Joe Webb over Drew Brees ? (1 Viewer)

[Dez]

Quarterback

Michael Vick - PHI vs MIN

Aaron Rodgers - GB vs NYG

Josh Freeman - TB vs SEA

David Garrard - JAX vs WAS

Peyton Manning - IND at OAK

Tim Tebow - DEN vs HOU

Philip Rivers - SD at CIN

Tom Brady - NE at BUF

Matt Schaub - HOU at DEN

Jon Kitna - DAL at ARI

Ben Roethlisberger - PIT vs CAR

Joe Webb - MIN at PHI

Drew Brees - NO at ATL

I am sorry but if I am playing for my fantasy championship I am starting Drew Brees over Joe Webb at QB.

Freeman at 3, Garrard at 4, Tebow at 6 ?

Again I am starting Peyton Manning and Drew Brees for my championship over these guys.

I understand all the match up talk but what about not sitting your super studs ?

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.

This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

 

[Philo]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

 

[gethugefast1]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=577846

 

[Dez]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.We are talking rankings here and in any given week who knows how much difference there will be between players on a given week.I surely am not hitching my championship wagon to Joe Webb and sitting Drew Brees if I have both or if Webb is on the waiver wire which is exactly what these rankings tell us to do.

 

[thehornet]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.We are talking rankings here and in any given week who knows how much difference there will be between players on a given week.



I surely am not hitching my championship wagon to Joe Webb and sitting Drew Brees if I have both or if Webb is on the waiver wire which is exactly what these rankings tell us to do.

looks like you dont have a problem then. thanks for starting a useless thread about tuesday rankings.

 

[rizzler]

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Not that you should be using other ppls ranking as gospel...But Dodds is ranked as the #2 most accurate projector this season across all major sites... In other words, if you DO listen to ppls projections, he might be one you wanna listen ttherwise, zip it up.

 

[mbuehner]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

To create such a vanilla tier is meaningless, aside from cya I suppose.

 

[RJS113]

I don't see the problem here. These rankings are based on how FBG's thinks these players will do this week. Would I start Tim Tebow over Tom Brady? Absolutely not. Could Tebow outscore Brady this week? Of course. Tebow outscored Brady last week. But while FBG's may have Tebow rated higher than Brady, or Webb over Brees, there are several other factors you have to consider. The biggest one, IMO, is who do YOU think will score more points? Also, one thing I would certainly consider is, who is the safer play? While I think Tebow will outscore Brady this week, can I trust him enough to start him over Brady? Nothing wrong with having Webb and Tebow ranked this high. Vick, Brady, Brees, Rogers and Rivers aren't the top 5 QBs every week.

 

[plyka]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.We are talking rankings here and in any given week who knows how much difference there will be between players on a given week.



I surely am not hitching my championship wagon to Joe Webb and sitting Drew Brees if I have both or if Webb is on the waiver wire which is exactly what these rankings tell us to do.

looks like you dont have a problem then. thanks for starting a useless thread about tuesday rankings.

What is up with this intense urge most people have around here of "protecting" this website and its analysts? Almost seems like q childish attempt to curry favor with the "teacher." The OP brings up a legitimate point that any ranking which puts Webb ahead of brees is downright insane. Now there may be a logical explanation, and if there is give people some time to give it, or do it yourself. But attacking him for asking the question? That makes less sense than the rankings.

 

[davidwb]

beyond the obvious with regard to early-Tuesday rankings that will likely change as the week evolves, clearly players such as Tebow have the potential for a big points week -- but also have much greater variance than more established players such as Brees. as a result, the expected point value for a Tebow could be above Brees, but the potential for a disaster would also be much greater for a Tebow than a Brees.

the rankings are a good first pass at whom you might start, but you can't base your decision only on that -- this sort of variance analysis is also important. for example, Freeman has very little variance compared with almost any other starting QB, good or bad. he has only a modest upside from his usual performance, but also very little downside.

 

[charlie54]

I don't see the problem here. These rankings are based on how FBG's thinks these players will do this week. Would I start Tim Tebow over Tom Brady? Absolutely not. Could Tebow outscore Brady this week? Of course. Tebow outscored Brady last week. But while FBG's may have Tebow rated higher than Brady, or Webb over Brees, there are several other factors you have to consider. The biggest one, IMO, is who do YOU think will score more points? Also, one thing I would certainly consider is, who is the safer play? While I think Tebow will outscore Brady this week, can I trust him enough to start him over Brady? Nothing wrong with having Webb and Tebow ranked this high. Vick, Brady, Brees, Rogers and Rivers aren't the top 5 QBs every week.

absolutely right.last week's top qbs in my league:vickgrossmanelitebowriversbreeskitnaflynnschaubgarrardcutlerryanfitzmccoypeytonbig benfreemanstantonyou read that right- grossman, tebow, flynn, garrard and mccoy all outproduced peyton last week.reality check.

 

[Dr. Awesome]

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Not that you should be using other ppls ranking as gospel...But Dodds is ranked as the #2 most accurate projector this season across all major sites... In other words, if you DO listen to ppls projections, he might be one you wanna listen ttherwise, zip it up.

 

[gethugefast1]

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Not that you should be using other ppls ranking as gospel...But Dodds is ranked as the #2 most accurate projector this season across all major sites... In other words, if you DO listen to ppls projections, he might be one you wanna listen ttherwise, zip it up.

Yea, Like Vicks #1...right Dr. A? :(

 

[BassNBrew]

Quarterback

Michael Vick - PHI vs MIN

Aaron Rodgers - GB vs NYG

Josh Freeman - TB vs SEA

David Garrard - JAX vs WAS

Peyton Manning - IND at OAK

Tim Tebow - DEN vs HOU

Philip Rivers - SD at CIN

Tom Brady - NE at BUF

Matt Schaub - HOU at DEN

Jon Kitna - DAL at ARI

Ben Roethlisberger - PIT vs CAR

Joe Webb - MIN at PHI

Drew Brees - NO at ATL

I am sorry but if I am playing for my fantasy championship I am starting Drew Brees over Joe Webb at QB.

Freeman at 3, Garrard at 4, Tebow at 6 ?

Again I am starting Peyton Manning and Drew Brees for my championship over these guys.

I understand all the match up talk but what about not sitting your super studs ?

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.

This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Second best in the business according to this site... http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/

 

[nickel&dime]

Interestingly, so far this season, Yahoo's projections (powered by Accuscore) have been the best at predicting QB performance. They're not doing well in overall accuracy across the other positions, but somehow they're killing it for QB. FYI, David Dodds is ranked #10 for QB, but #2 overall thanks to strong RB accuracy. I'm getting all these accuracy scores from:

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/

For arguments sake, here are Yahoo's top QBs for this week based on my league's scoring (4 pts per passing TD):

1. Vick

2. Rodgers

3. Brees

4. Tebow

5. Freeman

6. P. Manning

7. Rivers

8. Brady

9. Schaub

10. Garrard

11. Kitna

12. Big Ben

13. Matt Ryan

14. E. Manning

15. Flacco

27. Sexy Rexy

28. Joe Webb

For one of my leagues I need to make a call between Tebow and Freeman (I know, how I got to the championship game is an enigma to me too). I dropped Kitna to pick up Tebow....not sure if that was a good move, but I like Freeman at home against Seattle better than Kitna on the road at Arizona. Now I just need to figure out if I'm going to look stupid as hell if I gamble with Tebow at home against Houston instead of sticking with Freeman.

I've got Brees in my other league...no way I can bench him for any of these "high upside" running QBs.

 

[Philo]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.

Anyone who looks at the rankings and says "OMG!!! He's got Garrard over Rivers!" and doesn't realize that 1) the difference between the two is 0.1 points, and, 2) their estimates in the first place, is an idiot. You don't just "play the highest ranked player" without scanning all the way over to the right side of the screen (I know... so much trouble to do, right???) and look at the projections themselves, then use that to help you make your decision.

Anyone who blindly starts QB#4 over QB#5 because 4 is higher than 5 is dumb.

 

[Philo]

BTW, Wednesday rankings have Brees over Webb. I looks like the Brees projections, though, are about the same, and it's just that Webb went down by 0.5 points. So nothing really changed, they're still bunched together in the one big tier that spans from QB2 to QB25. BFD.

 

[Philo]

I mean, really, how do people think this works? Each game is a separate event. What Webb does in his game has no effect on what Brees does in his. It's not like Dodds sits there and says "Hmm.... Webb has a good matchup, might go for 250 yards, BUT.... that would mean he'd outscore Brees, which isn't possible. If Webb is going to go for 250, then that means Brees must go for at least 251." Really people, use some common sense.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

 

[RJS113]

I mean, really, how do people think this works? Each game is a separate event. What Webb does in his game has no effect on what Brees does in his. It's not like Dodds sits there and says "Hmm.... Webb has a good matchup, might go for 250 yards, BUT.... that would mean he'd outscore Brees, which isn't possible. If Webb is going to go for 250, then that means Brees must go for at least 251." Really people, use some common sense.

 

[Dez]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.

Anyone who looks at the rankings and says "OMG!!! He's got Garrard over Rivers!" and doesn't realize that 1) the difference between the two is 0.1 points, and, 2) their estimates in the first place, is an idiot. You don't just "play the highest ranked player" without scanning all the way over to the right side of the screen (I know... so much trouble to do, right???) and look at the projections themselves, then use that to help you make your decision.

Anyone who blindly starts QB#4 over QB#5 because 4 is higher than 5 is dumb.

Then the site should not ranked the players.Rankings should be for what players you would play. It is stupid to have rankings if your going to play the lower ranked guy.

Call me names all you want for pointing out something legit that's fine I won't fire back calling you names because I am above that unlike you.

If your not going to use the rankings then why even bother having them or paying the site to give them to you.

So what your telling me is if I have Tebow and Brees and they are ranked that far apart I just pick Brees because that is what most people would do because he is the stud QB ?

Well if that is the case why even have rankings they are worthless if no one is actually using them based on "well your an idiot if you use the rankings, you don't just play the highest ranked player"

THEN WHY HAVE RANKINGS ?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

what kind of defense is that supposed to be?

 

[Philo]

How does your scoring system work?

Do you A) get 25 points for having the #1 QB of the week, 24 points for the #2 QB, 23 for the #3 QB, etc....?

Or do you B) get points for the QB passing for 25 yards, or for throwing a TD, or for rushing for 10 yards, etc...?

If your scoring system follows "A", then fine, look at the rankings. If you use "B", look at the projections.

 

[BassNBrew]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

Actuall results11 QB Cutler, Jay CHI 1 14 24 194 3 1 1 -1 0 0 20.6 12 QB Ryan, Matt ATL 1 20 35 174 3 1 6 6 0 0 20.3 13 QB McCoy, Colt CLE 1 19 25 243 2 0 0 0 0 0 20.1 14 QB Fitzpatrick, Ryan BUF 1 16 26 223 2 1 3 19 0 0 20.1 15 QB Roethlisberger, Ben PIT 1 23 44 264 1 0 2 25 0 0 19.7 16 QB Freeman, Josh TB 1 21 32 251 1 0 5 29 0 0 19.4 17 QB Manning, Peyton IND 1 29 39 229 2 0 0 0 0 0 19.4 18 QB Stanton, Drew DET 1 23 37 252 1 0 2 24 0 0 19.0 19 QB Collins, Kerry TEN 1 14 24 237 2 1 2 -2 0 0 18.7 20 QB Campbell, Jason OAK 1 15 26 238 1 2 5 41 0 0 18.0 21 QB Henne, Chad MIA 1 33 45 276 1 1 0 0 0 0 16.8 22 QB Flacco, Joe BAL 1 10 20 172 2 0 1 2 0 0 16.8 23 QB Brady, Tom NE 1 15 24 163 2 0 0 0 0 0 16.1 24 QB Sanchez, Mark NYJ 1 19 29 170 0 0 3 15 1 0 16.0Despite the huge variations in stats, the difference between the worst two starts in a 12 teamer last week and the worst starter in a 2 QB league was about 4 points.4 QB Rivers, Philip SD 1 19 25 273 3 0 0 0 0 0 25.6 5 QB Flynn, Matt GB 1 24 37 251 3 1 3 13 0 1 24.9 6 QB Tebow, Tim DEN 1 8 16 138 1 0 8 78 1 0 24.7 7 QB Brees, Drew NO 1 29 46 267 3 1 0 0 0 0 24.4A 1.2 point window captures two studs and two guys available on the waiver wire last week.

 

[Philo]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

What should happen? "Oh, let's see... Ryan Fitzpatrick would, on average, be expected to score 18 points this week. That must mean that Peyton Manning and Aaron Rogers, who are in totally different games, must score at least 28 points because there has to be separation between them!"Looking at averages for QBs in weekly points, the difference between QB2 (Brady) and QB20 (Shaun Hill) in my league (6 pt TDs, which separates things a bit more than 4 pt TDs) is only SIX points per week. So it looks like a tier or a bunching is completely normal on average.

 

[BassNBrew]

Here's a fun one from two weeks ago

10 QB Rivers, Philip SD 1 23 39 280 1 1 1 5 0 0 17.5

11 QB McNabb, Donovan WAS 1 26 44 296 1 2 2 5 0 1 17.3

12 QB Cutler, Jay CHI 1 21 26 234 1 0 5 12 0 1 16.9

13 QB Jackson, Tarvaris MIN 1 15 22 187 2 3 2 22 0 0 16.6

14 QB Palmer, Carson CIN 1 23 33 249 1 0 0 0 0 0 16.4

15 QB Ryan, Matt ATL 1 18 36 205 2 2 3 -3 0 0 15.9

16 QB Roethlisberger, Ben PIT 1 22 38 253 1 1 1 -1 0 0 15.5

17 QB Smith, Troy SF 1 10 25 194 1 1 3 28 0 0 15.5

18 QB Kitna, Jon DAL 1 18 26 167 1 0 4 28 0 0 15.1

19 QB Freeman, Josh TB 1 19 38 181 1 1 4 28 0 0 14.9

20 QB Delhomme, Jake CLE 1 24 34 217 1 0 4 -5 0 0 14.3

21 QB Cassel, Matt KC 1 17 31 196 1 0 2 5 0 0 14.3

22 QB Garrard, David JAX 1 14 19 126 0 0 10 19 1 0 14.2

 

[Philo]

It's like arguing who's hottest among identical quintuplets. The differences are so minor as to be negligible. That's where the Shark comes in with an analysis of deviations... while Brady may average 23 points per week, say, it's up to the Shark to realize when there's a good matchup that changes his range, from his floor to his ceiling. Against a stout pass D, his floor might be 11 FP (his worst output of this season), but he can always get lucky on a bomb or two and his ceiling against the same D might be 28 FP. The projection might be "22.5 FP", but you have to know how likely he hits at least that number, and if the +/- is maybe 6 points or 8 or 12. Same if he's against a weaker D, he might be projected to score "27.8 FP", but his floor might be high at 23 and his ceiling could be 41 if he gets lucky (highest score this season) on things that can't be reasonably projected (nor should anyone try to).... blown coverage, a safety getting injured, unexpected call goes his way, lucky tipped pass, etc. There's a 5 FP difference between those two projections, but the ceiling/floor range analysis tells a totally different story.

Fantasy Football is like draw poker. You can project how likely you are to hit a certain hand, but that only tells you half the story. You have to analzye some other things (size of the pot, size of your stacks, how many players, size of the bets) to make the correct play.

 

[[icon]]

People whined that the Wednesday projections weren't fast enough.

Dodds explained that it takes until wed to accurately look over the data and create good projections

To make people happy, they release a preliminary set of projections on Tuesday based solely on Computer models (not looked over/tweaked)

PEople now whine that the tuesday projections aren't pefectly accurate.

PRoof of the theorem:

You will NEVER make everyone happy... some folks just look for #### to whine about.

 

[[icon]]

Quarterback

Michael Vick - PHI vs MIN

Aaron Rodgers - GB vs NYG

Josh Freeman - TB vs SEA

David Garrard - JAX vs WAS

Peyton Manning - IND at OAK

Tim Tebow - DEN vs HOU

Philip Rivers - SD at CIN

Tom Brady - NE at BUF

Matt Schaub - HOU at DEN

Jon Kitna - DAL at ARI

Ben Roethlisberger - PIT vs CAR

Joe Webb - MIN at PHI

Drew Brees - NO at ATL

I am sorry but if I am playing for my fantasy championship I am starting Drew Brees over Joe Webb at QB.

Freeman at 3, Garrard at 4, Tebow at 6 ?

Again I am starting Peyton Manning and Drew Brees for my championship over these guys.

I understand all the match up talk but what about not sitting your super studs ?

Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.

This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Since your thoughts are more accurate than dodds then you should go ahead win $1000 for your superior knowledge.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

Actuall results11 QB Cutler, Jay CHI 1 14 24 194 3 1 1 -1 0 0 20.6 12 QB Ryan, Matt ATL 1 20 35 174 3 1 6 6 0 0 20.3 13 QB McCoy, Colt CLE 1 19 25 243 2 0 0 0 0 0 20.1 14 QB Fitzpatrick, Ryan BUF 1 16 26 223 2 1 3 19 0 0 20.1 15 QB Roethlisberger, Ben PIT 1 23 44 264 1 0 2 25 0 0 19.7 16 QB Freeman, Josh TB 1 21 32 251 1 0 5 29 0 0 19.4 17 QB Manning, Peyton IND 1 29 39 229 2 0 0 0 0 0 19.4 18 QB Stanton, Drew DET 1 23 37 252 1 0 2 24 0 0 19.0 19 QB Collins, Kerry TEN 1 14 24 237 2 1 2 -2 0 0 18.7 20 QB Campbell, Jason OAK 1 15 26 238 1 2 5 41 0 0 18.0 21 QB Henne, Chad MIA 1 33 45 276 1 1 0 0 0 0 16.8 22 QB Flacco, Joe BAL 1 10 20 172 2 0 1 2 0 0 16.8 23 QB Brady, Tom NE 1 15 24 163 2 0 0 0 0 0 16.1 24 QB Sanchez, Mark NYJ 1 19 29 170 0 0 3 15 1 0 16.0Despite the huge variations in stats, the difference between the worst two starts in a 12 teamer last week and the worst starter in a 2 QB league was about 4 points.4 QB Rivers, Philip SD 1 19 25 273 3 0 0 0 0 0 25.6 5 QB Flynn, Matt GB 1 24 37 251 3 1 3 13 0 1 24.9 6 QB Tebow, Tim DEN 1 8 16 138 1 0 8 78 1 0 24.7 7 QB Brees, Drew NO 1 29 46 267 3 1 0 0 0 0 24.4A 1.2 point window captures two studs and two guys available on the waiver wire last week.

Guess that would be relevant had I asked about #11 to #25.

 

[JuniorNB]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

The rankings are for people to play the highest ranked player.

Anyone who looks at the rankings and says "OMG!!! He's got Garrard over Rivers!" and doesn't realize that 1) the difference between the two is 0.1 points, and, 2) their estimates in the first place, is an idiot. You don't just "play the highest ranked player" without scanning all the way over to the right side of the screen (I know... so much trouble to do, right???) and look at the projections themselves, then use that to help you make your decision.

Anyone who blindly starts QB#4 over QB#5 because 4 is higher than 5 is dumb.

Call me names all you want for pointing out something legit that's fine I won't fire back calling you names because I am above that unlike you.

Are you above using commas, as well?

 

[BassNBrew]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

Actuall results11 QB Cutler, Jay CHI 1 14 24 194 3 1 1 -1 0 0 20.6 12 QB Ryan, Matt ATL 1 20 35 174 3 1 6 6 0 0 20.3 13 QB McCoy, Colt CLE 1 19 25 243 2 0 0 0 0 0 20.1 14 QB Fitzpatrick, Ryan BUF 1 16 26 223 2 1 3 19 0 0 20.1 15 QB Roethlisberger, Ben PIT 1 23 44 264 1 0 2 25 0 0 19.7 16 QB Freeman, Josh TB 1 21 32 251 1 0 5 29 0 0 19.4 17 QB Manning, Peyton IND 1 29 39 229 2 0 0 0 0 0 19.4 18 QB Stanton, Drew DET 1 23 37 252 1 0 2 24 0 0 19.0 19 QB Collins, Kerry TEN 1 14 24 237 2 1 2 -2 0 0 18.7 20 QB Campbell, Jason OAK 1 15 26 238 1 2 5 41 0 0 18.0 21 QB Henne, Chad MIA 1 33 45 276 1 1 0 0 0 0 16.8 22 QB Flacco, Joe BAL 1 10 20 172 2 0 1 2 0 0 16.8 23 QB Brady, Tom NE 1 15 24 163 2 0 0 0 0 0 16.1 24 QB Sanchez, Mark NYJ 1 19 29 170 0 0 3 15 1 0 16.0Despite the huge variations in stats, the difference between the worst two starts in a 12 teamer last week and the worst starter in a 2 QB league was about 4 points.4 QB Rivers, Philip SD 1 19 25 273 3 0 0 0 0 0 25.6 5 QB Flynn, Matt GB 1 24 37 251 3 1 3 13 0 1 24.9 6 QB Tebow, Tim DEN 1 8 16 138 1 0 8 78 1 0 24.7 7 QB Brees, Drew NO 1 29 46 267 3 1 0 0 0 0 24.4A 1.2 point window captures two studs and two guys available on the waiver wire last week.

Guess that would be relevant had I asked about #11 to #25.

As a Wreck fan I figured I stick to subject that you know about...mid-tier to sub-par performances.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

As pointed out ad nauseum, the difference between QB2, the next-best-to-Vick, best possible option, and QB25, the almost unrosterable, unstartable, unusuable QB is FOUR POINTS in the projections. Right now, it's all one big tier. To discuss relative rankings within such a tight bunch is meaningless.

What's the point of projections if #2 to #25 are basically the same?

Actuall results11 QB Cutler, Jay CHI 1 14 24 194 3 1 1 -1 0 0 20.6 12 QB Ryan, Matt ATL 1 20 35 174 3 1 6 6 0 0 20.3 13 QB McCoy, Colt CLE 1 19 25 243 2 0 0 0 0 0 20.1 14 QB Fitzpatrick, Ryan BUF 1 16 26 223 2 1 3 19 0 0 20.1 15 QB Roethlisberger, Ben PIT 1 23 44 264 1 0 2 25 0 0 19.7 16 QB Freeman, Josh TB 1 21 32 251 1 0 5 29 0 0 19.4 17 QB Manning, Peyton IND 1 29 39 229 2 0 0 0 0 0 19.4 18 QB Stanton, Drew DET 1 23 37 252 1 0 2 24 0 0 19.0 19 QB Collins, Kerry TEN 1 14 24 237 2 1 2 -2 0 0 18.7 20 QB Campbell, Jason OAK 1 15 26 238 1 2 5 41 0 0 18.0 21 QB Henne, Chad MIA 1 33 45 276 1 1 0 0 0 0 16.8 22 QB Flacco, Joe BAL 1 10 20 172 2 0 1 2 0 0 16.8 23 QB Brady, Tom NE 1 15 24 163 2 0 0 0 0 0 16.1 24 QB Sanchez, Mark NYJ 1 19 29 170 0 0 3 15 1 0 16.0Despite the huge variations in stats, the difference between the worst two starts in a 12 teamer last week and the worst starter in a 2 QB league was about 4 points.4 QB Rivers, Philip SD 1 19 25 273 3 0 0 0 0 0 25.6 5 QB Flynn, Matt GB 1 24 37 251 3 1 3 13 0 1 24.9 6 QB Tebow, Tim DEN 1 8 16 138 1 0 8 78 1 0 24.7 7 QB Brees, Drew NO 1 29 46 267 3 1 0 0 0 0 24.4A 1.2 point window captures two studs and two guys available on the waiver wire last week.

Guess that would be relevant had I asked about #11 to #25.

As a Wreck fan I figured I stick to subject that you know about...mid-tier to sub-par performances.

As a Tarheel fan, I'm not surprised you have trouble reading. What's your point?

 

[BassNBrew]

Quarterback Michael Vick - PHI vs MIN Aaron Rodgers - GB vs NYG Josh Freeman - TB vs SEA David Garrard - JAX vs WAS Peyton Manning - IND at OAK Tim Tebow - DEN vs HOU Philip Rivers - SD at CIN Tom Brady - NE at BUF Matt Schaub - HOU at DEN Jon Kitna - DAL at ARI Ben Roethlisberger - PIT vs CAR Joe Webb - MIN at PHI Drew Brees - NO at ATL I am sorry but if I am playing for my fantasy championship I am starting Drew Brees over Joe Webb at QB.Freeman at 3, Garrard at 4, Tebow at 6 ?Again I am starting Peyton Manning and Drew Brees for my championship over these guys.I understand all the match up talk but what about not sitting your super studs ?Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Tebow - 29 ptsFreeman - 34 ptsGarrand - 29 ptsManning - 21 ptsSo what's bad? Your posting or the rankings?

 

[Go deep]

Quarterback Michael Vick - PHI vs MIN Aaron Rodgers - GB vs NYG Josh Freeman - TB vs SEA David Garrard - JAX vs WAS Peyton Manning - IND at OAK Tim Tebow - DEN vs HOU Philip Rivers - SD at CIN Tom Brady - NE at BUF Matt Schaub - HOU at DEN Jon Kitna - DAL at ARI Ben Roethlisberger - PIT vs CAR Joe Webb - MIN at PHI Drew Brees - NO at ATL I am sorry but if I am playing for my fantasy championship I am starting Drew Brees over Joe Webb at QB.Freeman at 3, Garrard at 4, Tebow at 6 ?Again I am starting Peyton Manning and Drew Brees for my championship over these guys.I understand all the match up talk but what about not sitting your super studs ?Good grief these rankings are bad to send out to people who actually pay for these.This is the advice the site gives ? Start also ran QB's in your title game over the uber studs.

Tebow - 29 ptsFreeman - 34 ptsGarrand - 29 ptsManning - 21 ptsSo what's bad? Your posting or the rankings?

Is this suppose to be this weeks results?