Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Sake-Bombers

Members
  • Content Count

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Sake-Bombers

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Location
    San Diego

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Saint Louis Rams
  1. My spidey sense is up too, just based on them being so weird with injuries this year. Picked up Andre Johnson just in case. With Chud coming on board, Hilton hurt, offense may be different coming out of bye in a couple weeks.
  2. Watkins and it isn't close. Harvin is benefitting from the double and triple coverage that Watkins is getting, but his skills at this point in his career fall way short of Sammy. Keep in mind that Watkins and Taylor have only played two games together and Sammy missed almost the entire preseason. They are still getting to know each other and will only get better. Thanks for the thoughts! And I agree, long term Watkins is the play. But week to week, right now at this point of season, it just seems like a coin flip between the two from a fantasy production standpoint. Which means Harvin is outperforming my expectations by a lot and Watkins is underperforming. Be it for rapport, double coverage or whatever, these two seem really close to me right now in the first half of the season.
  3. At this point, who is the more desirable Bills receiver to have - Watkins or Harvin?
  4. Wait, is this schtick? Or is there a segment of the community I was unaware of that really thinks Pierre Thomas could have 100+ receptions.I want to like the New Orleans RB, there's just too many of them to know who I'd want week to week. I will agree with Milkman that it is well within the realm of possibility for Pierre Thomas to catch 100 passes this year. I don't think it's going to happen, but that NO offense throws a *TON* of passes to RBs, and if Pierre Thomas is the guy who soaks up all those targets, he's going to put up massive receiving numbers. If you had told me that you had a crystal ball and you knew for a fact that one NFL RB was going to catch 100 balls this year, and you asked me to place odds on which one it would be, Jamaal Charles would be my first choice... but Pierre Thomas would probably be my second. That's kind of where I'm at. I don't think it's likely but it's a possible outcome.Hey, this is why I'm here, apologies if I came across harsh. Those numbers seem outrageous to me, but finding out the thinking and rationale behind them at least is making me open my eyes and to PT a bit more, and if I don't go after him, I now see better how others are valuing him. I am thinking Ingram gets enough opportunity to either capitalize or flop. Seems like PT is worth roster tong regardless. And Robinson ready to replace Ingram if need be and will probably have at least one really good game but who knows which one. That's just my speculation obviously.
  5. Wait, is this schtick? Or is there a segment of the community I was unaware of that really thinks Pierre Thomas could have 100+ receptions. I want to like the New Orleans RB, there's just too many of them to know who I'd want week to week.
  6. I tried the read tea leaves and thought he might get less. I was wrong. Wow, no value at all this year it seems. Regarding his statement, I find it really odd that Gordon is the one that gets to be disappointed that someone else "didn't exercise better discretion and judgment." He had a LONG time to work on that, and that is a very poor sentiment for him to have. Sure, makes you think there's more to the case, but at the end of the day, he's the one that needs to show better discretion and judgment, and definitely not judge others for theirs. Statement: AlbertBreer @AlbertBreer Browns WR Josh Gordon statement via the NFLPA: “I’d like to apologize to my teammates, coaches, the Cleveland Browns organization and our fans. I am very disappointed that the NFL and its hearing office didn’t exercise better discretion and judgment in my case. I would like to sincerely thank the people who have been incredibly supportive of me during this challenging time, including my family, my agent, my union, my legal team, and the Cleveland Browns staff.”
  7. Josh Gordon is the Shrodinger's cat of fantasy football. He currently both is and isn't suspended and we won't know which until Goodell opens the box.
  8. Lots of interesting nuggets in here, including explicit statement that DWI has no bearing on this suspension. Bottom line for me continues to be that yearlong suspension still not a slam dunk. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11281430/josh-gordon-legal-team-say-second-hand-smoke-reason-positive-marijuana-test Josh Gordon defense plan outlined The legal team for Cleveland Browns wide receiver Josh Gordon will argue in a hearing Friday that its client has disputed test results that were caused from second-hand marijuana smoke, according to sources. Gordon is appealing the NFL's imposition of a yearlong suspension for a positive test for marijuana. Gordon's legal team will argue that the positive tests are so marginal that they show uncertainty as to whether the test results were even truly positive, and even if so, were the result of exposure to second-hand smoke, according to sources familiar with the case. Gordon's "A" sample tested at 16 nanograms per milliliter, a bare one nanogram per milliliter above the 15 nanogram per milliliter threshold, while Gordon's "B" sample -- which should theoretically be consistent with the "A" sample being that it comes from the exact same specimen -- tested at 13.63 ng/ml, lower than the threshold. With both samples coming from the same specimen test, the results should be consistent. Gordon's attorneys do not believe their client should be suspended for a year for differing disputed tests results, especially when one was barely higher than the threshold, sources said. Gordon's attorneys also plan to introduce witnesses that will testify that Gordon's scores indicate he was the victim of breathing in second-hand smoke, according to sources. The league has maintained that it does not intend to suspend players for second-hand smoke. Scientific studies have shown that second-hand smoke exposure can result in the kind of test results similar to those of Gordon. Because of this, Gordon's test results would have been negative for marijuana if considered under other professional sports testing regimes -- including the strict Olympic standard and Major League Baseball -- the federal workplace testing standards and various state testing standards, including California and Nevada, which govern boxing and MMA. And lastly, Gordon's attorneys also will point out that with their client being subject to over 70 drug tests, there was only one time since his rookie year that a test came back positive for marijuana, and even then, the "A" and "B" samples did not match. Gordon's arrest in early July in North Carolina also was a DWI charge, which is unrelated to the proceedings surrounding his positive marijuana test. It cannot and will not be factored into any discipline that is doled out to Gordon over this violation. Gordon is facing the indefinite one-year ban for violating the league's substance-abuse policy for at least the third time. If he loses, he'll have to wait a year to apply for reinstatement. Last season, Gordon was suspended two games and docked four game checks for testing positive for what he said was codeine in his prescribed cough medicine.
  9. Just to clarify, I trust Lindsay Jones' reporting for USA Today. But that story is filed and done and I'm just saying reports are that he is doing more than running with the threes. But that story is filed and unlikely to be updated, so it's perspective is locked. And while I trust that source, I don't believe the story really is "okay he practiced with the threes at the start of the camp ergo yearlong suspension, no need to think about this anymore."
  10. That tweet and USA Today running with it are a pretty interesting example how narratives are established to me. There is also at least one tweet yesterday about Gordon catching passes from Manziel. Today Gordon working with Manziel and Hoyer. But a lot of reaction and credence put into the fact he was with threes early in camp and that report is going to be the truth for a bit. To me, that's important to note because this hobby is about finding value where others don't see it, and all of a sudden I think there's value here that many are just ignoring, and that tweet and USA Today pick up establish it for those that are skeptical of a one year Gordon suspension. Make no mistake, I think Gordon will be suspended for a good chunk this year. And I think looking at other options in CLE is smart and necessary. And if you think Gordon is definitely out for at least a year and is likely going to relapse, it makes sense to move past him. But I personally believe there's at least a possibility that he is not suspended the whole year, so I am not shutting the door on trying to figure out when he currently presents value this year. I am also totally fine with you believing whatever you want, and hopefully you can accept I'm entitled to an opinion too. The "I presented a point and nobody responded therefore I am right" posts drive me bananas.
  11. Funny how all the Gordon backers respond all other posts but this one. Whats the matter guys...no answers for my questions??? alcohol? You have said all along "missed test"...He blows .09 and you think he went to rehab for alcohol??? As I suspected...not a legit response. Why not just admit it is fishy instead of continuing to lower your credibility...or are you just "stirring it up" again?Am I a Gordon backer? Don't personally think so but I did try and address this point earlier. I think that the suspension under review and the DUI are unrelated. I think he went to rehab because he got the DUI. Will probably help him get out of it. And also because he needs to for image repair.That said, as far as the suspension, no idea what it's for but I think it's definitely possible he tested positive for something that would necessitate rehab, but that either he is not in stage 3 of there's a weird technicality causing the timeline funkiness. But either way rehab is good for him and his habits as well as his public image. Again, THERE MAY NOT BE ANY "TIMELINE FUNKINESS." The Gordon "timeline" dovetails with the Ray Rice "timeline," and if you look it up (or go back about 30-40 pages), you'll see that Gordon's "timeline" isn't all that different from Fred Davis' who also had his test results leaked before his appeal and suspension announcement.People keep saying "this is taking a long time," but based on the few situations that we have knowledge of, it doesn't really seem that out of whack. I can definitely accept that there may not be any timeline funkiness, especially if timeline for previous cases comparable. I just personally have become slightly skeptical that Gordon, Rosenhaus, Browns and heck even the NFL wouldn't be able to expedite this any quicker if it really was one year at stake. I mean, if the appeal doesn't have any merit, then it would be better to not do it at all and start serving in April instead of prolonging the start of serving to the middle of training camp.
  12. Funny how all the Gordon backers respond all other posts but this one. Whats the matter guys...no answers for my questions??? alcohol? You have said all along "missed test"...He blows .09 and you think he went to rehab for alcohol??? As I suspected...not a legit response. Why not just admit it is fishy instead of continuing to lower your credibility...or are you just "stirring it up" again?Am I a Gordon backer? Don't personally think so but I did try and address this point earlier. I think that the suspension under review and the DUI are unrelated. I think he went to rehab because he got the DUI. Will probably help him get out of it. And also because he needs to for image repair. That said, as far as the suspension, no idea what it's for but I think it's definitely possible he tested positive for something that would necessitate rehab, but that either he is not in stage 3 of there's a weird technicality causing the timeline funkiness. But either way rehab is good for him and his habits as well as his public image.
  13. Hadn't really considered what I want to happen here. I think I probably want this guy to get the help he needs and his life back on track. Never to drive drunk and not to foolishly waste talent that so many of us wish we had. As far as a suspension, I can't say I'm sure what I want. Now what do I think will happen? Until today I thought he'd be suspended for at least a year. Actually hadn't even read that "report" and don't put on any more stock in it than i think I should considering the source. But something today got me questioning the timing of this, something others have done before me. I also think the potential suspension for marijuana/missed test/whatever is separate from the DUI and other incident. I don't think they'd decrease his suspension given that info, but also don't think they can just double it or whatever because of them. If anything they may need to suspend or punish him separately for that. So I am saying that something seems weird with the yearlong suspension to me. I really am just trying to clarify my viewpoint here because I may have been misunderstood. This whole situation seems as clear as purple drank.
  14. As others have said, it's unlikely the Gordon case is taking any longer than any other suspension announcement. The difference is, the other ones didn't leak out through the media. Gordon also is choosing to appeal his suspension whereas others may not have done so. It sounds like the league has notified him that he will be issued a year long suspension and he will having a hearing to get that reduced or thrown out, and it sound like his argument is that some rule or protocol was not followed correctly. It still remains to be seen if he will win his appeal or not. At what point do we possibly have evidence that this isn't the case, though? I mean, the info was leaked a long time ago, and I would guess most suspensions get appealed. So the question then becomes: How many players get the ban hammer dropped on them after training camp has started? If the system is: Player notified in April, appeal heard August 1, that is a long time for the due process to take place, especially considering the importance of the time. I'm just thinking that the system (which I admittedly do not know how it works, and not many do) surely can't be set up to take that long just as part of standard operating procedure. Maybe I'm wrong though. Let's use the Ray Rice example. It's being reported that he has the right to appeal his suspension now that it's been handed down. Does that mean his appeal wouldn't be heard until mid-late October if he chose to? Surely the system is designed to be more efficient than that. Anyway, I'm feeling very hat about this all of a sudden, just wanted to share my change of heart I had today. At the end of the day, none of us know, but we'll find out soon!
  15. As others have said, it's unlikely the Gordon case is taking any longer than any other suspension announcement. The difference is, the other ones didn't leak out through the media. Gordon also is choosing to appeal his suspension whereas others may not have done so. It sounds like the league has notified him that he will be issued a year long suspension and he will having a hearing to get that reduced or thrown out, and it sound like his argument is that some rule or protocol was not followed correctly. It still remains to be seen if he will win his appeal or not. If the team has known since early April (http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/sports/2014/05/10/gordon-facing-suspension-for-one-year-report-says.html), it just seems really weird to me that they and Gordon would be fine waiting nearly three months for the appeal. Unless they think there is a very strong chance for reduction, they're better off NOT appealing early to get him back for OTAs next year instead of just going through the motions. I'm not about to carry the torch for this viewpoint or draw some crazy line in the sand or even say I don't agree with those who still think it will be longer, but for whatever reason, it just clicked for me today that the timing on this is indicating that a year is not the slam dunk I thought it was when I woke up this morning.