Joe Webb (2 Viewers)

[Football Critic]

Ok, lets be real about this...

Does anyone really think they will start a guy they just signed in Ramsey over a young guy who has been around all season and has not got a shot yet in Webb, with nothing really to play for?

We know Favre is not gonna play thats why they signed Ramsey, if TJax dont play Webb is the guy with TJax being the emergency #3.

I think Webb is a major sleeper this week and can put up decent wr 3 numbers in a td heavy league.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Good thing they didn't have fantasy football in the 60's and early 70's because there would have been a lot of confusion with Paul Hornung (RB/K), Gino Cappelletti (WR/K) and George Blanda (QB/K).

Confusion?Or Points? .... And what would be so wrong with that? I'll take Blanda at 1.1.

 

[rooney98]

Per Judd Zulgad as posted to Rotoworld at 7:30 pm ET Wednesday night

Joe Webb looks like Vikings' Week 15 starter

http://www.rotoworld.com/content/HeadLines...L&hl=195292

According to Judd Zulgad of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, it "sounds like" rookie Joe Webb will be the Vikings' starting quarterback on Monday Night Football against the Bears.

And he's going to make an interesting flex play in fantasy leagues. A number of scoring formats list Webb as a "QB, WR" because he was originally drafted to play wideout. Webb therefore has receiver eligibility, and isn't a bad bet for 30-plus rushing yards, about 130 passing, and perhaps a touchdown despite a highly unfavorable matchup and conditions at TCF Bank Stadium. It's bad news, of course, for Vikings pass catchers. Dec. 15 - 7:30 pm et

 

[travdogg]

Well, I feel pretty confident the Bears win the divison this week. Bears D will probably be the best defense this side of Pittsburgh this week.

In the long run, this is good for the Vikings. I found it funny that people were actually clamoring for Favre to be benched so they could see if Jackson was the future at QB, its like those people forgot Jackson had multiple shots and failed or got hurt every time, usually both. Webb will at least be something different, but ultimately the Vikings 2011 starter isn't on the team unless its Brett Favre, and that looks increasingly unlikely.

 

[Utter Chaos]

Good thing they didn't have fantasy football in the 60's and early 70's because there would have been a lot of confusion with Paul Hornung (RB/K), Gino Cappelletti (WR/K) and George Blanda (QB/K).

Confusion?Or Points? .... And what would be so wrong with that? I'll take Blanda at 1.1.

Confusion on which position they are eligible to play. Can you imagine having Blanda as your kicker?1961Kicking: 64 out of 65 extra points and 16 out of 26 field goals. That's an average of 8 points a week.Passing: 3330 yards, 36 touchdowns, 22 interceptions. That's 15.6 points a week (using 1/25 yards, 3/TD, -1/INT)So you could be getting 23.6 points a week from you kicker!

 

[shotgun72]

So if he throws for 120, runs for 40 and throws a TD, I would get around 22 pts if I start him at wr?

 

[gethugefast1]

So if he throws for 120, runs for 40 and throws a TD, I would get around 22 pts if I start him at wr?

My league only gives 1pt/25pass yards. W/ur example I'd get 12 points. But add a rushing TD...18

 

[Football Critic]

Does anyone know if he practiced and took the first team reps today?

 

[rooney98]

I have yet to be able to find information on who took the first team reps. @JuddZulgad on twiiter is Judd Zulgad. Judd is the top local NFL beat reporter. Right now, at this point, he thinks that Joe Webb is going to start.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

So if he throws for 120, runs for 40 and throws a TD, I would get around 22 pts if I start him at wr?

how would we know what your scoring system is?in my league there were 12 qb's who scored 15+ last week, and another 6 in double digits --- so total of 18 at 10+.some guys who didn't hit 10 were eli manning, clausen, fitzpatrick, sanchez, palmer, stanton, henne, cutler.brodie croyle and henne put up a point, john skelton put up 4.I'm posting all this to question whether starting the guy at wr is a clever abuse of the system, or are you just outsmarting yourself to try and do the clever thing.

 

[Jeromen]

I grabbed him in a league that is 1 yard= 1 point and TDs= 15. If he starts he is WR1 for me.

 

[thehornet]

Can a FBG writer chime in on this please? Not on the ethical issue, but his outlook as playing him as a WR? Who does he rank ahead of for WR's this week?

 

[faulknromos]

If he is starting, I'm starting him at WR and don't feel 1 bit of remorse. I have seen him play a lot in person and TV.

He was drafted as a WR? Worked out at UAB pro day as a WR after he missed the combine? He's an athletic freak. 42.5 Vertical, 11.05 Broad Jump, 21 reps, 4.44 40, 6.71 3 cone, 4.04 shuttle.

The MOST athletic WR coming into the draft.

He'll put up decent stats throwing the ball. 100 is the floor IMO.

 

[Jimbo Slice]

I picked Webb up. And I figured out my plan.

I start 2-2-flex. I'm starting AP Stewart and mcfadden as my 2 rb's and my flex. Andre Johnson is starting as my wr1. My options for wr2 are Jennings Austin or Santana moss. It will be Jennings if rodgers plays, if not, I'll put Webb in as my wr2. If he doesn't start or I #### out, I can drop gerhardt from my bench for Earl bennet before Monday's game and plug him in. Am I crazy? Like a fox!?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

If he is starting, I'm starting him at WR and don't feel 1 bit of remorse. I have seen him play a lot in person and TV.

He was drafted as a WR? Worked out at UAB pro day as a WR after he missed the combine? He's an athletic freak. 42.5 Vertical, 11.05 Broad Jump, 21 reps, 4.44 40, 6.71 3 cone, 4.04 shuttle.

The MOST athletic WR coming into the draft.

He'll put up decent stats throwing the ball. 100 is the floor IMO.

Well, this prompted me to look up Joe Webb's stats from the preseason. What I found surprised me. Take a lookassing:

Player Att Comp Yds Comp % Yds/Att TD TD % INT INT % Long Sck Sack/Lost Rating

Joe Webb 30 17 __191 56.7 ________6.4 _3 __10.0 __1 ___3.3 ___63 __2 16 _________95.3

Rushing:

Player Att Yds Yds/Att Long TD

Joe Webb 11 126 11.5 48 1

He led the team in preseason rushing, including almost double the nearest RB. he also had the most pass attempts.

Here's some video.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...No-ordinary-Joe

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlig...-48-yard-TD-run

Not bad.

 

[Football Critic]

Personally, I'm drooling over this chance at points.

The kid has nothing to lose and no hamstring is gonna stop him from his chance. I belive he is a huge advantage in leagues like a yahoo TD where he is a qb/wr, especially this time of year when the ww is bare. I hope he starts as I think he can throw for a few yards run for some as well and get 1 maybe 2 scores if we r lucky. his upside is huge.... a slick stratagy is starting the Chicago defense as well just incase he has a bad game, lol.

 

[UnderDawgs]

Did anyone see this on Yahoo this morning?:

New player notes Wed, Dec 15

Webb is still dealing with a hamstring injury, head coach Leslie Frazier told KFAN 1130 am Minneapolis. Frazier added that Webb would start this week if he's healthy and Tarvaris Jackson (turf toe) and Brett Favre (shoulder) can't play.

Recommendation: Webb hurt his hamstring two weeks ago and it sounds like he aggravated the injury in Monday's loss to the Giants. With all three quarterbacks uncertain for this week, the Vikings signed quarterback Patrick Ramsey on Wednesday.

(Rotowire.com)

 

[Warrior]

Not even a good argument, nor in the same boat.

Brady has never played WR, Webb was a QB/WR when he came into the league. I know YOU may not like it, but that dont make it wrong.

If he is listed as a dual position player by your leagues website, then he is a QB/WR no matter what you think or your argument, all your doing is changing rules c uz you dont like them from what i see.

Obviously the Brady example was a bit dramatic. But let me ask you this then... If a team loses their starting QB and all of the backups in the same game, they would need to put in someone and it would likely be a CB or WR (I thought I heard the announcers this past weekend say that Charles Woodson was the backup to Flynn?). So by your definition, we should be able to put Charles Woodson in at QB? Or you should complain to Yahoo and have them change Woodson's status? What is wrong with having a rule in place to ensure that players are used for their real purpose?Yahoo is the only website that has Webb listed at a QB/WR... the only one. We ran into this problem with Yahoo Colston's rookie year we took our league straight to MFL and have never looked back.

Now, based on the feedback that I've received here, I agree that my wording can use some work. I may change it in the offseason to state that players will be listed as they are on the official team website?

But you keep fighting the good fight :(

Nope, because Woodson wasn't drafted to play QB for the Packers. Nice try though, Stalin

 

[Football Critic]

Not even a good argument, nor in the same boat.

Brady has never played WR, Webb was a QB/WR when he came into the league. I know YOU may not like it, but that dont make it wrong.

If he is listed as a dual position player by your leagues website, then he is a QB/WR no matter what you think or your argument, all your doing is changing rules c uz you dont like them from what i see.

Obviously the Brady example was a bit dramatic. But let me ask you this then... If a team loses their starting QB and all of the backups in the same game, they would need to put in someone and it would likely be a CB or WR (I thought I heard the announcers this past weekend say that Charles Woodson was the backup to Flynn?). So by your definition, we should be able to put Charles Woodson in at QB? Or you should complain to Yahoo and have them change Woodson's status? What is wrong with having a rule in place to ensure that players are used for their real purpose?Yahoo is the only website that has Webb listed at a QB/WR... the only one. We ran into this problem with Yahoo Colston's rookie year we took our league straight to MFL and have never looked back.

Now, based on the feedback that I've received here, I agree that my wording can use some work. I may change it in the offseason to state that players will be listed as they are on the official team website?

But you keep fighting the good fight

Nope, because Woodson wasn't drafted to play QB for the Packers. Nice try though, Stalin

Who the one putting up the fight? Your examples are not only in the same bout, but they are down right dumb. Fact: If your site lists players at certain positions and you dont like it, use a different site or allow them to use the players, no in between....if there is an in between, its a dictatorship.

 

[gethugefast1]

Rotoworld

Chris Wesseling

Football Daily Dose

According to Judd Zulgad of the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, it "sounds like" rookie Joe Webb will start Monday Night Football against the Bears. As Rotoworld's Evan Silva points out, Webb could make for an interesting flex play in Yahoo leagues where he maintains wide receiver eligibility. I'd suggest ensuring that Yahoo doesn't correct that in the next few days before finalizing lineups this weekend.

 

[munygon2]

I didn't think Yahoo would change it mid-season. They haven't changed Woodhead's status.

 

[Jersey35]

As commissioner, I'd take a look at these on a case-by-case basis, with the default position being the one listed by NFL.com (the most official source available) but the ultimate ruling to be made by me.

If I know Webb is expected to play 90+% of his snaps at QB, I'm allowing him to be starting at QB, not WR. Same would go for Colston way back when. He's starting as a WR, so I'd allow him to be played as a WR, not a TE.

Someone like Kordell, back in the day, was starting at QB and as such would be playable as a QB (with the added bonus of getting some WR opportunities thrown in).

The situation could change weekly, but I'm not interested in giving one team some form of loophole to exploit because of what amounts to a clerical error on the part of our fantasy football service.

 

[Football Critic]

On your Yahoo! fantasy sports home page....

"Razzle Dazzle"

(Picture of Webb)

"Playoff time means throwing caution to the wind, like sneaking a second starting quarterback into your Week 15 lineup."

Yahoo! is well aware and are showing it, they will ander as many people as they may help if they change it, and they have not change football position eligibility in midseason going all the way back to Colston.

I'm startin Webb...like it says above...you need to make a move like this to pull it off sometimes this late in the year.

 

[Jed]

Wow would this be huge in Yahoo leagues if Webb started.

 

[Football Critic]

As commissioner, I'd take a look at these on a case-by-case basis, with the default position being the one listed by NFL.com (the most official source available) but the ultimate ruling to be made by me.If I know Webb is expected to play 90+% of his snaps at QB, I'm allowing him to be starting at QB, not WR. Same would go for Colston way back when. He's starting as a WR, so I'd allow him to be played as a WR, not a TE.Someone like Kordell, back in the day, was starting at QB and as such would be playable as a QB (with the added bonus of getting some WR opportunities thrown in).The situation could change weekly, but I'm not interested in giving one team some form of loophole to exploit because of what amounts to a clerical error on the part of our fantasy football service.

I love the commishes throwing their weight, glad I'm not in some of these leagues with this guy.I love how you say I, I'd, I'm...its not about you, its about the league. You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

Surprised some of my leaguemates haven't picked up on this yet - I'm over the amount of moves allowed in this league - I think I need to tip off the guys in the seperate playoff bracket so my opponent doesn't start this guy.

 

[Tat]

Did anyone see this on Yahoo this morning?:New player notes Wed, Dec 15Webb is still dealing with a hamstring injury, head coach Leslie Frazier told KFAN 1130 am Minneapolis. Frazier added that Webb would start this week if he's healthy and Tarvaris Jackson (turf toe) and Brett Favre (shoulder) can't play.Recommendation: Webb hurt his hamstring two weeks ago and it sounds like he aggravated the injury in Monday's loss to the Giants. With all three quarterbacks uncertain for this week, the Vikings signed quarterback Patrick Ramsey on Wednesday.(Rotowire.com)

not buying the hype. Even though he's a fellow Blazer, hurt hammy, bitter cold, and 8 man fronts don't sound good for Joe.

 

[gethugefast1]

I didn't think Yahoo would change it mid-season. They haven't changed Woodhead's status.

McCluster is still listed as WR?RB also.

 

[gethugefast1]

I didn't think Yahoo would change it mid-season. They haven't changed Woodhead's status.

McCluster is still listed as WR?RB also.

 

[gethugefast1]

I didn't think Yahoo would change it mid-season. They haven't changed Woodhead's status.

McCluster is still listed as WR/RB also.

 

[kface]

I picked him up and if he's starting i'm going to start him at wr....give him 30yds rushing, 150yds passing and 1td i would think...in our league that's 15 pts

a wr would require 100 yds and a td to match that...its possible but that's really your min for webb if he plays the whole game

 

[FinHead]

I dropped Crabtree to pick up Webb, but not sure I'd risk playing him in a start 3 WR PPR over Calvin, Ocho, M. Williams, M. Williams.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

I picked him up and if he's starting i'm going to start him at wr....give him 30yds rushing, 150yds passing and 1td i would think...in our league that's 15 ptsa wr would require 100 yds and a td to match that...its possible but that's really your min for webb if he plays the whole game

Depends - do you get minus pts for ints and fumbles?Last week Orton got me -0.86The previous week Collins got me 2 fantasy pts.I wouldn't take either of those numbers from a WR3.

 

[CrossEyed]

Hey, I think McCluster is still listed at WR/RB.

 

[zftcg]

Leaving aside any ethical considerations, and assuming Webb does get the start, is he really that strong of a play? Rookie making his first start for a struggling team against a top-tier defense, on Monday Night Football, outdoors in arctic temperatures.

By point of comparison: My league is pretty generous to QBs (20 yds/pt, 0.25 PPC, 6pts/TD), and vs San Diego last week, a similarly overmatched Brody Croyle put up 3.75 points. So while I like the *idea* of playing Webb at WR, in practice this might not be the week to try it.

 

[kface]

Leaving aside any ethical considerations, and assuming Webb does get the start, is he really that strong of a play? Rookie making his first start for a struggling team against a top-tier defense, on Monday Night Football, outdoors in arctic temperatures.By point of comparison: My league is pretty generous to QBs (20 yds/pt, 0.25 PPC, 6pts/TD), and vs San Diego last week, a similarly overmatched Brody Croyle put up 3.75 points. So while I like the *idea* of playing Webb at WR, in practice this might not be the week to try it.

I would agree on the wait and see approach but the two things are1) don't let the competitors pick him up2) if he does well start him next week

 

[inca911]

You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

As a commisioner, he is simply following the NFL.com official position description for the player, and is smartly not using an unofficial player position designation such as the ones created by Yahoo. Yahoo isn't "noticing" this player has a dual position, it is arbitrarily inventing a 100% fictional position description that does not exist in any official source. There are no "dual position" players in any of the official NFL player listings.To me, using Webb as a WR demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and general sportsmanship. If you want to "win" your league by using Webb, then it is clear just how much (or how little) your integrity is worth.

 

[jdubs952]

Leaving aside any ethical considerations, and assuming Webb does get the start, is he really that strong of a play? Rookie making his first start for a struggling team against a top-tier defense, on Monday Night Football, outdoors in arctic temperatures.By point of comparison: My league is pretty generous to QBs (20 yds/pt, 0.25 PPC, 6pts/TD), and vs San Diego last week, a similarly overmatched Brody Croyle put up 3.75 points. So while I like the *idea* of playing Webb at WR, in practice this might not be the week to try it.

Did they definitely decide on playing this game outdoors? This is also a running quarterback. I will start him with confidence over Mike Thomas, Ivory (Depending on the hammy), Dixon, & Maurice Morris.

 

[Jersey35]

As commissioner, I'd take a look at these on a case-by-case basis, with the default position being the one listed by NFL.com (the most official source available) but the ultimate ruling to be made by me.If I know Webb is expected to play 90+% of his snaps at QB, I'm allowing him to be starting at QB, not WR. Same would go for Colston way back when. He's starting as a WR, so I'd allow him to be played as a WR, not a TE.Someone like Kordell, back in the day, was starting at QB and as such would be playable as a QB (with the added bonus of getting some WR opportunities thrown in).The situation could change weekly, but I'm not interested in giving one team some form of loophole to exploit because of what amounts to a clerical error on the part of our fantasy football service.

I love the commishes throwing their weight, glad I'm not in some of these leagues with this guy.I love how you say I, I'd, I'm...its not about you, its about the league. You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

At what point did I change the rules? We have our own bylaws and it's not in our best interest to allow the flaws and decisions of MFL, Yahoo, or ESPN to dictate what we do. Yes, I rule with an iron fist when it comes to preventing owners from EXPLOITING loopholes.Perhaps I should have clarified, however. If a player is legitimately playing at two positions, he remains an option at both positions. Colston NEVER played TE for the Saints his rookie season (if I recall correctly) and allowing someone to start him at TE because our chosen fantasy site incorrectly had him listed as one would have been a gross injustice and would likely have tainted that season.What the heck is a commissioner for if he isn't there to step in when people attempt to take advantage of a loophole? Yea, it's true: guys who try to lawyer the rules and take advantage of loopholes or gaps in our rules aren't as happy in my league as they might be in others. But we also have less of that going on and an incredibly robust and active league.*Edited to add: I'm the guy who picked up Webb, and I don't think I'd allow him to start at WR this week - but I'd have to take a closer look at the situation to be certain.

 

[Football Critic]

You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

As a commisioner, he is simply following the NFL.com official position description for the player, and is smartly not using an unofficial player position designation such as the ones created by Yahoo. Yahoo isn't "noticing" this player has a dual position, it is arbitrarily inventing a 100% fictional position description that does not exist in any official source. There are no "dual position" players in any of the official NFL player listings.To me, using Webb as a WR demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and general sportsmanship. If you want to "win" your league by using Webb, then it is clear just how much (or how little) your integrity is worth.

My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... But for what its worth.....I want titles, I dont give a dang about integrity when it comes to being champ anyways.

 

[Jersey35]

You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

As a commisioner, he is simply following the NFL.com official position description for the player, and is smartly not using an unofficial player position designation such as the ones created by Yahoo. Yahoo isn't "noticing" this player has a dual position, it is arbitrarily inventing a 100% fictional position description that does not exist in any official source. There are no "dual position" players in any of the official NFL player listings.To me, using Webb as a WR demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and general sportsmanship. If you want to "win" your league by using Webb, then it is clear just how much (or how little) your integrity is worth.

My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... But for what its worth.....I want titles, I dont give a dang about integrity when it comes to being champ anyways.

For clarification, which "rules" are you referring to when you say "My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... "?

 

[Football Critic]

As commissioner, I'd take a look at these on a case-by-case basis, with the default position being the one listed by NFL.com (the most official source available) but the ultimate ruling to be made by me.

If I know Webb is expected to play 90+% of his snaps at QB, I'm allowing him to be starting at QB, not WR. Same would go for Colston way back when. He's starting as a WR, so I'd allow him to be played as a WR, not a TE.

Someone like Kordell, back in the day, was starting at QB and as such would be playable as a QB (with the added bonus of getting some WR opportunities thrown in).

The situation could change weekly, but I'm not interested in giving one team some form of loophole to exploit because of what amounts to a clerical error on the part of our fantasy football service.

I love the commishes throwing their weight, glad I'm not in some of these leagues with this guy.I love how you say I, I'd, I'm...its not about you, its about the league. You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

At what point did I change the rules? We have our own bylaws and it's not in our best interest to allow the flaws and decisions of MFL, Yahoo, or ESPN to dictate what we do. Yes, I rule with an iron fist when it comes to preventing owners from EXPLOITING loopholes.Perhaps I should have clarified, however. If a player is legitimately playing at two positions, he remains an option at both positions. Colston NEVER played TE for the Saints his rookie season (if I recall correctly) and allowing someone to start him at TE because our chosen fantasy site incorrectly had him listed as one would have been a gross injustice and would likely have tainted that season.

What the heck is a commissioner for if he isn't there to step in when people attempt to take advantage of a loophole? Yea, it's true: guys who try to lawyer the rules and take advantage of loopholes or gaps in our rules aren't as happy in my league as they might be in others. But we also have less of that going on and an incredibly robust and active league.

*Edited to add: I'm the guy who picked up Webb, and I don't think I'd allow him to start at WR this week - but I'd have to take a closer look at the situation to be certain.

This is my point, your trying to take control over a situation which you should not be allowed to. You are not the person who determines what a players position eligibility is, the site determines it. In leagues where commishes like you who try to take full control, this is the issue...Thank god for Yahoo for making the determination instead of someone who is part of the title contention, cuz there is no bias there.

 

[Football Critic]

You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

As a commisioner, he is simply following the NFL.com official position description for the player, and is smartly not using an unofficial player position designation such as the ones created by Yahoo. Yahoo isn't "noticing" this player has a dual position, it is arbitrarily inventing a 100% fictional position description that does not exist in any official source. There are no "dual position" players in any of the official NFL player listings.To me, using Webb as a WR demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and general sportsmanship. If you want to "win" your league by using Webb, then it is clear just how much (or how little) your integrity is worth.

My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... But for what its worth.....I want titles, I dont give a dang about integrity when it comes to being champ anyways.

For clarification, which "rules" are you referring to when you say "My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... "?

The league site rules, for about alomst everyone who plays on Yahoo! If a site says he is QB/WR eligibility your hands are tied, well, unless u have to have control and make the rules conform to ur beliefs.the fact that your on here shows me that your site allows it, but you changed it, your the commish "which means you organize the league and make some league decisions with conflict"...you dont change rules that the site deems allowed jsut cuz you dont like them..thats not the point of a commish.

 

[petben]

This is really pretty simple.

Fantasy sites should not qualify football players at two positions as there is an distinct opportunistic advantage to having even a bad starting QB playing as a WR/RB/TE/PK.

Fantasy football is not supposed to be about rule loopholes, and those attempting to take advantage know this isn't the right thing to do. Every commish should show a backbone here and not allow it.

 

[Jersey35]

As commissioner, I'd take a look at these on a case-by-case basis, with the default position being the one listed by NFL.com (the most official source available) but the ultimate ruling to be made by me.

If I know Webb is expected to play 90+% of his snaps at QB, I'm allowing him to be starting at QB, not WR. Same would go for Colston way back when. He's starting as a WR, so I'd allow him to be played as a WR, not a TE.

Someone like Kordell, back in the day, was starting at QB and as such would be playable as a QB (with the added bonus of getting some WR opportunities thrown in).

The situation could change weekly, but I'm not interested in giving one team some form of loophole to exploit because of what amounts to a clerical error on the part of our fantasy football service.

I love the commishes throwing their weight, glad I'm not in some of these leagues with this guy.I love how you say I, I'd, I'm...its not about you, its about the league. You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

At what point did I change the rules? We have our own bylaws and it's not in our best interest to allow the flaws and decisions of MFL, Yahoo, or ESPN to dictate what we do. Yes, I rule with an iron fist when it comes to preventing owners from EXPLOITING loopholes.Perhaps I should have clarified, however. If a player is legitimately playing at two positions, he remains an option at both positions. Colston NEVER played TE for the Saints his rookie season (if I recall correctly) and allowing someone to start him at TE because our chosen fantasy site incorrectly had him listed as one would have been a gross injustice and would likely have tainted that season.

What the heck is a commissioner for if he isn't there to step in when people attempt to take advantage of a loophole? Yea, it's true: guys who try to lawyer the rules and take advantage of loopholes or gaps in our rules aren't as happy in my league as they might be in others. But we also have less of that going on and an incredibly robust and active league.

*Edited to add: I'm the guy who picked up Webb, and I don't think I'd allow him to start at WR this week - but I'd have to take a closer look at the situation to be certain.

This is my point, your trying to take control over a situation which you should not be allowed to. You are not the person who determines what a players position eligibility is, the site determines it. In leagues where commishes like you who try to take full control, this is the issue...Thank god for Yahoo for making the determination instead of someone who is part of the title contention, cuz there is no bias there.

Are you for real? As commissioner, I should not be allowed to prevent someone taking advantage of a loophole created by a clerical error by our service provider?

Let me ask you this: if my service (MFL) incorrectly seeded our playoff teams because MFL's default setting was different from that in our bylaws, should I be allowed to adjust the error or not?

Incidentally, I have not said whether or not I would allow Webb to be started as a WR or not - I've indicated that these need to be looked at on a case-by-case basis. Although I do think it's more likely that a RB/WR like McCluster would be less damaging than allowing a guy who is taking ALL OF HIS SNAPS AT QB to be started as a WR. As I said earlier, maybe the guy who thinks he's gonna 'put one over on the league' won't be too happy about it, but I can guarantee you that the rest of the league will be grateful.

At any rate, I'd likely simply default to what NFL.com (the most official source) has listed, and go from there. Yahoo, MFL, or even ESPN are not really our acknowledged authority on NFL positions either.

 

[Jersey35]

You cant change rules just cuz you dont like them. Webb was a WR before this week, if you can get him part of the bonus. Yahoo notices it dual position, who r u to not to?

As a commisioner, he is simply following the NFL.com official position description for the player, and is smartly not using an unofficial player position designation such as the ones created by Yahoo. Yahoo isn't "noticing" this player has a dual position, it is arbitrarily inventing a 100% fictional position description that does not exist in any official source. There are no "dual position" players in any of the official NFL player listings.To me, using Webb as a WR demonstrates a clear lack of integrity and general sportsmanship. If you want to "win" your league by using Webb, then it is clear just how much (or how little) your integrity is worth.

My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... But for what its worth.....I want titles, I dont give a dang about integrity when it comes to being champ anyways.

For clarification, which "rules" are you referring to when you say "My integrity is ruined by playing by the rules? hmmm... "?

The league site rules, for about alomst everyone who plays on Yahoo! If a site says he is QB/WR eligibility your hands are tied, well, unless u have to have control and make the rules conform to ur beliefs.the fact that your on here shows me that your site allows it, but you changed it, your the commish "which means you organize the league and make some league decisions with conflict"...you dont change rules that the site deems allowed jsut cuz you dont like them..thats not the point of a commish.

Again. I'm not saying anyone should change any rules. If your league says to default to whatever yahoo says, then by all means go for it. My league is carried by MFL, but only for the last few years. Many of our bylaws are not supported by MFL, therefore it falls upon me to enforce our own rules when they conflict with MFL's defaults.FWIW, MFL has Webb listed as a QB by default and has, I believe, since week 1. That is all.

Oh, and to save you the trouble of going off on me again because I'm "not impartial", any questionable rules issues that involve my team are handled by our assistant commissioner. Not me.

 

[Football Critic]

This is really pretty simple. Fantasy sites should not qualify football players at two positions as there is an distinct opportunistic advantage to having even a bad starting QB playing as a WR/RB/TE/PK. Fantasy football is not supposed to be about rule loopholes, and those attempting to take advantage know this isn't the right thing to do. Every commish should show a backbone here and not allow it.

Another who missed out on the player or plays him. You keep forget players can play more then 1 position in the NFL, why not fantasy?He started the year at WR and will play QB, good thing that Yahoo was on top of this and allowed him to be eligible for both positions. I'm upset that Reggie is not a RB/WR. Point is he was a returner just 2 weeks ago. What about Brad smith, he too should be a QB/WR.

 

[Warhogs]

Webb has been listed as a QB/WR for a while on yahoo. McCluster has been a RB/WR all year. Our rules are simple in whatever yahoo defines for a position is what they are eligible to play. Using Webb at WR would not be cheating in any way. We have all played with these guidelines all season.

I picked up Webb in one league and might play him? I play my son in my other league and he might claim him to help his weak WR spot. Using Webb as a WR is all within the rules in both my yahoo leagues.

 

[charlie54]

So if he throws for 120, runs for 40 and throws a TD, I would get around 22 pts if I start him at wr?

depends if your league awards points for being an imbecile.

 

[charlie54]

I have yet to be able to find information on who took the first team reps. @JuddZulgad on twiiter is Judd Zulgad. Judd is the top local NFL beat reporter. Right now, at this point, he thinks that Joe Webb is going to start.

thats b/c they havent practiced yet this week.