Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Whizzinator

  1. Is this same crew that did the Pittsburgh-NE game last week?
  2. Baldwin probably best call; I’d think hard about Breida however myself
  3. .5 PPR debating among Jeffrey, Barber, Ballage leaning Jeffrey but curious about Ballage upside
  4. Am I crazy to believe in Giants against Sanchez and a dispirited Washington team?
  5. Statistically that wasn’t a bad choice (lots of analysis at the time on this point) and as noted above the replays suggest they succeeded in the conversion...but got a bad spot. in terms of how often now, they have had limited opportunities this year as several of their losses have been blowouts
  6. Looks like Ware is the winner of the “waiver wire sweepstakes” for 2018. wow
  7. Don't think they will really be in on him, but that's not really how the cap works. Acquiring team is only on hook for his base salary, $11 mil (the other $3 mil per year in his annual average is bonus proration, but Cards have to pay that and thus it stays on their cap). And then the acquiring team only has to cover the pro-rated portion which remains this year--which is roughly $6 mil. Pats have more than $5 mil in cap space after the Gilmore restructuring, so they could make it work with some simple additonal restructurings of current players. Next year they'd need to find the full $11 mil, too
  8. Feels like a really sad situation---the unexplained absence in training camp certainly could be consistent with mental/emotional health issues and now this. I hope the guy has his life in order going fowrard, football or not. At least he should have the resources to get help---of whatever kind---he might need.
  9. Connor is a lottery ticket, though one which has the advantage it likely either pays off or craps out in the next week or two, freeing up the roster spot. If you can get him late in a draft (at a point where everyone is a gamble) or cheap in FA he's surely worth a hold for a week or two to see what develops. But odds are, he has one week's real value at this point.
  10. I agree with that, but what I think he'd say (and no doubt Goodell) is they are just interpreting the words differently which is their prerogative. They have been pretty consistent this year in overturning calls without much deference. That is why loyal-to-on-field-refs Pereira has been increasingly critical of it. I think they are getting more overall calls right this way, but it blows up the flow of the game and has to be hard for the on-field guys. To me, as a longtime fan, part of the issue is the on-field guys are worse than ever and the league office more sensitive to the criticism than ever and that's led to what I think is a bad situation where a lot of calls get heavy review, and sometimes reversals, that might have stood in the past. Sometimes (as today) it serves the interest of getting the right result, but not at all sure the process is worth it.
  11. Watch the replay. read the pass interference rule. C'mon.
  12. Hardly---no team has been hurt more by NY the last two years than the Patriots, who lost the league's best player for 4 games. But I do think on replay reviews the NFL has changed the standard and not announced it. That is pissing off Pereira and Blandino, for good reason.
  13. As I've noted a couple times now, I think Riveron is applying a different standard for review than Pereira and Blandino did. That explains (among other things) the ASJ reversal in the Jets game earlier this year. I think NFL should own up to what the standard being applied actually is---and I don't think they have. Pereira is terrific. Worth noting that he said he's watching a review on a big-screen at a stadium and doesn't have the studio replays and all the angles and technology, so we'll see where he ultimately lands.
  14. The comment I responded to was that it was a touchdown---it wasn't, because he didn't get his foot down. Romo agreed with that (and did so right away, and consistently) The review standard is a different question, and you can read my thoughts on that in prior posts (my belief, across a bunch of plays this year, is Riveron is applying the review standard more leninently than in the past). As I have noted, it's a much more credible argument to say that it wasn't a TD but there may not be enough to meet the standard than to ignore that it wasn't a TD. And I think those who have watched the reverse angle replay will see that there was enough, but that is at least a realistic question to discuss.
  15. Taylor is frustrating to watch---a lot of good stuff, but so many times he doesn't go through his reads and holds the ball too long. I am not sure you can really win with him.
  16. The officials in NY who do the review agreed, and they have both the final word and the best evidence. You should re-listen to what Romo said---he said there's a question about possession and he wasn't sure.
  17. I agree---and Riveron has suggested that in his comments on a few replays this year.
  18. This is what I mean. Why not just ask 'was the call correct?' If it's about the team, or what happened on some other call, that's narrative not reality.
  19. Knowing the rules well enough to make this argument is respectable! I think NFL struggles with what is sufficient to overturn. and there's reason to think they have changed the standard this year (Riveron has spoken in terms that suggest this). I would guess Riveron will say you can see the ball moving after the second foot comes up, and that's conclusive enough. That is clearly what occurred, but as we saw in the Patriots game last week where people were talking about "Football Move" which hasn't been in rules in years, not everyone is too concerned with the actual rules and plays.
  20. Romo didn't, and neither did the actual referees. I'm quite comfortable with my base of knowledge. There's a lot of folks around here who like narratives more than facts and that's unfortunate.
  21. There's no requirement you watch the replays and know the rules to post here, but some of us try to do both anyway. Consider trying it.
  22. That one was not nearly as close at it looked---the angle from the back, where you see the toe drag, looks like a clear catch. But the issue is he bobbled the ball---on the reverse angle, where you can see ball moving and the feet, it's clear the second foot had finished the drag and was back up and ball was still moving. No possession. Then the second foot touched down out of bounds. Don't think this will be controversial once people really see the right replay, it was a close to no-brainer reversal in the end
  23. It's one thing to trick the Cowboys, who have had mediocre to poor coaching and discipline for a decade. Trying that against the Patriots is just a horrible bet. Given the weak Pats defense this year, you're far better off playing it straight than making a bet you can 'sneak' something over on them. Perhaps their only plus defensive trait right now is attention!
  24. Thanks to injuries I'm carrying a ridiculous 3 defenses. For this week, decision is down to Buffalo or Denver---leaning Denver, liked what I saw last week and suspect (hope?) that D has some pride that will carry it to end of year. Holding Chargers as well; a part of me wonders about them this week. They are all teed up if I am fortunate enough to need them week 16
  25. Drafted nine this weekend, wasn't psyched about slot. PPR. Ended up wtih Nelson/Gordon/Gronk/D Thomas/Hunt. Could have been worse, don't love Thomas but he's solid there. Biggest surprises in draft was how quickly RB dried up---teams who didn't have two early struggled.