weeks later that it is now, so on the third weekend in February (President's Day weekend) when most people are already off on Monday to help with the Super Bowl "hangovers". After all, the whole month of February is "sweeps" month, so to the networks, it wouldn't matter when the Super Bowl is as long as it is still in February. BUT... you would also have the added benefit of the high ratings from two extra playoff weeks during sweeps month. The networks would love that!
  6. I agree. You took the low end of my ranges for both Ekeler and Jackson, which won't happen. I was trying to offer ranges that would add up to 100%. You're probably right about not counting on much from Cox. I don't think we're too far apart, but I think 60% might be a little high for Ekeler. If I had to pick a specific number, barring any injuries, I would predict Ekeler - 50% Jackson - 35% Newsome - 15% I think that Newsome will get some decent work in the 4th quarter of any blowouts as well as taking a series from Jackson every once in a while. Any carries that Cox would get would be in a week (or two) that one of the other three guys is not playing due to being dinged up. Hopefully they all stay healthy all year, but I'm not sure how realistic that is. Ankle sprains tend to happen every once in a while. I can, however, see a scenario where Jackson out-touches Ekeler if even if both remain healthy... IF Jackson turns into a stud - which is certainly possible. I do think it more likely that Ekeler will out-touch Jackson, although I expect it to be closer than a lot of people think.
  7. Fair point. I do think that you could still arrive at something close to these percentages if one or two of them ever gets dinged up during the year. I think it also would depend on just how high they are on Jeremy Cox. I could just as easily see him on the practice squad as on the final 53. The main point I'm trying to make is that there is more to the Chargers RB corp than just Ekeler and Jackson and that I could easily see the RB work being split more evenly than some people are expecting.
  8. I really expect to see Detrez Newsome worked into the rotation as well. He's got some lead-back type of qualities. Also, Jeremy Cox will probably see some short yardage and goal line work. I'd expect to see a split along these lines. Ekeler 25 - 40% Jackson 25 - 40% Newsome 15 - 25% Cox 5 - 10% I think that this would work well IRL as it would keep everyone relatively fresh, but it wouldn't be that great for fantasy football though.
  9. Good point. This is probably why the owners are seemingly "locked in" to wanting an 18-game schedule in order to make the TV revenue pie just as big as possible. So if the owners really are all about maximizing the pie size, then 21 weeks with the three byes would be better than 19 weeks with one bye from their perspective.
  10. Just what I've been saying. The three evenly spaced bye weeks would benefit everyone regardless of whether teams play 16 or 18 games. In fact, it might be enough to convince owners to stay at 16 games per team due to the extra two weeks of regular season TV revenue. However, I just have a feeling from what I've been reading that they owners are stuck on an 18-game schedule and the best (only) way to accomplish that is more rest during the season. The three evenly spaced bye weeks what makes the most sense, imo. If they do decide to just add a 17th game and make it an international game, then I would think that the players would also still benefit from more time off during the season, both for traveling and recovering.
  11. None taken. I don't think that a proposal exists that every single person is going to like. Basically, it would push the Super Bowl back from the first Sunday in February two weeks to the third Sunday. Bye weeks are a crap shoot anyway, but if you had several spaced out, you'd have a better chance of having one when you really need one. Here's my suggestion... Bye w´╗┐eeks could be grouped like this: Group 1 = off weeks 4, 9, 14 Group 2 = off weeks 5, 10, 15 Group 3 = off weeks 6, 11, 16 Group 4 = off weeks 7, 12, 17 Group 5 = off weeks 8, 13, 18 No bye during weeks 1-3 and weeks 19-21 Currently, if a team has a bye week during week 4, they would then have 13 weeks in a row without a break. If they were in Group 1 above, the longest stretch they would have without a break would be 7 weeks. In fact, it would be 3 games - break - 4 games - break - 4 games - break - 7 games. Looking at the other side of it, if a team currently has a week 12 bye, they have 11 games before then. If you have a week 12 bye (Group 4) in my proposal, you also have a week 7 and a week 17 bye, which would mean 6 games - break - 4 games - break - 4 games - break - 4 games. Which scenario do you think would allow players to be more rested going into the playoffs? Seems obvious to me. If 18 games is an absolute MUST for the owners, then this plan makes the most sense to me. However... If they are willing to concede to the NFLPA and stay at 16 games, you could still do a 16-game, 19-week schedule with three evenly spaced byes. If you dropped to two preseason games, this would not increase the length of the season at all. Bye groupings would look like this... Group 1 = off weeks 5, 9, 13 Group 2 = off weeks 6, 10, 14 Group 3 = off weeks 7, 11, 15 Group 4 = off weeks 8, 12, 16 No bye during weeks 1-4 and weeks 17-19 You would still have the added advantage of more rest throughout the season and 19 weeks of regular season football instead of 17. Regardless of which plan you talk about (18 games or 16 games), I really think that the three evenly spaced byes is a good idea.
  12. Yes, the players would play all 18 games with no one having to sit out at all. That's why the three evenly spaced byes is an important part of it - for recovery time during the season. I think the whole "having to sit" thing is ridiculous and opens up so many issues that aren't really necessary. This would mean that players would make more because they're playing in 18 games, but so would the owners and the networks. Everyone would make more due to the bigger pie (21 weeks versus 17 weeks) that they would be getting from the networks. Expanding the rosters by a few spots would help with the overall team fatigue, especially due to the nature of specialization that is prevalent in the league now. Also, give more IR-Designated to Return spots. Since there would be a longer season, it would be more likely that players could return from their injuries. All the record books were thrown out in 1978 when the NFL went from 14 to 16 games, so I don't think that's too much of an issue.
  13. This was a big reason for my suggestion of a 21-week, 18-game season with three evenly spaced byes idea that I proposed earlier in this thread. More weeks means more money to split between the owners and players. Also, nobody has to sit out any games this way. Time wise the season would be two weeks longer with 2 preseason games and a 21-week season (23 weeks total), compared to the current model of 4 preseason games and a 17-week season (21 weeks total). However, with three byes instead of one, there is more recovery time (and travel time for international games) during the season to help players stay healthier - especially if those bye weeks are evenly spaced. I never did get a response from Goodell or the NFLPA from the detailed email I sent them (posted earlier on page 2 of this thread as well). I think that my entire plan solves all of the problems of an 18-game schedule and it expands the NFL brand, both foreign and domestically. Hopefully, they at least read it, but I won't hold my breath.
  14. Yeah, I figured as much. Just trying to see if there's anything there.