FBG Contest Team Status Updates Page (1 Viewer)

[nashua55]

I'd be shocked if the winner didn't have Welker.

71%! Wow, What players do the least amount of teams have that I have... (thus, I cheer for)AJ - 2.4%Palmer - 4.8%Denver D - 5.3%Everyone else that I have has between 10 - 40%, or 71%. COME ON AJ!!!

My players I have at under 10% are:Qb C. Palmer 4.8%RB S. Jax 6.7%WR J. Jurovicious 3.4%WR K. Walter 5.7%WR Randle El 8.3%TE A. Gates 9.7%

 

[hauser42]

Made it to the 500. Team has peaked lately and was #110 this week.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

Lessons learned for next year...

- TE's are worth the $$; don't be a cheapskate

- Running QB's, ala Vince Young, are a rip off; stick with the ones who get tons of passing yards

- Defenses don't score alot in this format; steer clear of the expensive ones

- Early byes

- If you normally play in non-PPR leagues, do some math before you make your picks

 

[QuizGuy66]

What the heck, thought I'm knocked out now I'll do an autopsy on my team.

Even though I got knocked out, I was at least in the top 80% this last week which woulda been good for most cuts. I certainly think I can hold my head high even though for the 2nd year in a row I dropped out in Week 12 as the Turk got me on Turkey Week.

Anyhow, on with the post mortem:

QBs ($37): Brees ($21 - used 5 times), Leinart ($14 - used 1 time), Garrard ($2 - used 6 times)

All in all I feel pretty good about my strategy here. Leinart getting hurt/losing his job was bad luck though I think next time if I target a young guy I'll look for one with more job security. Garrard was the ultimate arbitrage opportunity and could not be passed up. Even though huge percentages of players take guys like him, it's just a no-brainer. I think 3 was a good number for QBs. Since I didn't take Brady I can only give myself a B+ here. Brady will and should be ridiculously expensive in next year's contest and it'll be interesting to see how players cope with that.

RBs ($110): LT2 ($70 - used 11 times), ADP ($23 - used 9 times), D Foster ($13 - used 6 times), D Rhodes ($3 - used once), Tony Hunt ($1 - used zero times)

I rode LT2 all the way to week 12 last year and he was one of two "must have" guys for this contest for me even with the huge price tag. I have no regrets taking him even though his numbers became more along the lines of stud rather than super-stud. His durability in a year where lots of RBs went down was big. ADP was on many a roster and while a flaw in my strategy seems to be that I had too many common players, the risk/reward for him was too good and even with the injury situation I felt like this was a home run. Now with Foster, that's a bit tougher. As a #4 I think he woulda been perfectly fine but as a #3 with two long-shots behind him I think it was a mistake. Rhodes was an okay gamble but didn't pan out. Hunt wasn't worth the $1. I think 4 solid backs would've been a better idea here and probably is something I'll do different next year. The beginning of the downside for LT2 would shy me away from him (at least at $70) and if ADP is the new $70 man the injury risk might be too much to bear next year. All in all I give my picks a B-minus. I think the lack of depth here was the most significant factor in my elimination.

WRs ($65): Housh ($34 - used 11 times), S Holmes ($14 - used 8 times), Curry ($8 - used 6 times), Welker ($3 - used 10 times), Jacoby Jones ($2 - used once), C Henry ($2 - used twice), Northcutt ($1 - used 5 times), Sinorice Moss ($1 - used 1 very important time as his whopping 2.0 points helped me barely clear the week 5 bar)

I feel best about what I did at this position. Housh was and the perfect anchor. Welker was another great case of arbitrage even if everyone seemed to own him. Likewise for Santonio. Curry was well worth the price and Northcutt was a fabulous $1 pick. Henry was a worthwhile gamble that I would do again with a similar player - $20 worth of value for $2. Jones and moss being two stiffs that cost be $3 is something I can easily live mith. I have myself an A (Randy Moss and/or TO would be the only possible way to get an A+). Only tweak I can see making here would be to possibly carry one less dude.

TEs ($27): Heap ($26 - used 4 times), Eric Johnson ($1 - used 9 times with diminishing returns). Here was a case of getting to $250 and being happy at all the other positions - The difference in price to Gates was just too great. Heap was a big factor in destroying my chances as he just couldn't stay healthy. Given what I could get out of Johnson here, the 3-headed $6 TE might be the way to go next time out. Swap out Rhodes for a $20-something back and I might still be in this thing. I would grade myself a D here as a lot of folks took Johnson. Heap was not the way to differentiate my roster.

Ks ($2): Lindell ($1 - used 6 times), Kasay ($1 - used 6 times). Averaged just under 11 points per game at the kicker position with these guys. The top guy for week 12 averaged just under 12 (incl monster Bironas week), the top guy who had 3 kickers averaged just over 13 per week. The best 4-kicker guy (in terms of overall standing not kickers) in week 12 averaged 14 per week. Even though my guys weren't spectacular (heck they are 26th and 27th in regular kicker scoring) I think I would do the exact same strategy again at this position. I outscored Mr. 4-kickers at the position 3 times out of 12. The potential marginal gain just is not worth it at all. With that I give myself an A.

DEFs ($9): Chicago ($8 - used 7 times), Arizona ($1 - used 5 times, though they really tied Chicago once). It surprised me how many entries actually splurged for Chicago, but they really were that good the year before. This year? Not so much. This position is a total candidate for the $2 strategy next year. If I had picked the truly horrible Browns defense for $1 instead of the Bears, it would have cost me an average of 2 points over the course of the season. More depth at the skill positions would've been money much better spent. I took probably the most common tandem to boot. I give myself another D here.

Some other thoughts. I think my bye-strategy was mostly okay (the plan simply was to diversify as much as possible) though certainly skewing early would be the best thing to do where possible. I think taking 4 RBs with different bye weeks would be optimal - it's just such an injury prone position.

Anyhow, that's it for my post-mortem. Be back at it next year - hopefully a couple weeks stronger

-QG

 

[The Duff Man]

Great analysis. Here is mine. My first contest entry.

QBs ($34): Roethlisberger ($18 - used 6 times), Garcia ($8 - used 2 times), Harrington ($6 - used once), Garrard ($2 - used 3 times)

Taking four QBs was just a boneheaded move. I had three pegged in, but did a last minute change to add Garrard. I should have dropped Harrington when I did this. The week I used him I would have survived without him and the money could have been VERY helpful elsewhere. I liked both Big Ben and Garcia this year to perform above their $ value and I think they did.

RBs ($84): Jacobs ($26 - used 7 times), Green ($23 - used 3 times), Lynch ($22 - used 8 times), D Foster ($13 - used 8 times)

My strategy was to have four decent guys, with no studs. I figured my flex would come from WR so most weeks I was only looking for two RBs to score for me. A decent strategy, but I could have used the $6 saved on Harrington for another guy here as backup, or at least got Dayne to backup Green. Don't know what I was thinking with him, I was posting on here that I didn't think he would last the year, I grabbed Dayne in many leagues this year anticipating he would be starting by this point yet I stuck with Green in the contest

Last week only Foster was active, so lack of depth hurt.

WRs ($110): Evans ($29 - used 6 times), Edwards ($28 - used 9 times), Galloway ($20 - used 9 times), Berrian ($16 - used 9 times), S Holmes ($14 - used 8 times), Dem Williams ($3 - used once)

Evans was a total bust and I should have gone with Welker instead of Dem. Williams (what a difference that would make!) Other than that I got great value from my WR corp.

TEs ($17): Scaife ($9 - used 6 times), Graham ($7 - used 2 times), Eric Johnson ($1 - used 8 times)

I didn't spend much here, so can't complain with the production. The miss was on Graham, I bought into some preseason praise but he didn't pan out at all.

Ks ($2): Lindell ($1 - used 2 times), Kasay ($1 - used 5 times), Longwell ($1 - used 5 times)

Averaged almost 13 points a week. I think having the third kicker helps.

DEFs ($2): Cleveland ($1 - used 6 times), Houston ($1 - used 6 times).

Might add another D next year. Got good value from these two for only $2.

I didn't even consider bye weeks, got lucky that I didn't have too many conflicts. I didn't really pick many low priced players (other than TE) so I didn't give myself a chance to hit on some low priced guys. I picked a lot of mid value players who performed at mid-upper level. I missed on two big ones, Evans and Green. Next year I would probably drop to 3 QBs and add a low priced RB for depth. Drop to two TEs and use a higher priced TE1, then pick up another low priced WR.

 

[Stingdiddy]

Still alive...Welker has been "the man". Brees has been nice and Garrard and Shaub are back. LT/McGahee have both been solid. ADP could be back this week. Minny D has been money. Colston is chipping in nicely as well.

 

[nashua55]

What the heck, thought I'm knocked out now I'll do an autopsy on my team.Even though I got knocked out, I was at least in the top 80% this last week which woulda been good for most cuts. I certainly think I can hold my head high even though for the 2nd year in a row I dropped out in Week 12 as the Turk got me on Turkey Week.Anyhow, on with the post mortem:QBs ($37): Brees ($21 - used 5 times), Leinart ($14 - used 1 time), Garrard ($2 - used 6 times)All in all I feel pretty good about my strategy here. Leinart getting hurt/losing his job was bad luck though I think next time if I target a young guy I'll look for one with more job security. Garrard was the ultimate arbitrage opportunity and could not be passed up. Even though huge percentages of players take guys like him, it's just a no-brainer. I think 3 was a good number for QBs. Since I didn't take Brady I can only give myself a B+ here. Brady will and should be ridiculously expensive in next year's contest and it'll be interesting to see how players cope with that.RBs ($110): LT2 ($70 - used 11 times), ADP ($23 - used 9 times), D Foster ($13 - used 6 times), D Rhodes ($3 - used once), Tony Hunt ($1 - used zero times)I rode LT2 all the way to week 12 last year and he was one of two "must have" guys for this contest for me even with the huge price tag. I have no regrets taking him even though his numbers became more along the lines of stud rather than super-stud. His durability in a year where lots of RBs went down was big. ADP was on many a roster and while a flaw in my strategy seems to be that I had too many common players, the risk/reward for him was too good and even with the injury situation I felt like this was a home run. Now with Foster, that's a bit tougher. As a #4 I think he woulda been perfectly fine but as a #3 with two long-shots behind him I think it was a mistake. Rhodes was an okay gamble but didn't pan out. Hunt wasn't worth the $1. I think 4 solid backs would've been a better idea here and probably is something I'll do different next year. The beginning of the downside for LT2 would shy me away from him (at least at $70) and if ADP is the new $70 man the injury risk might be too much to bear next year. All in all I give my picks a B-minus. I think the lack of depth here was the most significant factor in my elimination.WRs ($65): Housh ($34 - used 11 times), S Holmes ($14 - used 8 times), Curry ($8 - used 6 times), Welker ($3 - used 10 times), Jacoby Jones ($2 - used once), C Henry ($2 - used twice), Northcutt ($1 - used 5 times), Sinorice Moss ($1 - used 1 very important time as his whopping 2.0 points helped me barely clear the week 5 bar)I feel best about what I did at this position. Housh was and the perfect anchor. Welker was another great case of arbitrage even if everyone seemed to own him. Likewise for Santonio. Curry was well worth the price and Northcutt was a fabulous $1 pick. Henry was a worthwhile gamble that I would do again with a similar player - $20 worth of value for $2. Jones and moss being two stiffs that cost be $3 is something I can easily live mith. I have myself an A (Randy Moss and/or TO would be the only possible way to get an A+). Only tweak I can see making here would be to possibly carry one less dude.TEs ($27): Heap ($26 - used 4 times), Eric Johnson ($1 - used 9 times with diminishing returns). Here was a case of getting to $250 and being happy at all the other positions - The difference in price to Gates was just too great. Heap was a big factor in destroying my chances as he just couldn't stay healthy. Given what I could get out of Johnson here, the 3-headed $6 TE might be the way to go next time out. Swap out Rhodes for a $20-something back and I might still be in this thing. I would grade myself a D here as a lot of folks took Johnson. Heap was not the way to differentiate my roster.Ks ($2): Lindell ($1 - used 6 times), Kasay ($1 - used 6 times). Averaged just under 11 points per game at the kicker position with these guys. The top guy for week 12 averaged just under 12 (incl monster Bironas week), the top guy who had 3 kickers averaged just over 13 per week. The best 4-kicker guy (in terms of overall standing not kickers) in week 12 averaged 14 per week. Even though my guys weren't spectacular (heck they are 26th and 27th in regular kicker scoring) I think I would do the exact same strategy again at this position. I outscored Mr. 4-kickers at the position 3 times out of 12. The potential marginal gain just is not worth it at all. With that I give myself an A.DEFs ($9): Chicago ($8 - used 7 times), Arizona ($1 - used 5 times, though they really tied Chicago once). It surprised me how many entries actually splurged for Chicago, but they really were that good the year before. This year? Not so much. This position is a total candidate for the $2 strategy next year. If I had picked the truly horrible Browns defense for $1 instead of the Bears, it would have cost me an average of 2 points over the course of the season. More depth at the skill positions would've been money much better spent. I took probably the most common tandem to boot. I give myself another D here.Some other thoughts. I think my bye-strategy was mostly okay (the plan simply was to diversify as much as possible) though certainly skewing early would be the best thing to do where possible. I think taking 4 RBs with different bye weeks would be optimal - it's just such an injury prone position. Anyhow, that's it for my post-mortem. Be back at it next year - hopefully a couple weeks stronger -QG

I like the analysis you did on your picking stategy. This whole contest is about strategy and this year I went with the 4 RB's (SJax, AP, M. Barber and Cadillac) starting on different bye weeks. It has worked pretty well considering I am still in the contest. I had hoped that my RB's would be a 3 headed monster with the Flex position, but in reality it hasnt worked out because injuries decimated that position for me most of the year. Basically I have been playing with 2 RB the whole year. But, because I had 4 starting backs, I was able to hang on when Cadillac , SJax and AP went down at different times. The depth at that position saved me. But by having depth at the RB slot, I am very week at WR. My highest priced WR is B. Berrian(16bucks). I new that would be a problem so I tried to counter that with having 9 WR, luckily one of them was Welker. This strategy is somewhat effective, but I think I underestimated the position at WR, WR generate alot more points than put in the equation. I think next I might back off the 4 RB strategy and go for a little more power at the WR position. As you stated TE was really value in this contest this year. I took Gates, but boy I wish I would have tried to fit in another big TE. Gates/Winslow or Witten combo would have been pretty powerful. You also talk about taking players with early bye weeks, I for one went with that stategy somewhat but it backfired on me. At QB I was going to select either Palmer, Brady or Brees since they all were similiar in value. I tossed out Brees because I figured he would be picked by too many teams, I chose Palmer because his bye was week 4 and Brady's was week 10 (which would be a tough cutdown week) in hindsite I wish i took Brady with another strong QB to counter the late bye week. My strategy will be different at Qb next year, instead of going 2QB (Palmer and Garrard) I will go with 3. Having 2 QB's leaves a team too vulnerable, I just got lucky so far, that it wasnt an issue yet. Sorry to ramble on. Good luck next year.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Updated power rankings

 

[lowman2]

Any idea how many Brady teams are left. I would think they were thinned out a little last week.

Thanks guys.

 

[ctriopelle]

Any idea how many Brady teams are left. I would think they were thinned out a little last week.Thanks guys.

looks like 19. see drinen's post on the previous page, titled "stats" 3.8% of 500 would be 19

 

[The Man With No Name]

Updated power rankings

I was surprised that last week I was inside the top 70. I'm shocked that this week I am outside the top 200. I thouht they were based on projections for the rest of the year, along with a few other things. My UQ is just over 100 too. I don't get it.It doesn't really matter, whatever happens will happen. No ranking has anything to do with it.

And I didn't expect to get this far, and don't expect to get any further.

 

[ctriopelle]

In thinking about the answer to the last Brady question, I do find it really odd that the Brady survival rate is actually LOWER than the general population (%live <4.2%). Given that he is so ridiculously better than QB2, it is apparent that either the people who chose Brady and dropped were really bad team pickers in general, or the bestball scoring effectively negated his individual advantage over the long haul. I would also suspect that in Brady's bye week, a good number of them were relying on Garrard to get thru (like I did with Manning). Sounded like a good plan at the time, but didn't work out well in practice

Sad thing is, what this ultimately leads to is Brady has become "unique". That's the last thing I wanted to see for the final 3 weeks, as this really gives those that were able to slip through with him an advantage if he keeps up his pace.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Updated power rankings

I was surprised that last week I was inside the top 70. I'm shocked that this week I am outside the top 200. I thouht they were based on projections for the rest of the year, along with a few other things. My UQ is just over 100 too. I don't get it.

Well, these things are pretty experimental, so I'm not sure what might explain it.I do weight the coming week more heavily, so if you have a key player or two who are out for this week (and weren't out last week) that might make a big difference. It just occurred to me that simply not having Adrian Peterson and/or Brandon Jacobs is going to cause you to drop quite a bit from last week's power ratings to this week's. They are pretty heavily owned and were out last week but playing this week. So if you don't have those guys, you probably got passed by a lot of guys who do.

If you do have those guys, then I'm not sure what could explain the drop. If you want to PM me your six-digit number, I could take a look. As you say, it doesn't really matter what your rank is anyway, but I think it's kind of fun to solve these little mysteries.

 

[nashua55]

In thinking about the answer to the last Brady question, I do find it really odd that the Brady survival rate is actually LOWER than the general population (%live <4.2%). Given that he is so ridiculously better than QB2, it is apparent that either the people who chose Brady and dropped were really bad team pickers in general, or the bestball scoring effectively negated his individual advantage over the long haul. I would also suspect that in Brady's bye week, a good number of them were relying on Garrard to get thru (like I did with Manning). Sounded like a good plan at the time, but didn't work out well in practiceSad thing is, what this ultimately leads to is Brady has become "unique". That's the last thing I wanted to see for the final 3 weeks, as this really gives those that were able to slip through with him an advantage if he keeps up his pace.

True about Brady with the unique factor, but me not being a Brady owner I think only 19 people owning him is the best case senerio for the non Brady owners. With the monster year Brady is having it is almost a gift that so little people own him. If Brady has a bad game Sunday, which is highly unlikely, the 19 owners might dwindle in half. Brady owners have a big advantage, but aleast I feel I have a chance against 19 teams with him than say 190 teams with him.

 

[Cobalt Cruisin']

Not sure how I made it this far, but I'll take it!

P Manning, D Garrard

LT, F Taylor, Dunn, A Thomas, Rhodes, Hunt

Harrison, Bruce, B Marshall, Battle, Moulds, Welker, Crayton, Engram

Scaife, Pollard

Bironas, Janikowski

Jax, SF

If Harrison can get healthy, it would be a nice boost.

Biggest Wastes were: Rhodes, Hunt, Moulds (what was I thinkin'! )

 

[Doug Drinen]

In thinking about the answer to the last Brady question, I do find it really odd that the Brady survival rate is actually LOWER than the general population (%live <4.2%). Given that he is so ridiculously better than QB2, it is apparent that either the people who chose Brady and dropped were really bad team pickers in general, or the bestball scoring effectively negated his individual advantage over the long haul. I would also suspect that in Brady's bye week, a good number of them were relying on Garrard to get thru (like I did with Manning). Sounded like a good plan at the time, but didn't work out well in practice

The Brady situation is very interesting indeed. I think there are a couple of factors in play. Week 10 was a bloodbath for Brady owners --- much worse than any other star's bye week --- and that's because of two things:1. Brady was so good he was carrying several otherwise-weak teams.2. Brady has such a solid track record of consistency and health that the people who picked him felt comfortable skimping on the backup QB slots. I think Brady is a cautionary tale about just how dangerous late bye weeks can be.

 

[rustycolts]

485 power ranking cant get much worse than that,but Ive been towards the bottom the whole contest and Ive made it this far so Im happy with that.32nd most unique team so I guess thats good.This has been a lot of fun learned a lot for next year hopefully I can make it one more week but Im not counting on it I think I used up my share of luck last week.

 

[Blueb]

In thinking about the answer to the last Brady question, I do find it really odd that the Brady survival rate is actually LOWER than the general population (%live <4.2%). Given that he is so ridiculously better than QB2, it is apparent that either the people who chose Brady and dropped were really bad team pickers in general, or the bestball scoring effectively negated his individual advantage over the long haul. I would also suspect that in Brady's bye week, a good number of them were relying on Garrard to get thru (like I did with Manning). Sounded like a good plan at the time, but didn't work out well in practice

Sad thing is, what this ultimately leads to is Brady has become "unique". That's the last thing I wanted to see for the final 3 weeks, as this really gives those that were able to slip through with him an advantage if he keeps up his pace.

I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Its quite likely that Brady will continue to put up monster games. To beat Brady owners the balance of your team must ouperform the balance of the Brady owners' teams. The more teams that have Brady the more combinations of players your team must beat. You should be happy there are fewer Brady owners left. The Brady owners that are left should also be happy since their source of points is more scarce (note that while this is an advantage for Brady owners, their not having this advantage doesnt help you in any way). Basically, everyone should be happy that there are fewer Brady owners left.

 

[ctriopelle]

I think Brady is a cautionary tale about just how dangerous late bye weeks can be.

Bingo. Learned my lesson on this the first time FBG ran this style of contest and made a late bye-induced exit. It was also part of my decision to be comfortable by only picking Manning/Garrard at QB since both byes were during the "easy" cut survival period. Definitely one of the hardest aspects to this contest is not just picking the best players you can afford, but picking them so that you aren't missing key components when you need them most.I'm curious to see how the shorter 3 week final scheme pans out (compared to 4 the other times). My team is REALLY un-unique (482), yet I'm 10th in total contest points to date (as well as Drinen ranked 164). Kudos to FBG's rankings, as I focused on buying as many points as possible with my $250 based on the FBG preseason rankings. I tweaked to spread byes, and also played with combos of positional distributions based on my thoughts on how to maximize the benefits of bestball scoring. Turns out this results in having a lot of players others find attractive, and also got me a pretty high scoring roster over the long haul. I consistently finish in the top 10-30% (never lower than a bye-related top 41% :fingerscrossed, but I've only finished as high as the top 0.8% (49th) in a given week. I do have 2 top 10 3-week scores with my one good week, so I wouldn't say I'm completely incapable of making a run if I make it past week 13. For me and the general lack of unique single week explosiveness, I think a longer final would have been more advantageous.

 

[ctriopelle]

I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Its quite likely that Brady will continue to put up monster games. To beat Brady owners the balance of your team must ouperform the balance of the Brady owners' teams. The more teams that have Brady the more combinations of players your team must beat. You should be happy there are fewer Brady owners left. The Brady owners that are left should also be happy since their source of points is more scarce (note that while this is an advantage for Brady owners, their not having this advantage doesnt help you in any way). Basically, everyone should be happy that there are fewer Brady owners left.

Good point, shouldn't have had so many beers at dinner! For us non-Brady owners, his uniqueness is a good thing for the reasons you pointed out. I was focused too much on what a distinct advantage he is to his owners at this ownership rate as opposed to the relative danger he now presents (or doesn't) to the field. For those of us without him, it is somewhat comforting that there will be less than 20 combos to contend with. Likely less than 10 after this week if the trend continues, but a big week will prevent that.

 

[Blueb]

I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Its quite likely that Brady will continue to put up monster games. To beat Brady owners the balance of your team must ouperform the balance of the Brady owners' teams. The more teams that have Brady the more combinations of players your team must beat. You should be happy there are fewer Brady owners left. The Brady owners that are left should also be happy since their source of points is more scarce (note that while this is an advantage for Brady owners, their not having this advantage doesnt help you in any way). Basically, everyone should be happy that there are fewer Brady owners left.

Good point, shouldn't have had so many beers at dinner! For us non-Brady owners, his uniqueness is a good thing for the reasons you pointed out. I was focused too much on what a distinct advantage he is to his owners at this ownership rate as opposed to the relative danger he now presents (or doesn't) to the field. For those of us without him, it is somewhat comforting that there will be less than 20 combos to contend with. Likely less than 10 after this week if the trend continues, but a big week will prevent that.

Right. It would only be good for us non-Brady owners for there to be lots of Brady owners left is if we are confident that he will suck. Since I dont think anyone here believes that, here's to hoping this week is a terrible one for Brady and there are no Brady owners left for the final 250. And of course also hoping for me to make the final 250 even though I am once again right at the bottom of the power rankings.

 

[CrossEyed]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

 

[coachjim]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

And TO and Folk owners as well.

 

[Toons]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Not so good for us Favre owners -- especially those with Garcia as his backup!

 

[Upchuck]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

And TO and Folk owners as well.

I've only got two of the three = Folk and Crayton. My main concern is ADP getting into the mix this week as he is my only other viable RB (LT is my main RB) and it is officially crunch time. Can't afford running just one RB any more!

 

[-OZ-]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

And TO and Folk owners as well.

As it would be for Romo owners.Only player I have here is Folk, but I'll take it. I agree with upchuck, it's far more important for me to get ADP, Jacobs, and Holmes back on the field. My guess is Jacobs and Holmes miss another week, which could be very costly to me.

 

[Ned]

favre out = ned out

grossman has to fill in favre's automatic 25+ pts

 

[Blueb]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

 

[BassNBrew]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

Funny that the head fbg projection guru missed this news. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/currentproj-wr.php38 Terry Glenn, DAL 34 * 60 38 28 40 26 42 35 39 34 30 * 35 34 38 30 39.1 35.0 38.5

53 Patrick Crayton, DAL 47 18 * 49 * * * 44 * * 56 * * 52 49 52 * 53.9 61.0 55.8

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/v...p;howrecent=200

Can you direct me to the site where this news was available as I would like to subscribe next year?

 

[Angry Beavers]

Farve out = Need a big game from VY!

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

Funny that the head fbg projection guru missed this news. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/currentproj-wr.php38 Terry Glenn, DAL 34 * 60 38 28 40 26 42 35 39 34 30 * 35 34 38 30 39.1 35.0 38.5

53 Patrick Crayton, DAL 47 18 * 49 * * * 44 * * 56 * * 52 49 52 * 53.9 61.0 55.8

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/v...p;howrecent=200

Can you direct me to the site where this news was available as I would like to subscribe next year?

BNB, You're better than this.Those predictions were last updated September 3rd.

You know darn well that Glenn was allegedly out for only a few weeks as of the first week of September and was even practicing as of Sept. 5th.

Blogger

 

[BassNBrew]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

Funny that the head fbg projection guru missed this news. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/currentproj-wr.php38 Terry Glenn, DAL 34 * 60 38 28 40 26 42 35 39 34 30 * 35 34 38 30 39.1 35.0 38.5

53 Patrick Crayton, DAL 47 18 * 49 * * * 44 * * 56 * * 52 49 52 * 53.9 61.0 55.8

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/v...p;howrecent=200

Can you direct me to the site where this news was available as I would like to subscribe next year?

BNB, You're better than this.Those predictions were last updated September 3rd.

You know darn well that Glenn was allegedly out for only a few weeks as of the first week of September and was even practicing as of Sept. 5th.

Blogger

That's not what your fellow staffer Bloom was implying above. "He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started."That's why I reference the 9-3 and forward rankings which were mostly pre-season rankings.

Crayton was a money pick and those who sniffed out the Glenn issue (or got lucky) deserve props.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

Funny that the head fbg projection guru missed this news. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/currentproj-wr.php38 Terry Glenn, DAL 34 * 60 38 28 40 26 42 35 39 34 30 * 35 34 38 30 39.1 35.0 38.5

53 Patrick Crayton, DAL 47 18 * 49 * * * 44 * * 56 * * 52 49 52 * 53.9 61.0 55.8

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/v...p;howrecent=200

Can you direct me to the site where this news was available as I would like to subscribe next year?

BNB, You're better than this.Those predictions were last updated September 3rd.

You know darn well that Glenn was allegedly out for only a few weeks as of the first week of September and was even practicing as of Sept. 5th.

Blogger

That's not what your fellow staffer Bloom was implying above. "He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started."That's why I reference the 9-3 and forward rankings which were mostly pre-season rankings.

Crayton was a money pick and those who sniffed out the Glenn issue (or got lucky) deserve props.

So just so I'm on the same page, exactly what are you calling into question, and whom?Bloom or Dodds?

Knowledge of Crayton / Glenn before the season or before 9/3?

 

[Upchuck]

Just being lazy, does anyone know the point totals for this week on Folk, Crayton, and Romo? Just curious and I'll be away from my computer most of the weekend. I need my 'fix' a little early.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Nice start for us Crayton owners.

Wow - 31.9% of entries have Crayton. Thats way more than I thought.

He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started.

Funny that the head fbg projection guru missed this news. http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/currentproj-wr.php38 Terry Glenn, DAL 34 * 60 38 28 40 26 42 35 39 34 30 * 35 34 38 30 39.1 35.0 38.5

53 Patrick Crayton, DAL 47 18 * 49 * * * 44 * * 56 * * 52 49 52 * 53.9 61.0 55.8

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/v...p;howrecent=200

Can you direct me to the site where this news was available as I would like to subscribe next year?

BNB, You're better than this.Those predictions were last updated September 3rd.

You know darn well that Glenn was allegedly out for only a few weeks as of the first week of September and was even practicing as of Sept. 5th.

Blogger

That's not what your fellow staffer Bloom was implying above. "He was an easy pick with the news about Glenn's knee before the season started."That's why I reference the 9-3 and forward rankings which were mostly pre-season rankings.

Crayton was a money pick and those who sniffed out the Glenn issue (or got lucky) deserve props.

I distinctly remember that the news that Glenn suffered a setback came before the deadline to submit contest entries on Sept 6 - there was a conflicting report about whether he would simply miss a few weeks or the entire year on the Cowboys website, but I know that as of the deadline, it was a sure thing that Crayton would at least start week 1 and 2, and that made him an easy choice at his price. Yes, he did practice on Wednesday, but we knew before kickoff Thursday night that the knee had a new problem.

 

[coachjim]

Hey guys. This is a free contest that I fully enjoy during the season as a sidelight to the leagues that I am in. I have been lucky enough to make the final 500 this year as well as last year. The last thing I want to read is that some guy is pointing the finger at someone else because he thought that guy had special knowledge.

I make my final selection the last possible moment just for reasons like this. You will note that I did not select Crayton though. My bad. I let a good one get away.

 

[Upchuck]

I distinctly remember that the news that Glenn suffered a setback came before the deadline to submit contest entries on Sept 6 - there was a conflicting report about whether he would simply miss a few weeks or the entire year on the Cowboys website, but I know that as of the deadline, it was a sure thing that Crayton would at least start week 1 and 2, and that made him an easy choice at his price.

Yup. I remember reading it somewhere also. That was also one the reasons I picked him up on my roster.

 

[Blueb]

Figured it was time to bump for the final "pre-elimination analysis". How's it looking for everyone?

Best of luck to 249 of you ..

 

[Steelers4Life]

I think that Addai's bad week and the Favre/Kitna combination is going to boot me out this week.

So close.

Assuming I'm right and I'm out, good luck to everyone who advances.

 

[coachjim]

Looks like 165 + for this week. Probably end up about 185 or so.

 

[ctriopelle]

Should take 160ish to move on this week. That said, I'm sitting on 146 right now...with basically only Welker-9ish and McGahee-7ish left to go. thank you to AD for making it back into the scoring column this week, Bush is dropping turds for me today!

 

[Upchuck]

197 plus Housh, C. Henry and Welker to play at WRs. WHOO HOO !!! (though I'd rather squeak by this week and 'save' the points for the next three.)

I'm baaaaackkkkkk.

 

[TheWick]

I'm out unless Maroney gets about 60 points :(

 

[Public Enemy]

93.55 for now. Need BIG games from McGahee, Parker and Welker.

 

[Blueb]

Should take 160ish to move on this week. That said, I'm sitting on 146 right now...with basically only Welker-9ish and McGahee-7ish left to go. thank you to AD for making it back into the scoring column this week, Bush is dropping turds for me today!

Huh. Im on 146 as well, with Welker/Demetrius Williams (7ish) and Mcgahee (7ish). Looks like we move on or get kicked out together...

 

[Gravedigger]

159.4 + FWP/McGahee -8, Welker/Henry -4.5, Wilcox -11.7, and BAL DF -10.

I'm not safe yet, but thanks to ADP and his twin brother AP, I've got a shot. Best of luck all.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

167.4 + (Welker - 11.5) thanks to a bunch of mediocre players staying healthy and playing well this week.

And I do mean mediocre. My starting lineup this week:

Vince Young

Adrian Peterson (CHI)

Deshaun Foster

Leon Washington

Isaac Bruce

Kevin Curtis

Devery Henderson

Bo Scaife

Nick Folk

Chicago DEf

With the exception of the kicker and defense, not a single one of those players would crack the starting lineup of a playoff-bound redraft team.

No shot at the title, but it would be cool to make the final 250.

 

[ctriopelle]

Should take 160ish to move on this week. That said, I'm sitting on 146 right now...with basically only Welker-9ish and McGahee-7ish left to go. thank you to AD for making it back into the scoring column this week, Bush is dropping turds for me today!

177.6 thanks to a big push at the end of the afternoon games. Ended up with McGahee -9.2 and Welker -9.1. 177+ has me dancing the happy finals dance! Anyone else from last year's finals locked in this year?

 

[The Man With No Name]

172.63 with Welker (-11.5) left. I hope he gets shut down as it is likely enough.