Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

cusefan115

Members
  • Content Count

    369
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Neutral

About cusefan115

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. John Middlekauff retweeted mike freeman ‏@mikefreemanNFL 2m A number of team sources across football believe the Vikings are wavering on playing Adrian Peterson this weekend. We'll see.
  2. Jason La Canfora retweeted Kevin Clark ‏@KevinClarkWSJ 6m NFL comment on Busch statement: "We understand. We are taking action and there will be much more to come." sounds ominous
  3. Boldin was a round 2 pick. I'm not sure anyone was underestimating him. Sure, most people still liked Bryant Johnson and Peter Warrick more but Boldin was a heralded prospect.
  4. Thanks for the rankings Zwk! What are your thoughts on Hopkins? He's a little lower on the wr list than I expected him to be.
  5. That's definitely the way I'm starting to feel too. All the reports from camp have been glowing. And the Texans can really only improve.
  6. A lot of people seem to question whether he has the athletic chops to be a #1 wr in the NFL but he seems to stack up pretty well to Dez Bryant in that regard (at least judging from the combine/pro day perspective). So where does the perspective that he is athletically limited coming from? The film?
  7. Do you mean Big Mike WIlliams. I've always thought of Tampa Mike as an athletic jump ball receiver.
  8. Yep. If add together what I have projected for Gronk, plus 6/16ths of what I have for Jordan Cameron, that puts my TE's season total only a few points behind Graham and at WR11. Too many people don't seem to recognize that head-to-head is a PPG game. And later PPG matters way more than earlier PPG. Oh well, just another misconception to exploit. Huh? You are in the playoffs (hopefully) later in the year. Each loss is magnified.
  9. How long did it take to hit the accept button? I agree. I would take that trade.
  10. sounds to me like he missed time and came back a primadonna. Munchak is too hard nosed as are his boys so they are letting him know that won't fly in TEN. I have little doubt they'll get that out of him, change that mindset. Biggest concern is not going 100% all the time. Some have him taking cheap shots from the D while others say finish the play it's not cheap at all. The Titans staff seems to view this as play 100% effort and we don't even have this discussion. The quotes on Wright are awesome this TC. I think already that Hunter lost any chance of starting over him. As always Mariani and Williams are hungry and doing everything right dying for a chance to play. Nate Washington is a predictable good effort, average player. Hunter has done nothing to find a niche in this O and he better. They went from about handing him the third WR spot to who is this primadonna? Again, I totally expect this gets straightened out quickly. Until then, enjoy(maybe wrong word here, bitter) the Pollard quotes and stories of defenders keying up on the primadonna WR. This is everything I wished would happen with Moss and Owens and the junk mindset so many WRs had way back then. Hunter may have tons of talent, but they will hit him hard til he changes. Not everyone has such a negative pov on hunter. http://www.musiccitymiracles.com/2013/8/2/4581012/titans-training-camp-mailbag-august-1-2013
  11. When a person makes a claim, it is up to others to fact check. That's just how these things work. www.google.com check laws of physics. also check what causes a concussion add 2+2 The sun will rise tomorrow, do you need an F'ing link for proof?? Relax dude. I know the laws of physics. I took a few years of college physics. There are way too many variables to make a definitive assertion based on elementary physics. Again this is just my opinion, you are welcome to your own. Im going to leave this alone from now on though so we don't sidetrack this thread too much.
  12. For the love of God, at what point will you acknowledge I said this is a SMALL part of the equation for me??? Not to mention it is FACTUALLy backed up by the wonderful reasearch of sir Isaac Newton a very, very long time ago. And of course I am simplifying it, duh Unless Austin would like to come over my house and let me slam a wall into him at different speeds and then scan his brains with high tech intruments to test his consussion and brain trauma tolerance, I PROBABLY can't give you specifics This is over for me already lol. I simply asked if you had a source for the statement you made. I thought it would be an interesting read. Instead of just saying no, you belittled my comment. So I explained myself a bit more. But the idea that physics would provide proof that a small player is more likely to sustain a concussion than a large one is a bit far fetched for me. Any theory that is borne out of physics equations would need to be proven in real life to be considered factual.
  13. That's fine. I was just curious. I personally don't really see size as a factor on the chances of sustaining a concussion but to each his own. Physics 101 man. It's a fact, not some theory. To each his own indeed. It does not mean he WILL have concussion issues. But if you put his exact head on a heavier frame that sustains the exact same hits, the concussion risk is less. Some people are more prone to concussions no matter what size they are. We do not know austins personal tolerance for concussions, but I do KNOW its higher than if he was a larger player. As I said, and since its unknown for his specific head, its a SMALL factor for me, but a factor none the less. I think you are simplifying this way too much. All the parts of the equation are moving. I'll hold off taking it as a given until I see some proof.
  14. Do you have any source for the bolded part?You mean other than physics? Really? Glad its so simple for you guys. Im guessing you are engineers then. Its not as easy as simply plugging this into you elementary force equation. But thanks for the contribution. All i did was ask if there was a source for the statement. There was really no reason to flame my comment.