Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Major

Case Keenum

Recommended Posts

Unless your league rules prohibit tanking it is crappy that they changed your lineup and justice was served when you lost because they forced you to start Cutler. Your job is to make your team as good as possible, once you realize you can't win it is time to build for next year. That is what you were doing by putting in a legal lineup that would probably lose, and in return you receive a higher draft pick to trade or draft a player to help your team next year.

I take it for granted they have the no-tank rule, based on the tone of OP. I support no-tank rules, else the league becomes a farce around midseason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless your league rules prohibit tanking it is crappy that they changed your lineup and justice was served when you lost because they forced you to start Cutler. Your job is to make your team as good as possible, once you realize you can't win it is time to build for next year. That is what you were doing by putting in a legal lineup that would probably lose, and in return you receive a higher draft pick to trade or draft a player to help your team next year.

I take it for granted they have the no-tank rule, based on the tone of OP. I support no-tank rules, else the league becomes a farce around midseason.

Anti-tanking rules shouldn't let other owners make Who To Start decisions for a team IF the players in question are starting for their real NFL team.

It should only prevent starting bye-week and injured players.

If you want to micro-manage a league to the point where it isn't any fun then just have everyone's lineup get set automatically based on the site's projected points. Or make it a Best Ball league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, you were tanking. You switched from (prospectively) a top-5 play to a bottom-2 play. The league acted properly.

oh bull####

he was swinging for the fences due his 1-5 record

he should rub that league's nose in it.

the league intervened, changed the outcome of the game, and now their season is tainted,

He wasn't "swinging for the fences". He admittedly thought Cutler was the better play. This isn't real football. He wasn't going to play keenum to "spark" his team.

reread what he wrote. He considered Keenum a "risky" start, but Cutler wasn't winning him any titles. He rolled the dice that some unkown quantity might be a golden ticket....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, you were tanking. You switched from (prospectively) a top-5 play to a bottom-2 play. The league acted properly.

oh bull####

he was swinging for the fences due his 1-5 record

he should rub that league's nose in it.

the league intervened, changed the outcome of the game, and now their season is tainted,

He wasn't "swinging for the fences". He admittedly thought Cutler was the better play. This isn't real football. He wasn't going to play keenum to "spark" his team.

reread what he wrote. He considered Keenum a "risky" start, but Cutler wasn't winning him any titles. He rolled the dice that some unkown quantity might be a golden ticket....

I just dont think playing an unknown QB that was named the starter over Cutler is tanking. Who cares how other people had them ranked, all it would take is for Keenum to have 1 more TD than Cutler and he would have likely outscored him. That wouldnt be that unlikely. I think tanking would be playing a RB that averages 3 touches a week over a guy that gets 20 on average or playing a teams 3-4th WR that gets 1-3 targets a game over a guy that gets over 10 a game. Or playing a guy that was ruled inactive or on a bye and saying you didnt know. Keenum was a riskier start because it was unknown how he would play, but Keenum was playing for his future. This 1 start meant a lot towards whether or not he would he would ever get a future chance to start in the NFL. Its not like Keenum had already proved he sucked as a NFL QB, this was his him chance to show everyone what he could do. Look at his college stats, hes a smart player, a baller, that knows how to put up big numbers for stats. I just dont think that it should have been tanking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schaub is the better QB of the 2 IMO.

probably but kubiak is sort of forced to start Keenum again. It would take a good amount of kahunas to go with Schaub at this point.

What does a Hawaiian sorcerer have to do with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless your league rules prohibit tanking it is crappy that they changed your lineup and justice was served when you lost because they forced you to start Cutler. Your job is to make your team as good as possible, once you realize you can't win it is time to build for next year. That is what you were doing by putting in a legal lineup that would probably lose, and in return you receive a higher draft pick to trade or draft a player to help your team next year.

There are leagues that don't prohibit tanking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

I think you found the line, and crossed it. ;)

"Having something different to cheer for" is not the same as starting your best players. You ALWAYS need to start your BEST players, the players you think are most likely to put up the most points. There is some room for starting high-risk, high upside guys over lower risk, possibly lower upside guys in certain situations, but honestly, it doesn't REALLY sound like that was the case. You tip-toe around that, but I don't get the impression you really think Case gave you the best chance to win this week. More likely you felt that he might do "surprisingly" well and bail you out on an otherwise obviously poor decision.

I do hate it when guys call you out for decisions on middle/bottom tier guys, and no, external rankings shouldn't be viewed as some definitive tanking guideline, especially when the guys in question are reasonably close. But to sit a guy who was comfortably in the top 10 year to date for a completely unknown first time starter facing a very tough matchup is not in one of those categories. The league was right to call you out on it IMO, and I generally tend to fall on the other side of that coin.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

I think you found the line, and crossed it. ;)

"Having something different to cheer for" is not the same as starting your best players. You ALWAYS need to start your BEST players, the players you think are most likely to put up the most points. There is some room for starting high-risk, high upside guys over lower risk, possibly lower upside guys in certain situations, but honestly, it doesn't REALLY sound like that was the case. You tip-toe around that, but I don't get the impression you really think Case gave you the best chance to win this week. More likely you felt that he might do "surprisingly" well and bail you out on an otherwise obviously poor decision.

I do hate it when guys call you out for decisions on middle/bottom tier guys, and no, external rankings shouldn't be viewed as some definitive tanking guideline, especially when the guys in question are reasonably close. But to sit a guy who was comfortably in the top 10 year to date for a completely unknown first time starter facing a very tough matchup is not in one of those categories. The league was right to call you out on it IMO, and I generally tend to fall on the other side of that coin.

Thanks to that line of thinking, his league's entire season is now tainted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

Your own honest rankings. Who you honestly think is most likely to score the most. From what you said previously, it was Cutler.

I'm not a big fan of leagues stepping in and forcing a lineup change. But I also recognize it wasn't the league that created this situation. So I have some empathy for the commish who got put in the situation of having to deal with it. Given that you admit you weren't starting the player you felt was best, I'd have a hard time throwing many stones at how the league handled it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

Your own honest rankings. Who you honestly think is most likely to score the most. From what you said previously, it was Cutler.

I'm not a big fan of leagues stepping in and forcing a lineup change. But I also recognize it wasn't the league that created this situation. So I have some empathy for the commish who got put in the situation of having to deal with it. Given that you admit you weren't starting the player you felt was best, I'd have a hard time throwing many stones at how the league handled it.

I think QBs can be a crap shoot each week unless you have one of the top guys, Cutler was ranked like Qb16 in my league going into that week so he wasnt exactly a stud QB. I thought Keenum would do well and not do much worse if at all than Cutler. The reason Cutler was the "better" play is because all the experts had him ranked higher. But we all know how accurate weekly projections are. Im surely many people have lost weeks blindly following FBGs weekly rankings. I just dont think its tanking when i wasnt trying to lose, I truely wanted Keenum to have a huge game. Just cause u start a guy ranked lower by the so called experts doesnt mean you are tanking. I dont think leagues should force you to play your players based on what Doods is projecting. Keenum was a viable starting QB, its not like I started a guy that wasnt playing, there was a lot of talk about how smart he is and how the coaches love him and that he had a lot of promise. I just think there should be some leeway in choosing your own lineups

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also the element of surprise in having a QB that opposing D's don't have a lot of info on...

Edited by Rove!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should start on offshoot thread to talk about that one dude's tainted commie league.

fyp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

Your own honest rankings. Who you honestly think is most likely to score the most. From what you said previously, it was Cutler.

I'm not a big fan of leagues stepping in and forcing a lineup change. But I also recognize it wasn't the league that created this situation. So I have some empathy for the commish who got put in the situation of having to deal with it. Given that you admit you weren't starting the player you felt was best, I'd have a hard time throwing many stones at how the league handled it.

horrible

why not just write a new rule:

teams that have dim prospects are not allowed to do anything unconentional. Dim and unconvential to be at the whim of the commish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should start on offshoot thread to talk about that one dude's commie league.

:goodposting: Beat it geeks and lets get back to discussing the man and soon to be legend, Case Keenum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly wasnt trying to tank, I thought Keenum had a decent chance to put up some stats. Cutler had been average at best and I wanted to give the new guy on my roster a shot. Just someone different to cheer for. Having Keenum in a dynasty league I obviously wanted him to do well, to increase his value and give me another starting QB option. I didnt start him hoping he would suck. At 1-5 i didnt really care if I won or lost but I wouldnt start horrible players and risk messing up the integrity of the league. Any starting QB can put up a decent fantasy game in any given week,

Whats the definition of tanking anyway? Whose rankings do you use? Not everyone uses FBGs rankings. Is starting a WR ranked #30 by Doods over WR #25 tanking? What about a WR ranked #60 over WR #25? Where is the line between tanking and allowing people to make their own lineup decisions?

Your own honest rankings. Who you honestly think is most likely to score the most. From what you said previously, it was Cutler.

I'm not a big fan of leagues stepping in and forcing a lineup change. But I also recognize it wasn't the league that created this situation. So I have some empathy for the commish who got put in the situation of having to deal with it. Given that you admit you weren't starting the player you felt was best, I'd have a hard time throwing many stones at how the league handled it.

I think QBs can be a crap shoot each week unless you have one of the top guys, Cutler was ranked like Qb16 in my league going into that week so he wasnt exactly a stud QB. I thought Keenum would do well and not do much worse if at all than Cutler. The reason Cutler was the "better" play is because all the experts had him ranked higher. But we all know how accurate weekly projections are. Im surely many people have lost weeks blindly following FBGs weekly rankings. I just dont think its tanking when i wasnt trying to lose, I truely wanted Keenum to have a huge game. Just cause u start a guy ranked lower by the so called experts doesnt mean you are tanking. I dont think leagues should force you to play your players based on what Doods is projecting. Keenum was a viable starting QB, its not like I started a guy that wasnt playing, there was a lot of talk about how smart he is and how the coaches love him and that he had a lot of promise. I just think there should be some leeway in choosing your own lineups

But you said:

Its all good though as Im the front runner for the top rookie pick next year. and to be honest if I was 5-1 instead of 1-5 I would have started Cutler as i would have thought it would be too risky to start Keenum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cant believe so many people are in favor of letting the league decide who a manager starts (bye week and injured players not withstanding).

So how about the draft? If someone takes Rob Bironas in round 8, should the other owners jump up and say "NO! You get the next best player. Available....Chris Givens. OK, next guys' pick."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you said:

Its all good though as Im the front runner for the top rookie pick next year. and to be honest if I was 5-1 instead of 1-5 I would have started Cutler as i would have thought it would be too risky to start Keenum.

When you're ahead you play conservative and when you're behind you throw Hail Marys.

sheesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should start on offshoot thread to talk about that one dude's commie league.

:goodposting: Beat it geeks and lets get back to discussing the man and soon to be legend, Case Keenum.

And 2 weeks ago it was Foles soon to be a legend. This guy could faceplant just like Foles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you said:

Its all good though as Im the front runner for the top rookie pick next year. and to be honest if I was 5-1 instead of 1-5 I would have started Cutler as i would have thought it would be too risky to start Keenum.

When you're ahead you play conservative and when you're behind you throw Hail Marys.

sheesh

Yes I probably would have started Cutler cause I would have wussed out and gone with what the experts said instead of going with my gut, the problem is that the guy who beat me is in a close battle for a playoff spot with several other teams and my original lineup would have beaten him, That "cheap" win could easily be the difference in him making the playoffs over another team, and It could also earn me a better undeserved rookie draft position for next year, so some league members are complaining. Just a dumb rule to enforce, I could see making a change if you start an inactive guy or a guy on a bye, but not something close. Too much can go wrong

Sorry about Hijacking the Legendary Case Keenum Thread. Im done posting about that. Time to get back to Hyping up this future Hall of Famer. Im all aboard the Case Train. The Man, The Myth, The Legend, Case Keenum

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should start on offshoot thread to talk about that one dude's commie league.

:goodposting: Beat it geeks and lets get back to discussing the man and soon to be legend, Case Keenum.

And 2 weeks ago it was Foles soon to be a legend. This guy could faceplant just like Foles.

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want upside, grab Keenum in all dynasty/keeper leagues. I think TJ Yates is serviceable but a better #2. Keenum is the guy that could surprise in a big way. Just my 2 cents from an H-Town homer.

And this my friend is why they pay me the big bucks....Easily bought for cheap/free agency at time of post. Keenum reminds me of A. Rodgers mixed with a dash of Brady and a hint of Russell Wilson (moxie).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And 2 weeks ago it was Foles soon to be a legend. This guy could faceplant just like Foles.

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Weren't you the one that said a couple weeks back that he injured his arm his senior year of college?

Edited by tdhartis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I probably would have started Cutler cause I would have wussed out and gone with what the experts said instead of going with my gut, the problem is that the guy who beat me is in a close battle for a playoff spot with several other teams and my original lineup would have beaten him, That "cheap" win could easily be the difference in him making the playoffs over another team, and It could also earn me a better undeserved rookie draft position for next year, so some league members are complaining. Just a dumb rule to enforce, I could see making a change if you start an inactive guy or a guy on a bye, but not something close. Too much can go wrong

Sorry about Hijacking the Legendary Case Keenum Thread. Im done posting about that. Time to get back to Hyping up this future Hall of Famer. Im all aboard the Case Train. The Man, The Myth, The Legend, Case Keenum

I'm sorry to keep beating this horse, but i find this interesting and just wanted to point out something i haven't seen brought up: Guy would have won by 2 points going with Keenum. Reading between the lines, that means the whole rest of his lineup must have been engineered to win, not engineered to lose. so it's definitely a stretch to say things like he was definitely trying to tank. If you're trying to tank, don't you do a better job of it than that??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And 2 weeks ago it was Foles soon to be a legend. This guy could faceplant just like Foles.

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Weren't you the one that said a couple weeks back that he injured his arm his senior year of college?

Not sure who you talking bout...I think I said he got injured in college and that his arm is stronger post injury. It's true. Dude has been pushing more weight than Colombia in the gym and much better deep ball than Schaub.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Schaub is the better QB of the 2 IMO.

probably but kubiak is sort of forced to start Keenum again. It would take a good amount of kahunas to go with Schaub at this point.

What does a Hawaiian sorcerer have to do with it?

Impressive! :yes:

Not too many know anything about that but someone with your avatar I 'imagine' would likely to be more tapped-in to spiritual knowlege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Weren't you the one that said a couple weeks back that he injured his arm his senior year of college?

Not sure who you talking bout...I think I said he got injured in college and that his arm is stronger post injury. It's true. Dude has been pushing more weight than Colombia in the gym and much better deep ball than Schaub.

A lot of it is just instinct and what I see being a pseudo scout. His arm is a helluvalot stronger than Schaub's. Remember he was hurt his senior year at UH. His arm has healed wonderfully and stronger than ever. Most of the scouting on him is done pre injury UH before he really developed. Just my 2 pence. Worthy gamble in dynasty/keeper leagues and brings hope to Texans fans.

That's what I'm referring to, but it sure seemed like you were implying he injured his arm his senior year at UH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Weren't you the one that said a couple weeks back that he injured his arm his senior year of college?

Not sure who you talking bout...I think I said he got injured in college and that his arm is stronger post injury. It's true. Dude has been pushing more weight than Colombia in the gym and much better deep ball than Schaub.

A lot of it is just instinct and what I see being a pseudo scout. His arm is a helluvalot stronger than Schaub's. Remember he was hurt his senior year at UH. His arm has healed wonderfully and stronger than ever. Most of the scouting on him is done pre injury UH before he really developed. Just my 2 pence. Worthy gamble in dynasty/keeper leagues and brings hope to Texans fans.

That's what I'm referring to, but it sure seemed like you were implying he injured his arm his senior year at UH.

Nah, you're way off base....stay focused on the topic at hand. Thanks guy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, you're way off base....stay focused on the topic at hand. Thanks guy!

It pertained to Keenum, and you claimed other people who were saying things you didn't like should keep it to themselves since they "kn[e]w little about him." You don't appear to know everything either. Relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You guys should start on offshoot thread to talk about that one dude's commie league.

:goodposting: Beat it geeks and lets get back to discussing the man and soon to be legend, Case Keenum.

And 2 weeks ago it was Foles soon to be a legend. This guy could faceplant just like Foles.

You've said this at least three times now. We got it, guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sleep:

you folks sleeping on Case, talking about a QB you know little about is always great schtick in the Shark Pool.

Weren't you the one that said a couple weeks back that he injured his arm his senior year of college?

Not sure who you talking bout...I think I said he got injured in college and that his arm is stronger post injury. It's true. Dude has been pushing more weight than Colombia in the gym and much better deep ball than Schaub.

A lot of it is just instinct and what I see being a pseudo scout. His arm is a helluvalot stronger than Schaub's. Remember he was hurt his senior year at UH. His arm has healed wonderfully and stronger than ever. Most of the scouting on him is done pre injury UH before he really developed. Just my 2 pence. Worthy gamble in dynasty/keeper leagues and brings hope to Texans fans.

That's what I'm referring to, but it sure seemed like you were implying he injured his arm his senior year at UH.

Nah, you're way off base....stay focused on the topic at hand. Thanks guy!

Yeah tdhartis, let it go. Most people know that the phrase "arm has healed" usually means a lower-body injury. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Texans will draft a QB in the first round next year. I'm from Houston and I like Keenum as much as anyone, but he's no Russell Wilson by any stretch. He's not a gifted runner and at 6'1" in cleats he's not tall enough to play the position. And, he doesn't have a "golden arm" like Flutie did.

More interesting to me is Keenum's incredible schedule *this year* in terms of bye-week relevance in 2QB leagues (as the ones I play in).

Edited by nobiz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubiak has announced Keenum as his new starting QB. I believe Case will invigorate the offense and is a good WW target for those in need of a QB. I'm a Brady owner and I would rather start Keenum right now over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we'll see Schaub starting games again in 2013. Like Nick Foles prior, expectations will be too high for Keenum coming off a decent performance.

Kansas City pass defense is beatable. They didn't exactly stop Jason Campbell yesterday either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can't see myself starting Keenum over anybody. High risk of a dud, and an upside of what, 250 yds and a TD? Where's the value in that?

Totally disagree. Keenum played well against KC and imo would have been the winning QB had the Texans not lost both Foster and Tate to injury. They had no threat at RB once those two were dinged and it allowed KC to focus its efforts on an aggressive pass rush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can't see myself starting Keenum over anybody. High risk of a dud, and an upside of what, 250 yds and a TD? Where's the value in that?

Well, if you are a Brady or Eli owner these days, I'd say about 80 more yards worth of value, depending on your league rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a good thing for AJ?

Yes, it is. He can throw a deep ball better than Schaub.

Better deep balls, but also potentially fewer opportunities if Keenum doesn't lock in on AJ as much as Schaub did. I could see it going either way, or see the factors canceling each other out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubiak last week: "Schaub is our starter when he is healthy."

Kubiak today: "Schaub is healthy -- we're going with Case."

Not wishy-washy at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can't see myself starting Keenum over anybody. High risk of a dud, and an upside of what, 250 yds and a TD? Where's the value in that?

:shrug: Peyton, Kapernick and Stafford owners could probably do worse than picking him up for their main QB's bye week.

FWIW, I'm stuck between Tannehill vs. the Bengals D and Keenum vs. the Colts. It's not an easy decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can't see myself starting Keenum over anybody. High risk of a dud, and an upside of what, 250 yds and a TD? Where's the value in that?

:shrug: Peyton, Kapernick and Stafford owners could probably do worse than picking him up for their main QB's bye week.

FWIW, I'm stuck between Tannehill vs. the Bengals D and Keenum vs. the Colts. It's not an easy decision.

How about starting both in a 2 QB league with manning on bye. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can't see myself starting Keenum over anybody. High risk of a dud, and an upside of what, 250 yds and a TD? Where's the value in that?

:shrug: Peyton, Kapernick and Stafford owners could probably do worse than picking him up for their main QB's bye week.

FWIW, I'm stuck between Tannehill vs. the Bengals D and Keenum vs. the Colts. It's not an easy decision.

How about starting both in a 2 QB league with manning on bye. :unsure:

at least it's an easy decision. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kubiak last week: "Schaub is our starter when he is healthy."

Kubiak today: "Schaub is healthy -- we're going with Case."

Not wishy-washy at all.

worst coach in the NFL hands down.....part of me hopes they keep losing so he'll eventually get fired and my team will finally have a chance to get AJ80 a ring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.