I knew I was done this week with no QB. Going into Monday Nights game I wanted 3 things, An Eagles win, A fantasy win, And enough Devonta points to stay alive in this. I got 2 of the 3 and finished short of the third by 0.4 points. Good luck the rest of the way. My enjoyment of this contest rarely lasts this long, if ever.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
2025 FBG Subscriber Contest (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter TheWinz
- Start date
Puppies
Footballguy
Am I mistaken, or do I remember you saying as a bonus, that you would put all the teams that outlasted your Subscriber Contest team into a drawing for a free 1-year membership?
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
Puppies, sorry to see you go. I was sweating last night too. Ahead by 5-ish at the beginning of the game, and in the absence of Golden playing, I was waiting for Goedert to catch up to my low 5.40 flex number before he could contribute. I was loving the low/no scoring while waiting for Goedert to get his name called. In the end, it pushed me up to 140+, which proved to be enough.
But, in a week where all 3 of my QBs conspired to take a collective bye, it wasn't Goedert that actually counted me in. I think I would have won by less then one point, even without him. The miracle that kept me alive was in the early Sunday game I was watching, my Texans comeback against the Jags. Didn't know it at the time, though I cheered my team's game win. With 7 seconds remaining in the game, the Texans ST/D, which I OWN, blocked a pass, intercepted the ball, and ran it back for an otherwise meaningless touchdown after game time had expired on the clock about a half hour earlier (it seemed like). Yes, of course I said to self - I'll take every bit I can get 'cause this week I need it. Without those last second totally improbable 8 points, I'd be watching from the sidelines the rest of the year. Glad I spent the extra change on the Texans ST/D, as it was exactly this kind of scenario that I was hoping to experience.
Again Puppies, sorry and I hope we still get to enjoy your chatter. I may join you next week on the sidelines, or thereafter, but for week 10, I get to add one more feather to my hat.
Last edited:
I'm not sure but if I said it here of course I'll honor it.
Last edited:
Puppies,
You are correct, but it wasn't just a 1 year membership - it was a lifetime membership (but only one). Also, this added bonus has nothing to do with the side bet I am tracking.
FTR - Joe's team was eliminated in week 10, so there will be 1148 subscriber's names put into the drawing (actually a few less, as I know a handful of folks with multiple subscriptions). Sucks I got booted the same week, so I don't get a shot.
Puppies
Footballguy
Thank you. I'm not going anywhere. I routinely still track my team even if eliminated, to see how it would have one had it not been eliminated.
The first year I played this contest, back in 2011, I didn't have to do that because I made the playoffs and then somehow managed to finish 4th overall in the contest. But I have not been able to make the playoffs again since that first year. I really thought I had a good chance to change that this year. Since that first year, I've made it to week 13 once, week 12 twice, week 11 once, and week 10 three times. This is a really fun contest, and the odds are stacked against you, so even lasting to week 10 is nothing to be ashamed of.
One year when I got bumped early I tracked all the other teams that were active and posting here in this forum, and created what I called the "Phantom Standings" where I listed all the scores of the teams each week that had already been eliminated to track how they would have done. It was crazy, but a lot of fun, and I think it kept people interested when they might not have been otherwise. Back then it was easy to do, because there was a grid that showed each team's entire season on one screen (similar to what @Army Eye has provided here) for us after that feature went away.
I'll probably still be lurking here and I'm sure I'll chime in from time to time.
Good luck the rest of the way!
Puppies
Footballguy
I Found it
Way back on page 16 of this thread...... (posted back on September 3rd) Post #767@Joe Bryant . . . I didn't want you to think I made that up.
I watched your team most weeks to see if it was still around.
Unfortunately, my team missed the cut this week too (by 5.9 points), so I won't be in the drawing.
Good luck to those who will be
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
Hear hear, to you and to Army Eye for sure!
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Top 1100
I Found it
@Joe Bryant . . . I didn't want you to think I made that up.
I watched your team most weeks to see if it was still around.
Unfortunately, my team missed the cut this week too (by 5.9 points), so I won't be in the drawing.
Good luck to those who will be
I wanted to thank Puppies again for his leadership in the think tanks for different roster sizes on this contest, he made me a believer in going wide, not overloading at RB since the frequency of injury and other factors, I won't give away all his secrets, lucky to still be in this but here I am. This is the farthest I've gotten in a long long time following a lot of the items we discussed. There were several others in that think tank, not sure if any of them are still in the contest.
Stafford is my teams' MVP right now, went cheap at QB and he's hit the starting spot almost every week, Tua is one of the other two and hitting a nice soft spot in the schedule the next 3 weeks. Most weeks I've been between 160-180, never hit 200 but don't worry about it, usually when I click on one of the top 10-20 teams that week, they don't seem like they can survive for long, lot of dollars spent on a handful of top shelf players that went off that week but not likely to sustain.
This post will do me in this week
this has been a lot of fun to trackCheers!
Your think tank was made up of Instinctive, Biabreakable, Ministry of Pain, Puppies, Chaka, and IHEARTFF. Sadly, your think tank team got booted very early, but the build of the team looks quite good. As for the members:
Instinctive - eliminated week 2
IHEARTFF - still alive
Puppies - eliminated week 10
MoP - still alive - only sweat was week 6 when your TE's came through for you
Chaka - eliminated week 5
Biabreakable - unknown
I was in the top 25 this week, I am going to sweat next week. I have 3 colts
-OZ-
Footballguy
Kicking myself for taking Tlaw over Stafford to pair with Penix. Other than just being wrong I’m not sure what I was thinking as I remember thinking Stafford was a great buy with this scoring.
At the time of rosters locking in, there were major concerns with Stafford's back, so a lot of people avoided him.
Also, I was high on Goff, and they had the same bye, so I never consider Stafford unfortunately.
Marauder
Footballguy
I had totally forgotten about this contest until a few days before the deadline and spent probably less than a half hour putting together my roster. Then I forgot about it again until last week when I checked to see if I was still alive, figuring I was probably long gone, but hey I was still alive. Then I survived again this week even with Mahomes out. This is definitely the least amount of time I've ever spent setting my roster and maybe the longest I've ever survived.
Puppies
Footballguy
Irrelevant statistics for week 10.... (otherwise know as "fun with numbers")...
Through the first 10 weeks, the roster size with the highest survival rate is roster size 29, with a survival rate of 31.58%.
The roster size with the lowest survival rate (no surprise) is roster size 18, with a survival rate of 5.37%.
18-player rosters have predictably had the lowest survival rate for 10 weeks in a row. This is to be expected due to the larger impact of player injuries to small roster sizes.
The highest survival rate and roster size through the first 10 weeks of this contest in the last 3 years was....
2025 = Roster size 29 @ 31.58%
2024 = Roster size 30 @ 25.27%
2023 = Roster size 29 @ 38.81%
A full 41.97% of this year's contest entries contained just 18 players on their roster. That compares to 47.10% in 2024, 43.63% in 2023, and 39.53% in 2022.
This year, entering this contest, there were 4,696 rosters with only 18 players, or 41.97% of the total.
Contrast that to only 76 rosters containing 29 players, or 0.97% of the total.
My personal conclusion is that very few of the entrants place much weight on the statistical realities of this contest, or are unaware of the statistical survival data.
Remember that in August 2026 when you are mulling over dozens of roster iterations as you prepare for the 2026 subscriber contest
.
Only 4 of the 27 remaining teams rostering 29 players entering week 10 (or 14.8%) were eliminated in week 10. Unfortunately, my team was one of the four.
A full 138 of the 390 remaining teams rostering 18 players (or 35.4%) were eliminated in week 10.
Through 10 weeks, 10,032 of the 11,180 teams, or 89.65% that entered the contest have now suffered a visit from the Turk and are on the outside looking in.
If you are reading this and your team is one of 1,148 teams still alive, your statistical odds of being one of the 225 teams that ultimately reaches the playoffs, are 9.75 times better today than they were at the start of this contest. At the start of the contest, your mathematical chance of making the playoffs was 2.01%, compared to 19.6% today.
That's probably enough "fun with numbers" for one week...
Good luck to all the survivors who are advancing to week 11
Through the first 10 weeks, the roster size with the highest survival rate is roster size 29, with a survival rate of 31.58%.
The roster size with the lowest survival rate (no surprise) is roster size 18, with a survival rate of 5.37%.
18-player rosters have predictably had the lowest survival rate for 10 weeks in a row. This is to be expected due to the larger impact of player injuries to small roster sizes.
The highest survival rate and roster size through the first 10 weeks of this contest in the last 3 years was....
2025 = Roster size 29 @ 31.58%
2024 = Roster size 30 @ 25.27%
2023 = Roster size 29 @ 38.81%
A full 41.97% of this year's contest entries contained just 18 players on their roster. That compares to 47.10% in 2024, 43.63% in 2023, and 39.53% in 2022.
This year, entering this contest, there were 4,696 rosters with only 18 players, or 41.97% of the total.
Contrast that to only 76 rosters containing 29 players, or 0.97% of the total.
My personal conclusion is that very few of the entrants place much weight on the statistical realities of this contest, or are unaware of the statistical survival data.
Remember that in August 2026 when you are mulling over dozens of roster iterations as you prepare for the 2026 subscriber contest
. Only 4 of the 27 remaining teams rostering 29 players entering week 10 (or 14.8%) were eliminated in week 10. Unfortunately, my team was one of the four.
A full 138 of the 390 remaining teams rostering 18 players (or 35.4%) were eliminated in week 10.
Through 10 weeks, 10,032 of the 11,180 teams, or 89.65% that entered the contest have now suffered a visit from the Turk and are on the outside looking in.
If you are reading this and your team is one of 1,148 teams still alive, your statistical odds of being one of the 225 teams that ultimately reaches the playoffs, are 9.75 times better today than they were at the start of this contest. At the start of the contest, your mathematical chance of making the playoffs was 2.01%, compared to 19.6% today.
That's probably enough "fun with numbers" for one week...
Good luck to all the survivors who are advancing to week 11
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Lots of injury reports in camp...people were talking up the QB2 for the Rams, Jimmy G
He was not hyped at all
-OZ-
Footballguy
That might be it. I had Goff for a while.
Assuming you made it past this week too.I hope not! Our RB room is almost identical!! Instead of Chubb, I have Keaton Mitchell & Charbs!!Still alive. Think this is the farthest I’ve ever made it in 10 years. Which means in going to get culled next week lol.
Footballguys
www.footballguys.com
Let us both have good games!!
Footballguys
I’m still alive which is crazy. I guess reading the theories on this post and going for a larger roster with more emphasis on wr and te than rb was the right move.
Trying not to be too positive but starting to get excited.
davidwb
Footballguy
Started with 21 players, but 2 are now out for the year (Conner and Evans). But at least I get Persall back, bringing me up to 19 active roster spots. Have Tyler Warren on bye this week -- and he's been one of my most consistent point scorers, so I might need another big week from Freiermuth! Plus, Mahomes and McPherson are back from bye weeks. Four players on bye next week, however, but they haven't been main scorers most weeks (Herbert, Bill, Allen, and Chargers D). Fingers crossed I continue to move on.
I did look carefully at much of the roster research in August. Thanks to all of you who provided insight.
I did look carefully at much of the roster research in August. Thanks to all of you who provided insight.
Birdie048
Footballguy
Sorry I fell 5 pts short in Week 10.Assuming you made it past this week too.I hope not! Our RB room is almost identical!! Instead of Chubb, I have Keaton Mitchell & Charbs!!Still alive. Think this is the farthest I’ve ever made it in 10 years. Which means in going to get culled next week lol.
Footballguys
Let us both have good games!!
Footballguys
I’m still alive which is crazy. I guess reading the theories on this post and going for a larger roster with more emphasis on wr and te than rb was the right move.
Trying not to be too positive but starting to get excited.
Just not enough with the Byes (Mahomes, Pollard, Jake Ferg & Pearsall still out). The GB def did great from a NFL Game perspective vs Philly but nothing in Fantasy scoring (2 pts).
@tigerz FIGHT ON AND CONTINUE THIS FUN BATTLE!
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
Am I understanding you will have only 15 actives next week to address 10 scoring positions. That would make me a little nervous. Everyone better come to participate. BTW, I also have four on Bye next week (one of them already out for the season) but I'll have 26 other Active or Injured players participating, as I have a 30-player roster. I'm not saying, "na na nuh na na!" I'm just a proponent for using all the roster spots allowed, and this demonstrates my reasoning. I'm not setting scoring records, but I'm staying alive (occasionally squeaking by) and the outlook is decent to make it to the playoffs.
Puppies
Footballguy
You're on it
.As I've preached here many times before, the object of this contest is not to score the most points - the object is to stay alive for 14 weeks.
That almost always involves making compromises on player selections when assembling a roster, and bypassing some players you'd like to roster but know it's too risky to do so either because of bye week conflicts, or the reality of the positional return on investment for cap dollars, or other factors.
I see this contest as the ultimate test of creating a roster that spreads out risk in order to survive 14 weeks of ups and downs and player injuries, and ultimately be rewarded with an opportunity to win bragging rights (or a prize).
Being a scoring leader any one week accomplishes nothing more than advancing your team one more week. Teams that might score less but are better risk-managed, have a better chance at reaching the playoffs, and the ultimate prize.
Good luck going forward
There's always discussion about where to spend up or down to get 7 usable weekly scores (2RB/2WR/1TE/2flex). Currently, there are 67 players who've scored at least 100 contest points. I was shocked to find out the list is made up of 18 RB's, 32 WR's, and 17 TE's.
Golden Gopher
Footballguy
Having a couple of solid TE's in this thing certainly helps. I've gotten a flex score from my TE's (Ertz, Johnson, Taylor) in 5 out of 10 weeks, including each of the last four weeks.
Golden Gopher
Footballguy
Injuries might be finally catching up with me. Stroud is out again. Fortunately, Geno and Rodgers both have very good matchups, so hopefully I can salvage 20 pts or so from one of them. Other than Hampton, pretty healthy at RB. WR feels like a game of injury "whack a mole." Pearsall might be back, but Odunze and Bateman are questionable (as is Pearsall, technically). Crossing my fingers Taylor gets some targets tonight given that Fields has almost nobody else to throw to. If I can keep my streak (currently 4) of weeks with multiple TE's in double-digits alive, that would be amazing. Of course, after last week's total disaster of a TNF game, I'm not counting on anything this week. Down to one kicker this week with Gano going back on IR last night. Would love to see the Pats defense rack up double-digits tonight to start the week strong.
Good luck to those still standing....
QB C.J. Stroud - $14 - OUT
QB Geno Smith - $11
QB Aaron Rodgers - $10
RB Omarion Hampton - $23 - IR
RB TreVeyon Henderson - $18
RB Jaylen Warren - $17
RB Tyrone Tracy Jr. - $16
RB Jordan Mason - $11
RB Jacory Croskey-Merritt - $6
WR Courtland Sutton - $19
WR Rome Odunze - $15 "Q"
WR Josh Downs - $12 - BYE
WR Ricky Pearsall - $11 "Q"
WR Rashod Bateman - $10 "Q"
WR Emeka Egbuka - $10
WR Romeo Doubs - $6
WR Jaylin Lane - $2
TE Zach Ertz - $9 - BYE
TE Juwan Johnson - $7 - BYE
TE Mason Taylor - $7
PK Graham Gano - $3 - IR
PK Cairo Santos - $3
PK Blake Grupe - $3 - BYE
TD New England Patriots - $4
TD Las Vegas Raiders - $3
Good luck to those still standing....
QB C.J. Stroud - $14 - OUT
QB Geno Smith - $11
QB Aaron Rodgers - $10
RB Omarion Hampton - $23 - IR
RB TreVeyon Henderson - $18
RB Jaylen Warren - $17
RB Tyrone Tracy Jr. - $16
RB Jordan Mason - $11
RB Jacory Croskey-Merritt - $6
WR Courtland Sutton - $19
WR Rome Odunze - $15 "Q"
WR Josh Downs - $12 - BYE
WR Ricky Pearsall - $11 "Q"
WR Rashod Bateman - $10 "Q"
WR Emeka Egbuka - $10
WR Romeo Doubs - $6
WR Jaylin Lane - $2
TE Zach Ertz - $9 - BYE
TE Juwan Johnson - $7 - BYE
TE Mason Taylor - $7
PK Graham Gano - $3 - IR
PK Cairo Santos - $3
PK Blake Grupe - $3 - BYE
TD New England Patriots - $4
TD Las Vegas Raiders - $3
48%. That is insanity even when you consider the rookie fever that has inflected the pool.
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
From what I had seen and read about him at Ohio State, he was destined to break out sooner or later.
ConstruxBoy
Kate's Daddy
Ditto. Had him on my team for a long time but replaced him in the last few entries.
I am one of those 79, great start indeed.
Puppies
Footballguy
Only 15.6% of the teams that rostered Henderson are still alive, The other 84.4% of the teams that rostered him are already dead.
The teams that have Henderson on their roster and are still alive, enjoy that status due to the other players on their rosters; not Henderson.
But that said, now he's the main RB so those surviving teams are in pretty good shape going forward.
Golden Gopher
Footballguy
Yeah, I'm a bit surprised that so many teams with Henderson still remain alive (including myself). When I put my roster together, I recall playing with several combinations that included two of the three rookies (not Jeanty, but Hampton/Henderson/Harvey). Ended up going with Hampton and Henderson, mainly just because it "fit" better with the other RB's I wanted considering bye weeks, etc. For a large portion of the first 10 weeks, that duo seemed like mostly a complete flop. I've only gotten three flex scores from my RB group all season, and that includes Week 7 when Warren and Bill counted for me with 7.3 pts each. Needless to say, my RB's have been carried by the WR and TE positions, and somewhat by Warren himself, who has counted in 7 of the 9 weeks he's played, including 5 in a row. And, in one of the two weeks he did not count for me, he still hit double-digits. He's been a pleasant surprise, to say the least. Now, with Henderson coming on strong, Hampton (maybe?) back soon, and Tracy at least playing, it feels like the group is hitting their stride so to speak.
I have to say... I'm a little disappointed in the NE defense. LVR has been bad for me, but NE hasn't been much better. Only two weeks in double-digits, and FIVE weeks with 4 pts or less. As a combo, LVR/NE has only had three double-digit weeks and ELEVEN out of 19 weeks at 4 pts or less. Ick.
I have to say... I'm a little disappointed in the NE defense. LVR has been bad for me, but NE hasn't been much better. Only two weeks in double-digits, and FIVE weeks with 4 pts or less. As a combo, LVR/NE has only had three double-digit weeks and ELEVEN out of 19 weeks at 4 pts or less. Ick.
Golden Gopher
Footballguy
Good info, and that really puts things more into perspective. That said, I don't think anybody was saying they're still alive because of Henderson, other than maybe surviving last week. I know, for me, had he even "just" scored 15 pts, I would have been cooked last week.
That's about 50% better than the average. That's pretty hard to explain.
Puppies
Footballguy
I think it’s explained by the fact that prior to 2 weeks ago, he was averaging only 6.36 fantasy points per game.
Individual player survival rates have less to do with their own performance, than they do the makeup of the roster they are part of.
Last edited:
So why did Henderson owners build better rosters by a 50% clip?
Because Henderson contest owners are just smart
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
I'll say for my team, I have $19 Harvey and $18 Henderson as my top two RBs. I didn't spend $55 on two homerun hitters. Those savings bought me the other 3 or 6 players that pitched in weekly while Harvey and Henderson were getting their running legs under themselves.
davidwb
Footballguy
Yes -- but they are my 15 mostly best players: (QB: Mahomes, RB: Jacobs, Cook, Mason, Bill, WR: JaMo, Pearsall, Egbuka, TE: Warren, Freiermuth, Taylor, PK: McPherson, Loop, Boswell, D: Ravens, Steelers). This has been my core group so far this year (well, maybe not Bill). MY biggest concern is not having Herbert -- I've used him 7 weeks and Mahomes 3 weeks. But 4 of the weeks I used Herbert, Mahomes still scored well.
But I'm already behind the cut line for this week: 9 points for Taylor vs. 10.5!
Charles in Houston
Footballguy
You're keeping pace, and that's exactly what you'll need from your other 14 players. I'm rooting for you and yes, you've got a good bench. I too own Pearsall and it would be nice if he can see the field this week.
Puppies
Footballguy
... To answer that last question above... IMHO... The Henderson owners likely built better rosters by a 50% clip, because they had the cap money to do so based on the make-up of the rest of their roster. Many of them likely had larger roster sizes and the increased survivability that typically results from it.
I think individual player survival rate is one of the most widely misinterpreted statistics we have. If it were actually a true indication of the scoring of the individual player then you would expect players who score the most points to also have the highest individual survival rates. And conversely you would expect players who score the least points to have the lowest individual survival rates. But that's usually not the case, and there's a lot more to it than that.
It costs a lot more in this contest to roster Puka Nacua or Justin Jefferson than it does Jalen Coker or a backup RB like Taj Brooks. Teams that roster expensive players typically have smaller rosters because that's all they can afford to have to keep under the salary cap. Smaller roster teams have a much lower survival rates in this contest and always have, and that's why often the stud players do not necessarily have high survival rates.
So you cannot take a player like TreVeon Henderson and claim that his high survival rate is due to his individual scoring. The stats I posted earlier pretty much prove that, because since he didn't really do any impactful scoring until two weeks ago, and thus he is not the main reason the rosters that contain him are still alive. What that statistic really indicates is that more TEAMS with him on their roster are still alive due to the mix of other players on the roster, in spite of the fact that Henderson himself has only recently contributed anything to the success or the survivability of the roster.
If survival rates were a direct indication of the ability of the individual player, then you would not have statistics like these:
PLAYER | SURVIVAL RATE | FANTSY POINTS SCORED |
Puka Nacua | 6.91% | 179 |
Justin Jefferson | 3.95% | 135 |
Marvin Harrison | 5.99% | 110.5 |
Tee Higgins | 7.25% | 116.1 |
Nico Collins | 7.07% | 113 |
Taj Brooks | 13.99% | 1.8 |
Jaken Coker | 16.67% | 13.6 |
Pat Bryant | 16.67 | 24.9 |
Jaylin Lane | 14.29% | 36.9 |
Ja Taveon Sanders | 16.99% | 44.8 |
Last edited:
Out of curiosity I started clicking on surviving Henderson rosters today expecting them to be larger, but they skewed lower. Small sample size and all so take with a grain of sauce.
Puppies
Footballguy
Interesting; thanks! It's not what I would have expected.
EDIT: You got me curious.
When I thought about it, I remembered that the number of large roster teams entered in this contest was very small (only 2,593) compared to the number of teams rostering only 18-21 players (8,587) .
Since you said that the surviving team size was small, I wondered how it compared to the average size of the eliminated teams that rostered Henderson....
Displaying the teams that rostered Henderson, only 18 surviving teams come up on the first page, so I averaged those roster sizes, and compared that to the average roster size of the first 18 teams on that page who were already eliminated.
Of the rosters containing Henderson, the average roster size of the surviving teams is 22.28 players, which indeed is on the small side. But the average roster size of the eliminated teams containing Henderson is even smaller, at only 19.61 players.
So I think that somewhat validates my original assumption that the entrants who rostered Henderson were able to beat the average survival rate by simply constructing a larger roster.
Last edited:
I think some folks are asking why a RB who costs $18 and averaged 6.38 points per week for the first 9 weeks survived at such a high rate? Here are the other RB's within $1 of him...
$19 - Harvey - 13.44% survival rate
$19 - Pollard - 9.61% survival rate
$19 - Judkins - 7.61% survival rate
$18 - Henderson - 15.65% survival rate
$18 - Robinson - 1.68% survival rate
$18 - Pacheco - 6.95% survival rate
$18 - Montgomery - 6.67% survival rate
$17 - Warren - 12.03% survival rate
$17 - Dobbins - 10.36% survival rate
$17 - White - 1.79% survival rate
$17 - Charbonnet - 11.76% survival rate
After 9 weeks, 7 of the 10 above had outscored Henderson, including Rachaad White. Rachaad was $1 less, and had outscored TreVeyon through week 9, even though his bye was week 9. How in the heck can Henderson survive at a rate nearly 9 times higher? I think the easiest answer is commonality.
One of the best strategies in this contest is to hide in the crowd.
