Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

reg

Members
  • Content Count

    3,015
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About reg

  • Rank
    Mod in training
  • Birthday April 20

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?s=&act=Login&CODE=06
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    OBC

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Minnesota Vikings

Recent Profile Visitors

8,598 profile views
  1. Has anyone seen reg aka "BigHead" lately? 

    OBC is still up, tell him to phone home. TIA

  2. But garbage time started in the second quarter
  3. Oct 19 - 3:28 PM LMAO Mike Wallace compared rookie WR Stefon Diggs' skill set to a young Antonio Brown. Wallace played with Brown in Pittsburgh. "When you look at a guy, you can tell from day one who can play football. I always felt like he could," Wallace said. "Just the skill set, the way he runs his routes, the energy that he has. It reminds me of him." This comparison is over the top, but it has become apparent the Vikings are high on their rookie receiver. Diggs could be limited by the slow pace of the Minnesota offense and the return of Charles Johnson (ribs), but he has the playmaking ability to be useful even on limited targets. He needs to be owned in all leagues. So he went from a speculative add to a must add because Mike Wallace compared him to Antonio Brown?No, he went to must add because he has looked fantastic while Johnson looked ordinary.Yeah, I don't disagree there, I'm just pointing out the hilarity that Rotoworld all of a sudden changed their tune only after they got Mike Wallace's endorsement.Yeah, it is a strange way to support that someone is a must add. Why not just say he looks great and is putting up numbers to prove it? It wouldn't make any sense to upgrade Diggs because of what Mike Wallace said because Wallace said the same thing in an interview August 2nd which I posted in this thread. Obviously it is how Diggs performed not what Wallace said about him causing the upgrade. I do have to wonder why the Vikings had Diggs inactive for the 1st 3 games if they have been seeing him play like this for months. Earlier in the season they said it was because he doesn't play ST, and all the vet receivers ahead of him were healthy. Only due to injuries did he get his shot, and it appears he's not letting go.
  4. See, this is almost crazy to me. You have one company (Wells) that is in good enough shape to take on Wachovia and is a much better fit for Wachovia shareholders and employees and another (Citi) that can't do the same thing itself and is a worse fit. How in the world can regulators not tell Citi to back off of this one, especially since the original Citi deal put taxpayers (the folks who pay the regulators salaries) on the hook and the Wells deal did not. Just silly to me.Announcement made last night / this morning that we will be going forward with our Wells deal....more as I hear it. This is all very bizarre to us as employees. If Wachovia is going in the pooper like everyone says and we are worth nothing, what is Citi or Wells fighting for exactly?Here is what Wells saw:https://www.wellsfargo.com/downloads/pdf/pr...OVIA_100308.pdf
  5. I don't see why they would go after National City. Wachovia has been the only bank so far that I think would have bolstered their position.Wachovia would have been a good move for Wells but they have always been very disciplined and do not make deals just to make deals. I think the chances are high that the regulators will hand National City on a silver plater similiar to how WaMu was served up to JPM. If so, Wells would be dumb to pass.Months ago it was rumored that we were looking at NCC, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened.
  6. I agree that NCC will be the next one down, they are life support as is. Fifth Third seems to be dropping like a brick today.
  7. reg

    Draft

    LOL @ "GETER DONE PEACE" ### rocko
  8. Post more often dammit!