mjb03003

Members
  • Content count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About mjb03003

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Recent Profile Visitors

353 profile views
  1. I'll just add on to this that Irvin has been vocal that he wants to get to 10 sacks this season (would be his first season with double digit sacks). He needs 3 sacks in his final 2 games to get there. Indy and Denver remain on the schedule, and both have given up 40 sacks this season, tied for third most in the leauge. Irvin might be a sneaky good start in IDP leagues this week.
  2. Su'a Cravens just tweeted that he'll be a Safety in 2017. Run, don't walk, to add him if he's still available.
  3. Su'a Cravens ‏@Sua_Cravens . @Redskins newest 2017 Safety Yal done woke a sleeping giant!!! #PATIENCEwasKEY 2:11 PM - 22 Dec 2016
  4. I gotta say this up front - I play in a big-play scoring format, where sacks are 5 points and TFL are 2 points (solos are 1.50 and assists are 0.75). I'm wondering if anyone else is seeing any long term value/upside in Bruce Irvin in a format like this. He had a pretty mediocre first half of the season, failing to register more than 4 solos in any game, and putting up just 2.0 sacks through week 9. He did force 4 fumbles to pad his stats, but he was not anywhere close to reliable for a LB. Since the week 10 bye, however, Irvin has been borderline dominant. Here's his stat lines the last 5 weeks: Week 11 vs. Houston: 9 solos, 1 assist, 2 TFL, 1 sack Week 12 vs. Carolina: 3 solos, 1 assist, 1 TFL, 1 sack, 1 PD Week 13 vs. Buffalo: 4 solos, 1 assist, 1 TFL, 1 sack Week 14 @ KC: 3 solos Week 15 @ SD: 5 solos, 1 assist, 2 TFL, 2 sacks, 1 FF If you don't play in big-play scoring, you probably don't see the utility in starting a guy like this, but in big-play this has been elite production (think Von Miller or Justin Houston). I figure he's signed long term in Oakland, and defenses will likely continue to be pre-occupied with stopping Khalil Mack. Irvin has the pedigree (2012 first round pick by Seattle) and has always been a good pass rusher. He had 22 sacks in 4 seasons with Seattle despite being used as more of a situational pass rusher. With Oakland he leads all LBs in snaps this season, rarely leaving the field, and he's embracing his role as "Robin" to Mack's "Batman." I'm thinking this could be a situation where a still relatively young player has found a home with a team and in a scheme that allows him to fully achieve his potential.
  5. Has anyone mentioned Sean Davis? He's been coming on strong, and is now the starting strong safety for the Steelers. Looks fast, strong, athletic...they're using him to rush the passer, and his coverage skills musn't be too bad because he was playing CB earlier in the season. Perhaps he's too shallow for this group. If so, I apologize for stating the obvious.
  6. So what are people thinking his playing time will look like the rest of the season? Will the Patriots find a way to get Hightower, Roberts, and Collins all on the field together (when they are all healthy)? Roberts seems too explosive to leave on the bench, but I'm concerned that he will be used situationally and see limited snaps.
  7. So my league's host site is crediting Dunlap with 2 sacks, a forced fumble, but only 1 TFL. I know it's possible to get a sack and not get a TFL (you can get a sack at the line of scrimmage, for a loss of 0), but both of Dunlap's sacks were well behind the LOS. Is it because he stripped the ball loose and forced a fumble? Does he not get credited with a TFL on that? Looking for clarity and it's not easy to find definitions/explanations for this sort of thing.
  8. Hey Sig - I need one for flex this week in PPR - Sammy Watkins, Jerick McKinnon, or Derrick Henry. Thanks! Watkins - concerned about the foot and Pat Pete in coverage McKinnon - concerned that Vikings can't run block, and Panthers D is good. Will he get checkdowns? Henry - concerned that the touches are still unreliable. Needs a big play or TD to pay off.
  9. Now he's playing DE... What are the odds of a position eligibility change in-season for him? Would be huge for his value in IDP leagues.
  10. My league is pretty unique, and as commish I take on a lot of extra work myself to keep it running, mostly because I've never found a site that could support what I wanted to do. Here's the particulars: 10 team, auction, PPR, 2 QB we do a three round rookie draft with slotted values, with the non-playoff teams drawing the top picks (lottery system). $200 budget for offense $100 budget for defense (IDP auction is first, and then I enter those results into the main league before the offensive auction begins) Keep as many as you want. Inflation is 30% or $3, whichever is greater. Lineups: 2 QBs 2 WRs 2 RBs 1 TE 1 W/R 1 W/T 3 DB 3 DL 3 LB 1 D Flex I've found this format forces many of the biggest stars back into the auction year after year, so the weakest teams can find themselves in a vicious cycle of needing to spend big to have studs year after year, but not really being able to "build something" that way. Best way to build is hitting on your rookie picks, stockpiling rookie picks to give yourself better odds of hitting on rookie picks, trading for young/cheap/under appreciated players before they break out, etc... ive seen teams come from the absolute basement and compete the very next year due to smart trades, cap management, and drafting. I've also seen some teams get stacked and stay stacked for a few years. But eventually age and inflation catches up to everyone...the best owners are constantly tweaking and looking for young, emerging players who they can build around for years. There's tons of trading all season and offseason because the caps are set loosely enough that you can easily take on or shed salary depending on what you are trying to do.
  11. It's not really that hard to look up and see what comments were made by whom, and what conversation spun off of them. This comment by you basically says that the NFL took their stance only after Brady took his position. I simply don't believe that to be true, and I think it's an important distinction. I tried to show all the ways that I feel it was the NFL who dug in first, by disseminating misinformation, allowing that misinformation to stand uncorrected for months, relying on deeply flawed/unreliable data to make their conclusions, hiring an "independent" company to investigate the issue, etc... Perhaps I failed to quote you properly in each of my subsequent posts, which may have muddied the waters a bit. My apologies for that. We're beating a dead horse here, though. It's probably best if we agree to disagree. I enjoyed the discussion though, and mean no disrespect.
  12. First of all, I think it's funny that you're telling me to stop posting about this on a message board, in a thread specifically about this topic. I think I'm well within my rights to post my thoughts on this topic. You can feel to ignore me. This all started because you said that Brady's defiance is what led to him getting such a stiff penalty, and that if he had handled himself differently, the penalties would have been lighter. I reject that hypothesis completely. The leagues' leaking of false/erroneous/inflammatory information is relevant here. If you follow the chain of events, it is clear that Brady was deemed guilty until proven innocent, and the league had every intention of making an example out of him and the Patriots. It became a witch hunt, and the Patriots and Brady were left to figure out how to defend themselves from allegations that weren't even based in fact. Meanwhile the 24 hour news cycle had already aided most of America to come to their conclusions, and changing the opinion of millions of people and 31 other owners was an extremely uphill battle. This is why I also say that the data the league relied on to determine their conclusions, and to hand out punishment, was deeply flawed. (9I used the word "fudge" about four posts back, and you've been latched onto it ever since (again, arguing semantics). The league/officials don't even know what gauge was used for which set of measurements, and still they used those readings as evidence of wrongdoing. They also admit they never even considered the ideal gas law, which if you analyze/apply the readings again with the laws of physics in mind, you come to a completely different set of conclusions than if you don't. The Wells report was not independent. Exponent has a long history of providing lengthy, detailed reports that come to the exact conclusion that the people paying them were hoping for. It's the same company that concluded that second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer. Simply enter "Wells Report" into your google search and you will see how easy it is to find the overwhelming denouncement of the Wells report from every community. It's MUCH harder to find links that back the report and conclude that it was well executed. "Making up" a violation was, perhaps, a poor choice of words (again, semantics), but I've tried on about three separate occasions now to use different words to clarify what I meant by that. For some reason you're still saying that I'm arguing that this particular violation was completely made up. For the last time, what I'm saying is this: There is/was a clear process for dealing with equipment violations, but the league chose to take a completely approach with the handling of this particular equipment violation. This is why I say that it should be concerning to football fans everywhere that Goodell has the power to take an issue with a clear set of penalties, and decide that this specific violation falls into a different category, with no limits to the severity of the punishment he can dole out. In his appeal decision, Goodell likened this particular equipment violation to taking PEDs. When did allegedly tampering with footballs reach this critical level of concern for the league? Which leads me to the last point, which also clearly ties into all of this. If the league suddenly finds PSI levels of footballs to be on the same level of importance as PED violations, then what is being done to prevent this from happening going forward? The answer is very little. They're supposedly doing secret "spot checks," but they won't even share the findings of those spot checks. How can you simultaneously give someone an unprecedented penalty for allegedly having knowledge of a scheme to tamper with footballs, and then implement no concrete measures to protect the integrity of the footballs the next season? I think you clearly lose credibility when you are that inconsistent. For fans of football and teams/players league wide, I think this is all very troubling for the future of the league. That is and has been my point.
  13. I think you're being intentionally obtuse. The leaks were directly responsible for the media coverage of this issue. Again, for almost 2 months the only information anyone (including other NFL owners) had to go on was the misinformation leaked by the league. If you think that didn't have any impact on the outcome and the punishment/appeal, I don't know what to tell you. There have not been just as many experts that have stated the Wells/Exponent report is valid. The overwhelming sentiment from completely unbiased people has been that the Wells Report completely and utterly fails to make a connection between the PSI of footballs and any wrongdoing by anyone. The officials of that AFC Championship game in January 2015 admitted to not knowing which gauges they used to record their measurements, and the two gauges were proven to give significantly different readings. The Wells Report makes an assumption of which gauge was used by which official during each measurement in order to prove what they set out to prove. If you think that's valid, I don't know what to tell you. Goodell and the league has/had NEVER levied a punishment anywhere near this severe for an equipment violation. In fact, the penalties for an equipment violation are very clear. Goodell and the league had to make this into an issue of "league integrity," which PSI levels of footballs had never been before, in order to get carte blanche in handing out punishment. If you think that doesn't constitute a "made up violation," I think you're arguing semantics. Call it whatever you want, I guess, but this same sort of violation of league policy was never handled this way before. It should make you wonder what other violations could be taken out of their normal context and called something else in order to hand down overly severe punishments/suspensions/fines/loss of draft picks. I don't think I'm "jumping to conclusions" in reference to the NFL not sharing PSI data. If this was as serious/important of an issue as they made it out to be, they would record PSI of every game ball before, during, and after every game. The fact that they do not care to even record it at all should raise eyebrows. Give me one legitimate reason that the league would not want to closely monitor football PSI. I'm genuinely curious what reasons people can come up with.
  14. What I'm referring to is the fact that the "league sources" leaked a bunch of erroneous information about the measurements of the footballs. That leak stood as the ONLY information the public would have access to for WEEKS, until the Wells Report was released and proved that information to have been completely inaccurate. The league knew it was inaccurate, and rather than correct it in the interest of letting the "investigation" prove or disprove wrongdoing, they allowed the media and the public to run with it, creating a situation where Brady and the Patriots were guilty until proven innocent. The Exponent/Wells Report was a joke, and most scientists or legal experts who have read it and analyzed it agree that it was neither "independent" nor scientific in nature. The NFL paid Wells to create a report that the general public would buy hook, line, and sinker, and astonishingly it worked, even though it did not even attempt to address natural fluctuations in air pressure caused by the ideal gas law. They somehow got by with the "more likely than not" standard even though there was never anything that linked Brady directly to any wrongdoing, nor any actual proof of any wrongdoing. There have been multiple equipment violations in the past for tampering with footballs. The Vikings were heating footballs on the sidelines. The Chargers were applying a sticky/tacky substance to footballs on the sidelines. There are many more examples, and many more players who have come out and admitted that this is a common practice that has gone on (and continues to go on) forever. In the past, the league either did nothing, sent a memo to the teams asking them politely not to do it, or levied a small fine. So for this one infraction to suddenly warrant a 4 game suspension, a $1 million fine, and the lost of multiple draft picks (including a first rounder), is just asinine. Maybe Goodell didn't "make up the violation," but he did choose to pursue this one in a completely different manner than he had pursued similar violations in the past. Finally, the NFL made it clear that they considered the PSI of footballs to be HUGELY important through their handling of this case. So why then did they refuse to record PSI measurements of footballs during the 2015 season? Why did they only do "spot checks," and why were the results of those "spot checks" not made public? The answer is pretty obvious - they would lose all credibility if it was discovered that footballs routinely fall outside of the accepted range during the course of play, without the aid of any sort of tampering. The overwhelming evidence from the scientific community about the ideal gas law and it's effects on PSI must have scared the league away from recording/publicizing any PSI readings. Which says a lot.
  15. It will be funny when the next star player gets an overly harsh penalty from the league and fans of that team and NFL fans in general act all outraged at how out of control Goodell's power has gotten. I hope it doesn't happen, because it's bad for the sport, for fantasy football, and frankly it gets really tiresome to have these so called scandals dominate the news 24/7. But if/when it does happen it will be funny to watch how many people completely change their tune about what is fair, right, and just. You realize that if Roger Goodell's decides to, he could make up some phony violation and fudge a bunch of "data" and suspend any player he wants, and take any number of draft picks from any team in the league, right?