unckeyherb
Footballguy
starting Lacy. Been hoping I made it through round one to capitalize on this juicy matchup. I made it and now I'm ready for Lacy to lay the smackdown.
Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.
Against a better Detroit defense and in a game where momentum just crushed them. Dallas has nothing on defense.Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
True, but they can get pressure on the QB. Ultimately their best defense is a good offense. And the Packers d blows, without the protection of Erin.Against a better Detroit defense and in a game where momentum just crushed them. Dallas has nothing on defense.Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
Have you watched any Dallas game lately, like the game against Chicago this past week where Chicago never had to punt and scored on every drive save the kneel down to end the game? Did you see Michael Bush, who for the year was averaging 2.0 ypc get 38 yards on 8 carries for 4.8ypc?Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.
Detroit was like top 5 rush defense going into that game. Dallas is dead last in rush defense and their best player, Lee, is injured again.Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.
Umm, no they can't. Dallas is tied for the 4th lowest sacks. They are also 4th worst in YPA and have given up the most passing yards in the NFL. Sorry, their D is atrocious against the run and pass. If you watched the Chicago game, you would probably think Flynn is a great play this week. GB still has some decent WRs in Boykin, Nelson and Jones. I don't expect Flynn to tear it up, but he will probably have one of his better games.True, but they can get pressure on the QB. Ultimately their best defense is a good offense. And the Packers d blows, without the protection of Erin.Against a better Detroit defense and in a game where momentum just crushed them. Dallas has nothing on defense.Remember the Thanksgiving debacle.You sure they'll steam roll? Dallas looks really dysfunctional right now. On defense they're a hot mess. Their last 6 games they have let up an average of 161 yards rushing a game. They've also given up an average of 465 yards per game over that stretch.Even with Flynn in there, I see a Packers desperation win on the road. They have enough talent on offense to move the ball against that defense.seriously? starting not one but two Packer rb's? Dallas is going to steamroll, and then Flynn/Tolzien will be in garbage time, junk screen mode. complete abandoment of the run. you really want to do this? the starting qb is flynn for heavens sake!
Well, yeah, I agree with you on this.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
I agree with that, but you saying Dallas has any D in any way is not true. See my post above, they are historically bad. They have the 5th worst YPA and the 2nd worst YPC, i.e. any way you attack them, they bend over and take it.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
Cowboys ILB Sean Lee (neck) has been ruled out for Week 15.
It looks like Eddie Lacy will get himself some on Sunday. Dec 13 - 2:14 PM
My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
Have you ever won a championship with this strategy?My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
You're absolutely right in that it's a conservative approach. It was just a thought.Have you ever won a championship with this strategy?My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
Seems like a logical idea to me...If you have deep lineups. I may consider this.You're absolutely right in that it's a conservative approach. It was just a thought.Have you ever won a championship with this strategy?My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
I'm in the same boat with Lacy and I have Jackson. My biggest fear is Lacy aggravates his injury and is pulled. Jackson at home against the Skins is a pretty attractive matchupBeen fighting with this all week. Have S. Jackson in a good match-up too that I can plug in for Lacy
Kind of same boat didnt get as much out of Manning so dont want to risk him re-injuring it.
Its my fear...but the risk/reward is that if no tweaking occurs...he could very well have a huge day with this matchup.If they say he's healthy, I'm starting him. This matchup is just ridiculous. Might be the worst defense in the league right now. The nagging fear is he tweaks it in the first quarter and they sit him for starks rest of the way. Well no guts no glory right. Its playoff time.
would be the 2nd time all season I would have played S-Jax tooI'm in the same boat with Lacy and I have Jackson. My biggest fear is Lacy aggravates his injury and is pulled. Jackson at home against the Skins is a pretty attractive matchupBeen fighting with this all week. Have S. Jackson in a good match-up too that I can plug in for Lacy
Kind of same boat didnt get as much out of Manning so dont want to risk him re-injuring it.
I am sitting on the side with Le'veon Bell - granted Bell's matchup is not great - but he is a lock for 20 touches. Not sure what to do, a 100% healthy Lacy and I am in. Oh the decision.would be the 2nd time all season I would have played S-Jax tooI'm in the same boat with Lacy and I have Jackson. My biggest fear is Lacy aggravates his injury and is pulled. Jackson at home against the Skins is a pretty attractive matchupBeen fighting with this all week. Have S. Jackson in a good match-up too that I can plug in for Lacy
Kind of same boat didnt get as much out of Manning so dont want to risk him re-injuring it.
And then miss about 10 tackles.Won't Dallas just stack the box? And then what?
Won't Detroit just stack the box against LeSean McCoy? Won't every single team in the second half of the 2012 season stack the box against Adrian Peterson?Won't Dallas just stack the box? And then what?
I don't get this. Not trying to be snarky, I honestly don't understand the logic.You're absolutely right in that it's a conservative approach. It was just a thought.Have you ever won a championship with this strategy?My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
Depends on your alternatives. If your options are ogbannaya or dwill, I think guaranteeing that you take advantage of that matchup is more important than the extra upside of 5-8 points.I don't get this. Not trying to be snarky, I honestly don't understand the logic.If you only start Lacy, there is a chance that you get bad production from one RB position. If you start both, you are guaranteeing you get bad production from one. That's so conservative, it's reckless.You're absolutely right in that it's a conservative approach. It was just a thought.Have you ever won a championship with this strategy?My mention of starting both was more as insurance. If Lacy starts but gets nicked early and starks is sitting on your bench, that just sucks. It was an odd scenario of starting both because the starter isn't 100% going in. So we don't know how he'll be.Let me try to clear something up. I got no issue with starting Lacy. There should be enough touches if he's active to rely on some nominal to good stats. But the idea of two Packer RB's being start worthy this weekend just boggles my imagination.
I think the active/inactive list comes out at Noon EST right? So another 20 mins or so.Still nothing definite about him starting, is there?
Didn't he sit most of the game after breaking of a 45 yard TD several games ago? With lacy being probable, I think he's a safe play.All we need to hope for is that this injury doesn't slow Lacy down and that he doesn't tweak it. Oh yeah, and Starks needs to get bottled up on his first few carries so he rides the pine.
Damn I hate this....
If Lacy is inactive then Starks is the easy choice.For those waiting on Lacy, what are your backup plans?
I am debating btw Steve Smith and Starks in my PPR. Leaning Starks.
Stacy. I think Lacy is going to be a good play.For those waiting on Lacy, what are your backup plans?
I am debating btw Steve Smith and Starks in my PPR. Leaning Starks.
L Bell is my backup to Lacy.For those waiting on Lacy, what are your backup plans?
I am debating btw Steve Smith and Starks in my PPR. Leaning Starks.
Probably usually means that they will play unless they face a setback.He was probable? How often are probable not playing?
Yeah,I don't understand the concern...He was probable? How often are probable not playing?
right..think he is good to go I am rolling with him, and don t have any 4:00 options to play if he is outProbably usually means that they will play unless they face a setback.He was probable? How often are probable not playing?