Feedback, watched all 3-
(Sorry I don't know names or remember names well. I am bald myself.)
Bald guy-super comfortable. In a past life, he was definitely a news broadcaster. Doesn't always offer opinion. When he does offer his opinion it seems wise.
You nailed it. DB had his own radio show for years before starting a daily podcast in the DFS industry in 2011; since then, he's been on thousands of DFS podcasts and videos. He currently has several shows on Sirius/XM Fantasy Sports radio. That is why he is so polished (and knows his stuff)...but his function on this show is the 'host,' which is why he sometimes takes a backseat to the 'analysts.'
Middle guy- Somewhat shy, soft spoken, needs to get comfy in front of camera. Best of the three IMO, nicely cuts right to "why" and doesn't ramble. The BEJ logo was amusing right behind him, glad he moved his chair.
You nailed this one too...I am a scientist by trade and being in front of a camera, particularly at my normal bedtime, is not easy. I'm going to try to get some extra sleep on Wednesdays before the show, so that I can be a bit more "awake" when we're recording.
Lee- oh so smiley week 1 like a kid in candy store. Contributes well. Very agreeable which I'm not sure if it's a good thing.
On the West coast, Austin is wide-awake and probably giddy coming out of his regular job.
Bald guy has professional looking backdrop or amazing window view which totally trumps the other two and makes them look amateurish. I prefer the latter. I'll take Bloom at home over Eisen in studio anyday, but there is a difference in how it looks.
3 guys agreeing on something over and over doesn't make for as good a show as knowledgable debate or even if there's little discussion just "I don't like this QB this week, CBs too strong" and leave it at that. Sometimes it's too 'buddy buddy' positive. I don't know how you react here to make a suggestion umm...maybe you all agree, so all three offer a different reason why? maybe before the show figure out some things you don't agree on?
Two sides to every story- bald guy could be the differing view.
I understand what you're getting at here and we might try to incorporate something like this over the next few weeks. I don't agree with your conclusion that we agree on everything...there have certainly been times when Dan has called out my projected ownership numbers as being way off (for example). Last week, Dan and Austin made a bet on who would be the best QB on the Week #3 slate (another example). That said, I think this is a good suggestion and I'm going to give it some more thought, as to how to incorporate a bit more debate into the show.
I will say that the three of us have never worked together before and perhaps some of what you're seeing (agreeable personalities) is a product of us trying to establish a rapport; as we become more comfortable with each other and how we see things, some of that debate you're seeking may come naturally, too.
I've thought about the segments on the show and can't think if you can do it differently. It seems fine, but just the same I do go back and listen. If Lee says "Luck blah blah blah" I might think wait didn't he say...and scroll back to what you said previously on luck.
I watch a bunch of shows, some suggestions that follow are not necessarily from just this one-
I think percentages would make a good debate. Example-Lacy ownership is extremely low, Tom Brady is extremely high. I can understand the logic in jumping on the train so as no one gets an edge with Brady. I can understand the logic with going Lacy because few have him. Could also be to gronk or not to gronk.
I'd like to hear injuries when someone says "Is 5th best at shutting down ...." Names like Revis will get mentioned but if starting CBs are hurt, I don't think their passing D ranking is the same or applicable and...something in here to discuss
If you read my work here on FBG (Tips and Picks), you know that I'm big on this kind of analysis...but it has been too early to really start digging hardcore into analytics just yet because the sample size has been too small and, therefore, unreliable. You will definitely hear more of this as we move forward because those stats/metrics will become more reliable with a larger sample size.
Vegas line often times has several games with same O/U. It's a pet peeve of mine when 7 games are supposed to score 45 total points and someone only mentions it about one game as if that game is special. This is oddly common this year.
I like the chart of what the show will cover and that it's revisited.
Cowboys look like they stink right now. No one is going to start a Cowboy is simply not true. The cheapies always get squeezed into DFS lineups and these are starters. Gotta break them down, not just gloss over.
There are dozens of shows that go game-by-game and dissect every value play for every team. We are trying to get away from that format to some degree and talk more about football, while always having a DFS tie-in. Sometimes we may do a better job of achieving that goal than others, but the intent of the show is to create a discussion surrounding teams, injury situations, matchups, etc, so as to identify potential areas to target with your DFS selections later in the week.
If you want a breakdown of each position with deeper analysis of selections, etc, I am on another show at 11:30 AM (EST) on Sunday mornings on RotoGrinders...that is a much better (and timelier) source for that kind of information.
Abdullah was the darling of week one, not much in week two. Why? If you praised a few guys then the following week I think you should touch on how ya feel about the performance. Off week, not as good as I thought, D was better than expected etc. Matt Jones probably qualifies here. Most DFS shows won't even discuss him much next week but every one loved him Wednesday.
I thought we were doing this with our bold predictions and a few other things, but maybe we aren't driving it home well enough...I'll revisit and reconsider.
I'd like to hear "I went with soandso (who is cheap) so I had enough money to go with player X(who is expensive)" Doesn't always have to be individual player. Could be a new feature combo plays or some such.
Kickers and Defenses are annoying in DFS getting 15-20 points while yours gets little to nothing. I've "nailed" some lineups with QB RB WR TE and then fell considerably due to K and D. The chances of picking the best (or almost the best) at all the other spots is slim so it stings when ya get them right and your D stunk it up. You have to include these just like I have to listen to them and not just RB WR, it's necessary.
Again, the intent of the show is not necessarily to do a detailed game-by-game DFS summary...we could pick defenses, but would like to do it as part of a larger discussion about the state of an opposing offense due to injuries, positional battles, ineptitude, etc.
I would like one of you to adopt the lineup tool at RG, have Lee's version or somesuch and weed out a ton of players. I don't want to check or uncheck 400 players to be included. Lee's version could be without 30 3rd string TEs and 5th WRs and the injured guys and...more focused. I do understand why it's there for everyone, just saying a nice alternative would be this.
Interestingly enough, I have a sit-down scheduled with the RG brass this week to provide feedback on their lineup builder. I agree with your comments, although I don't know how they can reasonably be incorporated without eliminating somebody else's potential sleeper selection(s).
Hope this helps.
It does--thank you!
, he hurt me in a few spots but managed to do very well last although 2 0f my 3 top QB plays bombed(Bradford being the other). I do my own projections but very much like to hear others opinions as you can never have too much information.
