ALWAYS START YOUR STUDS? (1 Viewer)

[dickey moe]

I define a stud as a player/Def that is a MUST START each week, with confidence, no matter what the match up, barring serious injury/behavioral/etc. concerns. This may be too loose or tight a definition for some owners, so feel free to alter it in this discussion as you see fit. This year I consider the true studs at each position to be:

QB

Manning

Palmer

McNabb

Brady

RB

LT

Larry Johnson

Shaun Alexander

Tiki Barber

Rudi Johnson

Ronnie Brown

Steven Jackson

WR

Holt

Fitzgerald

T.O.

Chad Johnson

Steve Smith

Harrison

Wayne

Boldin

Chambers

TE

Gates

Gonzales

Heap

Shockey

PK

There are no stud kickers.

Def

Chicago Bears

Would you bench any of these guys at any time this year? Are there any you disagree with? Any you think should be added?

 

[beergut]

I'd add Portis (when healthy, of course)

 

[dickey moe]

I'd add Portis (when healthy, of course)

Any other healthy year I'd agree with you. Still not convinced his shoulder isn't going to give him problems this season.

 

[Keys Myaths]

I don't know if Brady should be on the QB list.

 

[dickey moe]

I don't know if Brady should be on the QB list.

I thought that one might be controversial, considering New England's WR issues. Until those perceptions are demonstrated as reality on the field, I'm starting Brady each week if I have him.

 

[j3r3m3y]

I question putting Chambers on that list. He is a great start most weeks, even moreso due to their schedule. But until I see something better than last week out of Daunte I wouldn't call Chambers and automatic start, if I have a more favorable matchup somewhere else.

 

[packersfan]

I see no reason at this time to bench Edge. I think Edge remains a Must Start at RB at the present time unless you have ridiculous depth at the position.

 

[DarkManX]

STUD can be interpreted differently. Someone may not be a great player but could have stud status on a not so great team. For instance you may have someone like Hines as your #1. Although Ward isnt classed as a "STUD" he would be considered 1 by the manager since its not likely you would bench Ward for anyone else if he was your #1, regardless of matchup etc.

Same can go for RB, though most players would have a top 10 RB as their #1 and again, not in that category but you would rarely bench them if at all, Edge for example since he's not in that list.

So no, I wouldnt bench anyone I considered a stud for my team, or the usual guys, LT, SA etc etc.

 

[jafo]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

 

[Family Matters]

I see no reason at this time to bench Edge. I think Edge remains a Must Start at RB at the present time unless you have ridiculous depth at the position.

I agree in a start 2 (or more) league but as your stud, I don't think so in AZ. Here's what I posted in another thread regarding stud RB's and Edge in paticular:QUOTE(LordHusker @ Sep 13 2006, 10:48 PM) As I grudgingly bench Edge this week and start Julius Jones and Tatum Bell, it suddenly occurs to me: I'm benching the first pick I made in a 14-team draft. I'm benching a "stud." First-rounders are studs, right?Not sure but I might be in the minority on this one. I do not feel Edge is a stud in AZ. AZ is a pass first team that is not passionate about running the ball. I realize he had about 26 carries but his YPC of 2.6 or whatever is no better than the other backs they've had there. And this is against a 49er D that is average at best against the run and unable to stop the pass.So for those that thought Edge would be anywhere near as productive as he was in Indy, I think that's where it breaks down. I love Edge and realize he's one of the best backs in the NFL. But he was brought in to do 2 things for Green's offense:1. Pass protect. Keeping Warer healthy is crucial if this offense is to have any success.2. Give D's a reason to think about trying to stop the run. Again the hope is that they bring the safety up so they can pass more effectively.Truth is that D's will likely realize that AZ isn't willing to run block and therefore they can forcus more on pass D if they so choose. They will come to understnad that AZ isn't much of threat to run on them consistently for anything meaningful. They will have to respect Edge but not the AZ run game. The best you can hope for is that AZ makes plays that take them to the goalline and allow Edge to punch it in. If he gets more than 8 TH's it will be a success for them. But that may not pan out for FF'ers.So when you say bench a stud, I do not feel Edge is the stud he was because AZ is not a good system for RB's. In fact look at how well Thomas Jones has done since leaving. Even Pittman runs better in TB and he's just a backup. So I am not surpirsed you are benching Edge for Jones. As long as Jones is healthy he will likely be a solid play.

 

[radballs]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

Winslow as well.

 

[dickey moe]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

Winslow as well.

Would you still think so if he would have had a bad game last week?

 

[sholditch]

I don't think that Winslow or Watson belong in that list. TE can be a very sketchy position and I would really say that Gates and Shockey are the only must-starts. With Huard in at QB and Edwards coaching I don't see Gonzo as a must start.

Edge I am on the fence on.

 

[jafo]

I don't think that Winslow or Watson belong in that list. TE can be a very sketchy position and I would really say that Gates and Shockey are the only must-starts. With Huard in at QB and Edwards coaching I don't see Gonzo as a must start.

Edge I am on the fence on.

I totally disagree with you on this, but understand your reasoning for not starting Watson every week if you wouldn't even start Gonzo.

 

[Restricted]

Simply put Stud = Tier 1 players?

I'd still put R. Moss in the stud WR catagory. Not so sure that S. Jackson or R. Brown belong there, yet.

 

[Traders2001]

Ronny Brown is nt a stud .

He was lucky to score two td`s in the first game , cause rushing wise he did nt impress me .

And with worthless Culpepper at QB Chambers is far from being a stud.

 

[dickey moe]

Simply put Stud = Tier 1 players?I'd still put R. Moss in the stud WR catagory. Not so sure that S. Jackson or R. Brown belong there, yet.

Moss would still be a stud, but he's on the Raiders. Jackson and Brown are probably stretches for some, but I think the combination of their ability, good offenses, opportunity, and no RBBC (unless you count Stephen Davis's vulture potential against Jackson) put them at the lower end of the stud RB range.

 

[Mik789fl]

I'm not benching any of those studs after 1 week

I might add the Ravens D to your list,I know the Bucs don't have a juggernaught on offense but Baltimore sure did remind me of their Super Bowl team on Defense.

 

[dickey moe]

I'm not benching any of those studs after 1 weekI might add the Ravens D to your list,I know the Bucs don't have a juggernaught on offense but Baltimore sure did remind me of their Super Bowl team on Defense.

Yeah, they're definitely on the radar, just not quite convinced they will be as dominant as the Bears defense this season.

 

[4th&26]

Ronny Brown is nt a stud .

He was lucky to score two td`s in the first game , cause rushing wise he did nt impress me .

And with worthless Culpepper at QB Chambers is far from being a stud.

Agree to disagree...

You have to remember, the Fins played a TOGUH Steelers defence. You can't expect any WR to post monster #'s against them. However, when you look at the gamebook, Culpepper threw to Chambers 14 times!!! 1-4. That is enough for me to throw chambers in the lineup in ANY game. Chambers is a stud.

also, i had him last year and sat him for a better 'matchup' and WAMMO 200+ yards!!!

 

[jon_mx]

As long as these guys stay healthy and aren't on a bye week they are in my lineup

Manning, FWP, Foster, TO, Driver, Watson.

I hate trying to guess each week and stick with guys until they fall flat on their face.

 

[Family Matters]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

Winslow as well.

Would you still think so if he would have had a bad game last week?

To me Winslow is a bit of an unknown. On 1 hand we know he will be one of the goto guys when healthy. OTH-we don't know how healthy he is or how good he is. Last week was only 1 game but I think portends things to come. There are challenges in covering a TE that plays like a WR.

 

[JayMan]

I define a stud as a player/Def that is a MUST START each week, with confidence, no matter what the match up, barring serious injury/behavioral/etc. concerns.

RB

LT

Larry Johnson

Shaun Alexander

Tiki Barber

Rudi Johnson

Ronnie Brown

Steven Jackson

I think the various starting requirements play a role here... but if it's a 2RB league... a few names needs to be added:Edge / Westbrook (if PPR) / McGahee

If we don't add these guys in 2RBs leagues - this would assume that you are on the fence between Edge and Foster or McGahee and C.Brown depending on the matchups? (i.e. guys ranked in the 27-33 range - your 3rdRB in a normal draft)

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Hasselbeck and Watson are on that list.

 

[JayK]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

I think "must start" depends as much on your lineup. I would have added Watson too... but my #2 is Winslow, and he had a better week last week. So it really depends on your backups... I think the list of "start every week studs" (no matter their match up) is actually very slim, and I wouldn't put Brady or Watson on it. LJ, LT, Alexander, Manning, Gates, Chicago... and that's maybe all.

 

[KiddLattimer]

I see no reason at this time to bench Edge. I think Edge remains a Must Start at RB at the present time unless you have ridiculous depth at the position.

After watching the mighty 49ers defense maul the Cards' line last week... I'll pass on Edge being a must start.

 

[dickey moe]

I define a stud as a player/Def that is a MUST START each week, with confidence, no matter what the match up, barring serious injury/behavioral/etc. concerns.

RB

LT

Larry Johnson

Shaun Alexander

Tiki Barber

Rudi Johnson

Ronnie Brown

Steven Jackson

I think the various starting requirements play a role here... but if it's a 2RB league... a few names needs to be added:Edge / Westbrook (if PPR) / McGahee

If we don't add these guys in 2RBs leagues - this would assume that you are on the fence between Edge and Foster or McGahee and C.Brown depending on the matchups? (i.e. guys ranked in the 27-33 range - your 3rdRB in a normal draft)

I'm simply saying those guys listed above are a must start -- depending on the situation I could see starting other lesser tier RBs over the ones you mentioned -- even in start 2RB leagues.

 

[Lemmiwinks]

By week 6 Chester Taylor will be on this list.

 

[Azarias]

I'd add Portis (when healthy, of course)

Any other healthy year I'd agree with you. Still not convinced his shoulder isn't going to give him problems this season.

I agree with this and I'm waiting for him to show me something before he makes it back as my starter. Right now I have S. jackson and C. Taylor and even though his ypc was horrible the coaching staff kept feeding him the rock.

 

[moleculo]

I would add Ben Watson to the TE list for this year. If he is healty he is a must start IMO.

I think "must start" depends as much on your lineup. I would have added Watson too... but my #2 is Winslow, and he had a better week last week. So it really depends on your backups... I think the list of "start every week studs" (no matter their match up) is actually very slim, and I wouldn't put Brady or Watson on it. LJ, LT, Alexander, Manning, Gates, Chicago... and that's maybe all.

I put TE in the same boat as K. I don't really understand what makes a matchup for a TE good or bad; I've been aweful in the past trying to forcast TE production. Plus, I typically don't like to roster more than one anyhow - I'd rather use a roster spot on a WR flier or a backup RB, and then use the WW when it's the TE's bye week. So, for me, what ever TE I have on my roster is a must start.

 

[ffnut]

By week 6 Chester Taylor will be on this list.

Possibly sooner. I am convinced that the O-line will get better each week as they gel and if this guy stays healthy, he will be gold getting his 25-30 touches every week.

 

[Warhound]

I'd put Burress on the WR list.

 

[bentley]

I think that this list can grow because of individual team situations, but shouldn't shrink. I think that some of the guys that have been suggested since the original post have to be based on someone's own team. Somebody used Hines Ward as an example. I would never sit Hines Ward, because my other options would be Jerricho Cotchery or Michael Clayton.

 

[dreadlocks]

My definition of Stud:

It's not conceivable that I would ever consider benching this player based on their matchup.

Under my definition Randy Moss is not a stud.

 

[el-gato-grande]

I question putting Chambers on that list. He is a great start most weeks, even moreso due to their schedule. But until I see something better than last week out of Daunte I wouldn't call Chambers and automatic start, if I have a more favorable matchup somewhere else.

Chambers is an automatic start, because the week you DON'T start him is the week he explodes for 150+ yards and 2 TDs. Dude is maddening that way.

 

[dickey moe]

My definition of Stud:It's not conceivable that I would ever consider benching this player based on their matchup.Under my definition Randy Moss is not a stud.

Agreed.

 

[dreadlocks]

Ronny Brown is nt a stud .

He was lucky to score two td`s in the first game , cause rushing wise he did nt impress me .

And with worthless Culpepper at QB Chambers is far from being a stud.

Agree to disagree...

You have to remember, the Fins played a TOGUH Steelers defence. You can't expect any WR to post monster #'s against them. However, when you look at the gamebook, Culpepper threw to Chambers 14 times!!! 1-4. That is enough for me to throw chambers in the lineup in ANY game. Chambers is a stud.

also, i had him last year and sat him for a better 'matchup' and WAMMO 200+ yards!!!

Another thing a stud does is still score you points during on a night where they struggle for yards.

 

[walkwithme]

Barring injury Warner is a stud. He is on a team that struggles with the run and also has 2 stud receivers. Arizona probably has the most potential studs on one team. Barring injury I can't imagine a combo putting up more stats than Boldin, Fitzgerald, Waner, and James.

 

[bonesman]

As long as these guys stay healthy and aren't on a bye week they are in my lineup

Manning, FWP, Foster, TO, Driver, Watson.

I hate trying to guess each week and stick with guys until they fall flat on their face.

That guy is a stud and should have been mentioned in the OP