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.

FanDuel Week 10 (1 Viewer)

Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.

Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.

Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?

 
Some idiot (genius) on DK is winning $100k rostering Ben with both Bryant and Brown in the $3 Playaction. Actually just got passed by a person with Seattle D. But that's going to be a nice payday for being a dolt.

 
Some idiot (genius) on DK is winning $100k rostering Ben with both Bryant and Brown in the $3 Playaction. Actually just got passed by a person with Seattle D. But that's going to be a nice payday for being a dolt.
My brother tried to convince me to go w/ a Ben/Brown stack. He's a Pitt fan and was convinced Ben would play. We argued for 15 mins about how frigging stupid it would be to start Ben. He wanted me to do it in a cash game instead of going w/ Brees. The fact that it was stupid hasn't stopped him from gloating incessantly about it tho.

Just because it's a game of skill doesn't mean luck isn't a component.

 
I should have went cousins across the board. Gonna cost me at least 1/3rd of my winnings at least with just going Bortles over cousins.

I'm sure it's going to get worse after tomorrow nights game. Went Olsen instead of Reed in a ton of lineups also. I'm sure there's a ton of eifert/dalton lineups.

What a week.

 
My Thurs Cousins LU wasn't very good but could cash with another big game from Eifert. Also my Newton Thurs is close with Nugent and my Rodgers should cash.

Today's Cousins will easily cash. The Brady was terrible thanks to Cobb Diggs Deangelo Starks. My Bortles I almost bought completely out of at the last minute, but put those dollars on the Brady LU. Ooops.

So ya I think all Cousins would have worked out better, but I was on so many guys that did crappy I really don't know how much better.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Had a nice start to a Thurs gpp with Cousins, Cooks and Reed. I needed a little more out of Gurley, Blount (got stuffed at the 1 a few times), and DJax. Walsh and Pitt did their job. A big game out of Hopkins tomorrow and I can maybe win $25 on $1 entry. That would help recover some losses.

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?
#4 rush defense? They are giving up almost 110 yards a game and have given up 6 rushing tds. They are ranked the 16th worst rushing defense and given up the league most 9 20+yard rushing plays. According to team stats. the number 4 rush defense is arizona giving up 90 yards a game and only 3 tds.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brady throwing a pass behind LaFell for a pick at the 1 instead of an easy td where he beat him is also going to hurt me. Blah

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?
#4 rush defense? They are giving up almost 110 yards a game and have given up 6 rushing tds. They are ranked the 16th worst rushing defense and given up the league most 9 20+yard rushing plays. According to team stats. the number 4 rush defense is arizona giving up 90 yards a game and only 3 tds.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

Coming into this week, the #4 rush defense, 21.5% better than average. And coming into this week, they had given up 5 rushing TDs all season. At home they had given-up ~77 yards per game with a grand total of 1 rushing TD (actually, 1 TD to RB at all) in 4 games.

Granted, they hardly played the elite running games of the NFL at home, but they did face Seattle to open the season and Leveon (who got the 1 TD). But there's a reason he was a ~2.1% owned player in cash games. The match-up wasn't a good match-up by any objective measure.

I'm not saying he was a bad GPP play (he wasn't, he was a very good GPP play), but if any "expert" said he was a good cash game play he would have had 0 objective data to base that on.

Projections for public consumption are extremely difficult. If the sole basis for a recommendation is that the coaching staff said they want to get him the ball, that's a bad recommendation.

 
I have absolutely nothing to add to this thread. :X Worst DFS week in my 4 years of playing. One of those weeks where the process was right, but the result was wrong. It started with a bang with that Cousins/Reed TD too...

 
Overall this is a bad week for me. I had some nice plays like Demarco Murray, Bryant, Floyd, Evans, and still have Bernard and Hopkins tomorrow, but most of my QBs and RBs did not hit anywhere near value. And I have no idea why didn't have any lineups with Kirk Cousins... I played him last time when he had that great game against the Bucs but I ignore him this time against the Saints? ugh.

I need to pay more attention to Vegas odds, lol.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I went Cousins everywhere. Cash lineup at 119 which is winning pretty much everything. But for Cousins I'd be losing a LOT.

 
i wish the sites would get rid of defenses and kickers

make to flex spots

denver has killed me twice in a row.
I know I'm totally in the minority, but I like having defenses and PK. I don't think they're quite as random as some argue. Based on this week, PK are no more random than RB apparently.

 
Sitting in 19th/23000 in the 100k NFL spike single entry with Floyd still going.

Would be top 3 now if Beckham had held onto that 2nd TD.

 
i wish the sites would get rid of defenses and kickers

make to flex spots

denver has killed me twice in a row.
I know I'm totally in the minority, but I like having defenses and PK. I don't think they're quite as random as some argue. Based on this week, PK are no more random than RB apparently.
i wish the sites would get rid of defenses and kickers

make to flex spots

denver has killed me twice in a row.
I know I'm totally in the minority, but I like having defenses and PK. I don't think they're quite as random as some argue. Based on this week, PK are no more random than RB apparently.
There is a guy, Chris Raybon or something on 4for4, that has actually shown PK's predictability is on par with other positions. And I like Defenses because I'm usually pretty good at predicting of how the outcome of a game will turn out. So FanDuel it is for me.

 
Nudged up into the money here and there. I have some exposure in 3/4ths of my cash lineups tomorrow (Eifert, Nugent/Cincy, and Washington respectively), so it could be salvageable.

 
Making nothing. Cousins was fine, but mcfaddedn/williams/Denver killed me.Unless Hopkins does REALLY well. Then I might place somewhere.

 
Well, Doug Martin didn't kill my Thursday lineups. He just severely wounded them. DeAngelo Williams finished most of them off.

 
I'm shocked at this week - scores must be wayyyyy down. I stopped even paying attention mid-way through the afternoon games as I thought for sure I was cooked. I ended up at 110.9, and somehow that cashed in 20/20 50/50s for Sunday-only. The same lineup with a different kicker (Nugent) is winning across a bunch of 50/50s heading into tonight, and in good position to get there in the rest with a decent night from Nugent.

Apparently it was a bloodbath week. I'm floored I'm winning this week... spent my entire Sunday thinking I torched 70% of my year-to-date profit.

 
I'm shocked at this week - scores must be wayyyyy down. I stopped even paying attention mid-way through the afternoon games as I thought for sure I was cooked. I ended up at 110.9, and somehow that cashed in 20/20 50/50s for Sunday-only. The same lineup with a different kicker (Nugent) is winning across a bunch of 50/50s heading into tonight, and in good position to get there in the rest with a decent night from Nugent.

Apparently it was a bloodbath week. I'm floored I'm winning this week... spent my entire Sunday thinking I torched 70% of my year-to-date profit.
Yeah. My Thursday lineup hit 119+. It's looking like a rake and may even pull down all of its triple-ups.

My Sunday-Monday lineups are still in play despite really low scores. I'm thinking that hitting 112 would be a pretty strong performance in most cash games. The double-ups I'm in are currently all carrying cash lines of 100-102. I've got 3 lineups at 96.62, 98.46, and 106.86 and all have players left (Washington, Eifert, Nugent/Cincy respectively). It just means a late night for me I guess.

 
I want to make love to Kirk Cousins for single handedly turning this week from devastating to "slightly better than breaking even."

Not a good week for the expert RB prognosticators.

 
I want to make love to Kirk Cousins for single handedly turning this week from devastating to "slightly better than breaking even."

Not a good week for the expert RB prognosticators.
:goodposting: Seemed the writing was on the wall that Ingram and Williams were in for "locks of the week".. and making my lineups :X

Last two weeks have been killers for me.. Started the year with $38.. Two weeks ago I was up to $108..

Unless tonight's game is a 10-6 snorefest, I'll be down to $73 as I'm currently "in the money" with FBG Lineup, but I am only 3 points over the cut line. :mellow:

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?
#4 rush defense? They are giving up almost 110 yards a game and have given up 6 rushing tds. They are ranked the 16th worst rushing defense and given up the league most 9 20+yard rushing plays. According to team stats. the number 4 rush defense is arizona giving up 90 yards a game and only 3 tds.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

Coming into this week, the #4 rush defense, 21.5% better than average. And coming into this week, they had given up 5 rushing TDs all season. At home they had given-up ~77 yards per game with a grand total of 1 rushing TD (actually, 1 TD to RB at all) in 4 games.

Granted, they hardly played the elite running games of the NFL at home, but they did face Seattle to open the season and Leveon (who got the 1 TD). But there's a reason he was a ~2.1% owned player in cash games. The match-up wasn't a good match-up by any objective measure.

I'm not saying he was a bad GPP play (he wasn't, he was a very good GPP play), but if any "expert" said he was a good cash game play he would have had 0 objective data to base that on.

Projections for public consumption are extremely difficult. If the sole basis for a recommendation is that the coaching staff said they want to get him the ball, that's a bad recommendation.
They gave up a rushing td to Bell and peterson 2 good running backs. Peterson went over 100 against them, Bell probably would have done the same if Big Ben would not have gone down with an injury and vick coming in. The seahawks are a joke this year, their offense is horrible. The rams defense is not very good. I was confident with the numbers I looked up. You obviously did not like what you saw. Either way, thats the great thing about dfs.

 
My predictions were awful. TE was the only position group I was right on. Still don't know how Green Bay laid an egg. Luckily had Cousins in the lineup and barely made it past the money line in 50/50. Onward to next week.

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?
#4 rush defense? They are giving up almost 110 yards a game and have given up 6 rushing tds. They are ranked the 16th worst rushing defense and given up the league most 9 20+yard rushing plays. According to team stats. the number 4 rush defense is arizona giving up 90 yards a game and only 3 tds.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

Coming into this week, the #4 rush defense, 21.5% better than average. And coming into this week, they had given up 5 rushing TDs all season. At home they had given-up ~77 yards per game with a grand total of 1 rushing TD (actually, 1 TD to RB at all) in 4 games.

Granted, they hardly played the elite running games of the NFL at home, but they did face Seattle to open the season and Leveon (who got the 1 TD). But there's a reason he was a ~2.1% owned player in cash games. The match-up wasn't a good match-up by any objective measure.

I'm not saying he was a bad GPP play (he wasn't, he was a very good GPP play), but if any "expert" said he was a good cash game play he would have had 0 objective data to base that on.

Projections for public consumption are extremely difficult. If the sole basis for a recommendation is that the coaching staff said they want to get him the ball, that's a bad recommendation.
They gave up a rushing td to Bell and peterson 2 good running backs. Peterson went over 100 against them, Bell probably would have done the same if Big Ben would not have gone down with an injury and vick coming in. The seahawks are a joke this year, their offense is horrible. The rams defense is not very good. I was confident with the numbers I looked up. You obviously did not like what you saw. Either way, thats the great thing about dfs.
I'm not bagging on your analysis, you don't have to justify that to me or anyone else. I'm just trying to defend the "experts" a little bit. What they do is extremely difficult. Making projections for everyone else to use is necessarily a conservative task. Everything has to be based on objective data. The subjective stuff might be fine for personal use or even on message boards, but the projections themselves really can't be. FWIW, I didn't use Forsett in any cash lineup. I liked his match-up and think he's very talented, but I don't trust Harbaugh's usage patterns at all. I get why the math said Forsett was worthy of a play though.

 
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Tennessee_ATO said:
wyattroa said:
Alright, so I saw so many experts calling for forsett to have a huge day once again. After the last game I said I am staying away from balt all together. Forsett has a terrible day, glad I stayed away. My question is, why, after the previous games and game plans would the experts pick him? I just didnt see it.
I saw guys calling for him to have a good day, I didn't see anyone calling for him to have a huge day.Who did you have pegged to have a huge day out of curiosity?
my guys this week were langford, starks, ingram(breaks off a huge run and then they dont use him anymore), and williams. williams was done once big ben came in and they went to shotgun only to protect ben.Robert
You actually targeted Langford going on the road to face the #4 rated defense against the run?
Yes. They have talked all wee how they wanted to get Langford lots of playing time. Chicago as a team are doing much better and knew he would be getting passing targets out of the backfield with jeffery gimpy.
So you just ignored the whole "on the road facing the #4 rush defense" matchup entirely? Did you think Langford achieved "matchup proof" status based on his body of work before this game (45 rushes for 152 yards and 5 catches for 101 yards) or did you have reason to think STL's defense was primed for a let down?

I'm not trying to come across as snarky, but you do see the reasons for my skepticism in the process, right?
#4 rush defense? They are giving up almost 110 yards a game and have given up 6 rushing tds. They are ranked the 16th worst rushing defense and given up the league most 9 20+yard rushing plays. According to team stats. the number 4 rush defense is arizona giving up 90 yards a game and only 3 tds.
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

Coming into this week, the #4 rush defense, 21.5% better than average. And coming into this week, they had given up 5 rushing TDs all season. At home they had given-up ~77 yards per game with a grand total of 1 rushing TD (actually, 1 TD to RB at all) in 4 games.

Granted, they hardly played the elite running games of the NFL at home, but they did face Seattle to open the season and Leveon (who got the 1 TD). But there's a reason he was a ~2.1% owned player in cash games. The match-up wasn't a good match-up by any objective measure.

I'm not saying he was a bad GPP play (he wasn't, he was a very good GPP play), but if any "expert" said he was a good cash game play he would have had 0 objective data to base that on.

Projections for public consumption are extremely difficult. If the sole basis for a recommendation is that the coaching staff said they want to get him the ball, that's a bad recommendation.
They gave up a rushing td to Bell and peterson 2 good running backs. Peterson went over 100 against them, Bell probably would have done the same if Big Ben would not have gone down with an injury and vick coming in. The seahawks are a joke this year, their offense is horrible. The rams defense is not very good. I was confident with the numbers I looked up. You obviously did not like what you saw. Either way, thats the great thing about dfs.
I'm not bagging on your analysis, you don't have to justify that to me or anyone else. I'm just trying to defend the "experts" a little bit. What they do is extremely difficult. Making projections for everyone else to use is necessarily a conservative task. Everything has to be based on objective data. The subjective stuff might be fine for personal use or even on message boards, but the projections themselves really can't be. FWIW, I didn't use Forsett in any cash lineup. I liked his match-up and think he's very talented, but I don't trust Harbaugh's usage patterns at all. I get why the math said Forsett was worthy of a play though.
I agree with you 100% on forsett, everything looked great on paper. The problem is game plan there. Against San Diego they come out pass heavy when they are horrible against the run. They have no WRs to really throw too, but they dont run. Not sure whats going on in Balt currently with game script.

 
Anyone going to play the Monday-Thursday slate? I'm actually kind of intrigued at the options this week... plenty of them and the pricing actually forces you to make trade-off decisions. I think I'll throw some $$ into some 50/50s.

Right now I've got:

Dalton

Yeldon

McCluster

Hopkins

AJ Green

Robinson

Eifert

Novak

Cinci D

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was looking it over. So what is a "core" injury that Hurns suffered yesterday? Obviously stay away from him, correct?

 
I was looking it over. So what is a "core" injury that Hurns suffered yesterday? Obviously stay away from him, correct?
Sounds like he's being evaluated for a sports hernia, and surgery has been mentioned. I'd stay away, personally.

With Yeldon in a walking boot, that's also making me nervous.

 
I agree with you 100% on forsett, everything looked great on paper. The problem is game plan there. Against San Diego they come out pass heavy when they are horrible against the run. They have no WRs to really throw too, but they dont run. Not sure whats going on in Balt currently with game script.
Me either and I'm stuck with Forsett in 2 season-long leagues.

 
BassNBrew said:
chet said:
Brutal week for me. Must have been a bad week for the FBG forecasters.
Well the "H-value" thingy hasn't been working for awhile.
I've been a FBG for almost 15 years and it pains me to say this, but I've lost money tailing the last five weeks and got crushed the last two weeks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
BassNBrew said:
chet said:
Brutal week for me. Must have been a bad week for the FBG forecasters.
Well the "H-value" thingy hasn't been working for awhile.
I've been a FBG for almost 15 years and it pains me to say this, but I've lost money tailing the last five weeks and got crushed the last two weeks.
My only losing week came after I incorporated "H-Value" into my roster construction. Not saying that it is a HORRIBLE function, just i did better without it.

 
Crazy week ...

Vegas had a BAD week. 9 underdogs won outright. Cash cut-lines very low this week.

First place I go for all things Fan Duel are the lines and threw things off a little. Thankfully, followed the gut and had 100% exposure to Cousins ... did not waiver ... and panned out. And pulled the plug on Crabtree. Avid bow hunter and i am sorry but you cannot do much via the air in a game with a steady 25 mph wind. If I opt out of hunting in weather that windy you sure as blank cannot throw a football with a high level of accuracy. Again ... trust YOUR process and where you arrived at

For what is is worth I typically check line-ups of the "pros" once cash games go live. On weeks when there is a cheaper QB ... 6500 - 7400 ... with a dream match-up those guys are typically locked in on that player. Ball in the QB hand every play. Point add up quickly. Takes so little to hit cash value.

Regardless of what smoke screen, BS you read from said "pros" that work for DFS specific sites ... on weeks if/when there is a value play at QB in a statistically superior match-up they are on that player more often than not, while by passing the 9200 - 8900 QB

Not making a connection between myself and the pro player by any means. Just sharing learning experiences.

I made a habit of comparing my line-ups to the pros in an effort to learn when I started last year. I still do this each week. You can identify tendencies in their games, as you can in poker. Suggestion ... try it out and see how you differ in thought and now close you are to their thinking. I just know a cheap QB in a good match-up is pretty safe and sharp play.

I have come to the realization that a good 80% of the content they (pro writing or broadcasting) produce is equally smoke screen and non-comital. They hedge more comments than not, as to not tip too much and not to look wrong. I have learned to take it all in stride and trust the line-up I built.

I will say this. John Lee in my opinion is the most direct, specific voice in the DFS space. You are missing out if you are not following him via written word or his broadcasts. Ask him a direct question and you get a direct answer.

As a Lions fan ... who was mid point of college when they last won on the Frozen Tundra ... WTF happened yesterday and how did it happen? If you are racing the Niners for the 1st overall pick you are going about it all wrong FINALLY winning in Green Bay. This ... this is life as a Lions fan

Hope anyone chasing big money tonight makes out

 
BassNBrew said:
chet said:
Brutal week for me. Must have been a bad week for the FBG forecasters.
Well the "H-value" thingy hasn't been working for awhile.
I've been a FBG for almost 15 years and it pains me to say this, but I've lost money tailing the last five weeks and got crushed the last two weeks.
Been a FBG longer and gave $900 back in the last 4 weeks. I could cash this week if Hopkins has a great game.... Crap.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top