I didn't realize it was against the rules. If it is, I can edit the subject line, but it seemed so off-the-wall that it's hard to discuss without mentioning the actual ranking.Pretty sure the powers that be aren't going to appreciate you giving out exact rankings on a player
tis is weak on their behalf. borderline ######ed that we can't discuss their rankings on their forums.Pretty sure the powers that be aren't going to appreciate you giving out exact rankings on a player
thisIt's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
Actually you can. They've been very clear in the past they don't mind if someone lists an individual player and that ranking. You can even list the one above/below to compare. It's listing all 21 ahead of him that's a problem.tis is weak on their behalf. borderline ######ed that we can't discuss their rankings on their forums.Pretty sure the powers that be aren't going to appreciate you giving out exact rankings on a player
Vernon or Fred?Guy has been a disappointment as of late. He's been vastly overshadowed by Gronk, and dropped an easy TD against the Chiefs last week. That said, he's still put up decent numbers. I'm not the fan I used to be though and will probably start Davis over him this week, if that means anything.
Whoops...Fred.Vernon or Fred?Guy has been a disappointment as of late. He's been vastly overshadowed by Gronk, and dropped an easy TD against the Chiefs last week. That said, he's still put up decent numbers. I'm not the fan I used to be though and will probably start Davis over him this week, if that means anything.
I definitely get that, but he can still go off on any given week and I just can't imagine why he'd be ranked that low. Somewhere in the 6-10 range seems right to me.Guy has been a disappointment as of late. He's been vastly overshadowed by Gronk, and dropped an easy TD against the Chiefs last week. That said, he's still put up decent numbers. I'm not the fan I used to be though and will probably start Davis over him this week, if that means anything.
Agree that he shouldn't be ranked that low. Anything below 8 or so is ridiculous.I definitely get that, but he can still go off on any given week and I just can't imagine why he'd be ranked that low. Somewhere in the 6-10 range seems right to me.Guy has been a disappointment as of late. He's been vastly overshadowed by Gronk, and dropped an easy TD against the Chiefs last week. That said, he's still put up decent numbers. I'm not the fan I used to be though and will probably start Davis over him this week, if that means anything.
It may have something to do with Philly being tough on TEs this season. I think only Fred Davis, and maybe one other TE I'm forgetting, has really played well against them. Of course, NE is different than most teams that have played Philly since they have two quality pass-catching TEs, but stats are stats.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
He should have had 2 touchdowns. He dropped one, and caught the other but had it called back on an illegal shift.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
Still locked in at #22...It's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
Is it possible to even ignore Gronkowskis girth?Belichick likes to switch it up, teams right now will be particularly focusing on Gronk, I'm pretty confident Hernandez has a big game coming up soon.
Why list him there in the first place then????Philly is terrible against the TE. He should never have been there in the first place.It's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
True last year, not this season. They're actually one of the better defenses against the TE. Football Outsiders even has them at #1.Why list him there in the first place then????Philly is terrible against the TE. He should never have been there in the first place.It's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
YGOS?Is it possible to even ignore Gronkowskis girth?Belichick likes to switch it up, teams right now will be particularly focusing on Gronk, I'm pretty confident Hernandez has a big game coming up soon.
I wouldn't read anything into those stats. Philly's linebackers and safeties are mostly terrible. They haven't been gashed by TEs because teams can run on them at will. Also, the numbers would look a lot worse if not for some egregious drops by Lance Kendricks in Week 1 and Jake Ballard last week.It may have something to do with Philly being tough on TEs this season. I think only Fred Davis, and maybe one other TE I'm forgetting, has really played well against them. Of course, NE is different than most teams that have played Philly since they have two quality pass-catching TEs, but stats are stats.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
for ranks based on success rate for winning football games. there is some overlap, but its not necessarily indicative. id prefer looking at prior te performance and if you could rig a srs type profile i think it would be even more enlightening.True last year, not this season. They're actually one of the better defenses against the TE. Football Outsiders even has them at #1.Why list him there in the first place then????Philly is terrible against the TE. He should never have been there in the first place.It's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
Agreed, but my point is they aren't "terrible" this year.for ranks based on success rate for winning football games. there is some overlap, but its not necessarily indicative. id prefer looking at prior te performance and if you could rig a srs type profile i think it would be even more enlightening.True last year, not this season. They're actually one of the better defenses against the TE. Football Outsiders even has them at #1.Why list him there in the first place then????Philly is terrible against the TE. He should never have been there in the first place.It's called "Early Cheatsheets". The updated one will come later tonight and I can guarantee he'll end up higher than that.
Thats exactly how I feel. If he is playing he is in for me.He will never be on my bench. I don't care where he's ranked.
Moved up to #19. Projected for 3/43. He's only caught less than 4 balls once in a game this year (and he had a TD that week), so I still find it to be a bizarre ranking, especially with Branch being a game-time decision.
How many points does your league give for "should've been TD's?" -- mine gives 0. I think his ranking is about right. He has some upside but is certainly not a top TE.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
The point is that he's been targeted in the end zone. Are there really more than 15 TE's you'd start in front of Hernandez this week?How many points does your league give for "should've been TD's?" -- mine gives 0. I think his ranking is about right. He has some upside but is certainly not a top TE.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
How do his targets in the red zone compare to other TEs targets in the red zone? Unless we can figure that out the targets you saw are not special/unique to Hernandez. To answer your question there are 12-13 TEs I would absolutely start over him. Around 5-6 I would consider to be about equal to him and could go either way on.The point is that he's been targeted in the end zone. Are there really more than 15 TE's you'd start in front of Hernandez this week?How many points does your league give for "should've been TD's?" -- mine gives 0. I think his ranking is about right. He has some upside but is certainly not a top TE.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.
Fair enough. I just see his floor as being very similar to most of the other guys in the 6-15 range, while his ceiling is substantially higher (and he has a much better chance of realizing it on any given week).How do his targets in the red zone compare to other TEs targets in the red zone? Unless we can figure that out the targets you saw are not special/unique to Hernandez. To answer your question there are 12-13 TEs I would absolutely start over him. Around 5-6 I would consider to be about equal to him and could go either way on.The point is that he's been targeted in the end zone. Are there really more than 15 TE's you'd start in front of Hernandez this week?How many points does your league give for "should've been TD's?" -- mine gives 0. I think his ranking is about right. He has some upside but is certainly not a top TE.I know he's been a bit quiet lately but he should've had a TD last week and he's finally completely healthy. There are really 21 TE's you'd rather have than him in a PPR this week? One of the strangest rankings I've seen from FBG in a long time.