What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2018 FBG Subscriber Contest (6 Viewers)

1 Entry rolled with just Darnold at QB.

1 Entry rolled with just Bradford at QB.  - He also has Bailey as his only kicker :/

3 guys only have Flacco

-QG

 
QuizGuy66 said:
Some roster minimum stats:

237 entries have 1 QB

122 entries have 2 RB

61 entries have 2 WR

947 entries have 1 TE

1626 entries have 1 PK

1591 entries have 1 TD

-QG
Click to expand...
As others have said, many are not eligible for prizes, and simply had fun putting in a crazy lineup.  I assume about 1000 entries were for ####s and giggles.

 
TheWinz said:
As others have said, many are not eligible for prizes, and simply had fun putting in a crazy lineup.  I assume about 1000 entries were for ####s and giggles.
Click to expand...
Of course and those entries are great :)

Though I suspect more than a couple of these entries are in fact people thinking that they are making a :shark: move.

-QG

 
QuizGuy66 said:
Of course and those entries are great :)

Though I suspect more than a couple of these entries are in fact people thinking that they are making a :shark: move.

-QG
Click to expand...
Yes, there will certainly be a few eligible submissions that are wild, like 23-QB guy, or 16-K guy.  I just wish there were about 14,000 of them!  I think I will go back to 2017 and see if any "wild" submissions made it to week 13.  Should be fun...

 
Got 37 points out of the first game.  Pretty happy about that.  I really hate that I feel really good about my team.  That can only mean one thing,elimination by the 3rd week.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Did anyone else intentionally roster a player or two because you thought they would be considered bad values and thus low ownership?  My decision for Henry was based on this. 

Value based on projections vs low ownership?

 
Bonfire said:
Did anyone else intentionally roster a player or two because you thought they would be considered bad values and thus low ownership?  My decision for Henry was based on this. 

Value based on projections vs low ownership?
Click to expand...
That is basically 80% of my team.

 
I decided to go back to last year's top 100 teams.  That's a pretty decent sample size, huh?  Of the top 100, all had 1-5 QB's, 4-11 WR's, 4-11 WR's, 1-5 TE's, 1-6 K's, and 1-4 D's.  IMO, here are the 2 most unique teams...

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/contest/2017/111946.php  This guy had only 1 QB, 1 K, and 1 D.  He was the only one in the top 100 to carry only 1 QB.  He was the "uniquest" IMO.  I am amazed he made the finals.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/contest/2017/103444.php  The only entrant with 6 kickers; all others had 4 at most.

After going over all top 100 teams, a few things were obvious:

- Common players are the way to go; uniqueness is overrated

- Carrying between 2 and 4 QB's, TE's, K's, and D's is also the way to go.  Over 90% fell into this category.

- Going stud RB outweighed stud WR by a large margin, as most would expect.

- Even though most teams were "common", it seems the low-cost WR's each person chose made the most difference.

IMO, the low-cost WR's will prove to be the difference maker again.  Are you happy with yours?

 
TheWinz said:
I decided to go back to last year's top 100 teams.  That's a pretty decent sample size, huh?  Of the top 100, all had 1-5 QB's, 4-11 WR's, 4-11 WR's, 1-5 TE's, 1-6 K's, and 1-4 D's.  IMO, here are the 2 most unique teams...

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/contest/2017/111946.php  This guy had only 1 QB, 1 K, and 1 D.  He was the only one in the top 100 to carry only 1 QB.  He was the "uniquest" IMO.  I am amazed he made the finals.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/contest/2017/103444.php  The only entrant with 6 kickers; all others had 4 at most.

After going over all top 100 teams, a few things were obvious:

- Common players are the way to go; uniqueness is overrated

- Carrying between 2 and 4 QB's, TE's, K's, and D's is also the way to go.  Over 90% fell into this category.

- Going stud RB outweighed stud WR by a large margin, as most would expect.

- Even though most teams were "common", it seems the low-cost WR's each person chose made the most difference.

IMO, the low-cost WR's will prove to be the difference maker again.  Are you happy with yours?
Click to expand...
That first team is incredible. Not only did he carry the 1 qb, k and defense. He was taking 0's from quite a few mid to high dollar players. Garcon, Montgomery, and Marshall.

I think this is why the running backs went to .5 per receptions to balance out the stud rb vs stud wr

 
msudaisy26 said:
That first team is incredible. Not only did he carry the 1 qb, k and defense. He was taking 0's from quite a few mid to high dollar players. Garcon, Montgomery, and Marshall.

I think this is why the running backs went to .5 per receptions to balance out the stud rb vs stud wr
Click to expand...
The stud wrs were injured or missing their qb at the end of the year.  More likely the change was made by dodds to give the sharks paying attention a leg up

 
QuizGuy66 said:
Some roster minimum stats:

237 entries have 1 QB

122 entries have 2 RB

61 entries have 2 WR

947 entries have 1 TE

1626 entries have 1 PK

1591 entries have 1 TD

-QG
Click to expand...
Not sure if this has been covered, but there are at least 104 teams that can't get a full roster's worth of scoring players in week 1. Some of that's due to suspensions, injuries, and rostering free agents, retirees or guys who have already gone on IR. But there are 45 teams that simply didn't roster 7 RB+WR+TE, so they can never get a full team's worth of scoring players. Obviously, this includes a lot of throwaway teams (all three 22-kicker teams, all five teams with 20 or more QBs).

 
If your team was eliminated week one and wasn't a joke entry, would/should you be embarrassed?  If not placing in the prizes it's all the same outcome, but still.  Clicked through a few teams currently at bottom of standings and they seem like legit entries and not all jokes.

 
Bonfire said:
If your team was eliminated week one and wasn't a joke entry, would/should you be embarrassed?  If not placing in the prizes it's all the same outcome, but still.  Clicked through a few teams currently at bottom of standings and they seem like legit entries and not all jokes.
Click to expand...
It’s halftime of the 1pm games?

 
TheWinz said:
IMO, the low-cost WR's will prove to be the difference maker again.  Are you happy with yours?
Click to expand...
So far I can't complain

Jo Brown WR BAL6 13.50FL

C Godwin WR TB6 13.10FL

K Cole WR JAX7 8.40

J Ross WR CIN5 7.30

M Gallup WR DAL6 0.00

 
152.45 + (Rivers/Stafford - 23.95) + (Freeman/Kelly/Zeke/McCaffrey - 6.90/10.10/13.10/33.70) + (M Jones/Gallup/Chad Williams - 10.10/13.10/13.50/19.60) + (Burton/Seals-Jones/Vannett - 5.80/10.10/13.10) + (Butker - 9.80) + (Jets/Raiders - 16)

-QG

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ill prob advance but awful start.  nothing from my rbs or non-lockett wrs.  wow this sucks.  luckily colts TE combo kept me alive.  #feelsbadman.

 
After 4pm games (no Mia/Ten players on my team):

178.9 + (Stafford - 38.20) + (J Kelly/ Marvin Jones - 12.50/13.10) + (Burton - 6.40) + (Raiders/Jets - 16)

-QG

 
Normally I’d be an alright week so far but 160 with Burton-3.5, Howard-6.5 and Rodgers -33 lol...

Well love week one where you wanna swap your whole roster after just the 1st quarter(looking at you Kelce and Goodwin) ... I still like my team and feel they can put up decent numbers week over week...

the insaine scores this week will defiantly skew things though. Also Cheap QB’s well out preforming their $ value and possibly putting up the best week they will see all year drug a lot of teams along.

best early season picks.... easily Grant and Stills. 

 
Mahomes

Conner

Tyreek

Gronk

Browns defense - might be the best $2 spent in this contest

:thumbup:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
148.4 and Jimmy Graham -7,30 need Graham to do something or it would be like the walk of shame in collage, out week one

 
Pretty happy with my team.

Not the fact that I am having a good week, but because the players I didnt use would have made the cut too.

Thinking this team has a pretty high floor.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When using calcomatic, Is there a way to see other entries if we don’t know their number? I would like to see who is near me, the highest scorer and/or the lowest 

 
Steeler said:
Check the standings page from the menu on the left.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I kept going to that page and it was always blank except for two ads. I saw it was blank and clicked back on my team. It takes a couple of seconds to load. 

BTW... do you get revenue if we click on the ads?

thanks

 
20.6 above the cut line.  Man it would suck to be put out the first week.  I still have Jordy (-11.4) and Cook (-8.4) so maybe I can get a few more points.  That's what I get for liking my team.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dacomish
Official 2023-2024 Subscriber Post Season/Playoffs Contest
2 3 4
Replies
171
Views
5K
Puppies
Puppies
apalmer
2023 FBG Subscriber Contest
56 57 58
Replies
3K
Views
71K
UFFLCommish
UFFLCommish
Dacomish
Official 2022-2023 Post Season FBG Subscriber Contest
8 9 10
Replies
462
Views
13K
joey
joey

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Top