Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

zftcg

Members
  • Content Count

    5,064
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

zftcg last won the day on October 23

zftcg had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,134 Excellent

About zftcg

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Washington Redskins

Recent Profile Visitors

3,761 profile views
  1. I don't think it was as much of a slam dunk decision as Broncos going for it on previous drive, but yeah, given that Denver had no timeouts and their offense hadn't been able to move the ball much, probably should have kicked the FG and made them have to score a TD.
  2. After declining to go for it on 4th and 1 from the 3, Broncos forced to go for it in 4th and 10 from the 50.
  3. Clock was running. Cleveland would have been able to run it down another 40 seconds.
  4. LOL Williams calling timeout right before a neutral zone infraction that would have clinched the game.
  5. Joseph making a strong play for patron saint of this thread.
  6. Joseph kicking a FG on 4th and 1 from the 3 down 4 with 4:30 left. They never learn.
  7. Obviously, it's your roster so you should do whatever you think is best. I just don't have enough confidence to project guys' stats, much less their ceilings and floors. (That goes double for a guy like Foster; I follow football pretty closely, and I had never heard of him before a few weeks ago.) If I were faced with a lineup decision like yours, I would probably really on a decidedly less scientific method, like "Don't start the WR whose QB had been posting more rushing yards than passing yards." But mostly, I would just assume that with two unproven commodities like Foster and Dixon, the uncertainty would be very high and my confidence in whatever I picked would be low.
  8. I'm with you. Maybe Rodgers will torch them, maybe they'll have an off day, but they're the DST1 and it's the semis and I'm gonna ride or die with them.
  9. For the record, I remain deeply skeptical that reshuffling your lineup after TNF is a good idea. In order for it to make sense, you need to a) be a heavy favorite/underdog, b) be able to correctly identify the steady vs. boom/bust guys, and c) have one of each that you can strategically deploy in a given matchup. Unless all those conditions are met, you're most likely just moving pieces around in an effort to give yourself the illusion of control. I think it's something to consider in roster construction (and even then, only as a tiebreaker). So you draft Landry and then, a few rounds later, you're deciding between Fuller and Edelman, and you go Fuller because you already have a safer option. But once the season is underway, your best bet is generally going to be putting out your strongest lineup each week and not overthinking it.
  10. I was mostly just busting your chops. It was funny that a guy goes for 210/1 and the following week you're saying someone else might have more HR potential. The irony is that I came very close to sitting Kittle last week for that exact reason. In fact, if Sanders hadn't torn his Achilles I probably would have started Samuels over him (once Sanders went down, I had to start both). After the game, it occurred to me that Kittle now has TD receptions of 85 and 82, plus a 70 yarder that was not a TD, but that he cleaned up with a short TD catch on the next play. I'm pretty sure no TE, RB or WR has more than one play of 70+ yards this year (maybe Albert Wilson before he got hurt?) Meanwhile, Kittle also only has two games with less than 50 YFS. So he's provided steadiness and HR potential, which is kind of amazing.
  11. zftcg

    Tyreek Hill

    Eh, he had a bad game. The timing sucks, but what can you do? It happens to every WR. In fact, compared to other burners a la DJax and Fuller, it happens way less with Hill.
  12. zftcg

    Stephen A might be a bit off.

    I once went on a date with a girl (who had gone to an Ivy League school!) and we were talking about the Olympics, which were going on at the time. She said she had been watching the night before and couldn't believe that Marco Polo was an Olympic sport. I was confused for a second, and then said, "Are you sure it wasn't water polo?" "Ohhhhhh ..." She was hot, but that was kind of a dealbreaker.
  13. The Stats Say Washington Should Have Signed Colin Kaepernick (And It’s Still Not Too Late!) Although as an homage to the famous Onion article on Barry Bonds, I'd like to write a follow-up titled, "Washington Should Have Signed Kaepernick, According to Everyone Who Watched the Butt Fumble"
  14. True, though going back to SB 49, it's worth keeping in mind that Belichick specifically drilled his DBs on defending that play during the week, then inserted Butler into the game as soon as he recognized the formation. Meanwhile, KC fell for a play that LA had already run for a TD to Williams in the same game. Also, in reference to my earlier discussion with @fred_1_15301, note that Lynn doesn't say anything about whether he should have gone for two after the earlier TD, but said he always knew he would after the second one. Which pretty much proves that he used a sub-optimal process that, fortunately for him, yielded good results.
  15. You mean the defensive formation where they leave the Chargers' best WR uncovered? And yes, I agree with you in general that teams shouldn't automatically be expected to call a timeout -- look at the way Belichick mindf##ked Carroll in the Super Bowl by not calling one. But given how discombobulated his secondary was on the 2PC, maybe it would have made sense in that scenario? I still haven't heard an explanation of what happened to the Chiefs on that play.