Joe Webb (2 Viewers)

[[icon]]

And in the MNF game I watched him very closely. He never once tried to go deep up the sidelines when they were well behind in the game. Granted he had no snaps but he wasn't even looking for Rice along the sidelines and that was his best WR. So yeah Harvin might get some tosses his way but don't think for a second that Urlacher isn't gonna know the same thing. Webb has almsot zero impact on the long passing game and won't stretch the field. For the Bears on defense it is gonna feel like the field is 25 yards not 100, and for the Vikes the field is going to feel like it's 300 yards not 100 on offense.

Wrong,

This happens a lot. The fact that MOP is so over the top down on Webb is the reason why he's getting slid in as my WR3 this week.

 

[Deadzone21]

What's your take if your league gives a point per completion for qbs? I think he's a must start.

Interesting. I don't play in a league that scores for completions, but I can see a lot of dump offs to the flats, quick slants and short routes. If he can convert enough of those for first downs, he can get about 20 completions.

 

[Kenny Powers]

13-26 175 8 rushes for 80 yards with a TD. I think he'll be fine against the "vaunted" Bears D and will make his day with his feet.

vs the Bears.. with 8 in the box.. on top of a block of ice.. where players are already speculating they may not even be able to wear cleats..I think you are being way too optimistic. I bet he doesn't break 30 rushing yards, and zero rushing td's.

Ive seen this "field is going to a block of ice" stated a couple of times. Newsflash - the defense is running on the same field and Id bet Webb is faster than at least 10 players on CHI's defense.If you're thinking he doesnt break 30 yards rushing, I think youre being far too pessimistic

 

[Warrior]

13-26 175 8 rushes for 80 yards with a TD. I think he'll be fine against the "vaunted" Bears D and will make his day with his feet.

vs the Bears.. with 8 in the box.. on top of a block of ice.. where players are already speculating they may not even be able to wear cleats..I think you are being way too optimistic. I bet he doesn't break 30 rushing yards, and zero rushing td's.

Ive seen this "field is going to a block of ice" stated a couple of times. Newsflash - the defense is running on the same field and Id bet Webb is faster than at least 10 players on CHI's defense.If you're thinking he doesnt break 30 yards rushing, I think youre being far too pessimistic

 

[Clutchfanatic]

What's your take if your league gives a point per completion for qbs? I think he's a must start.

Interesting. I don't play in a league that scores for completions, but I can see a lot of dump offs to the flats, quick slants and short routes. If he can convert enough of those for first downs, he can get about 20 completions.

 

[GDogg]

Sure, if you are eliminated from playoff contention, you should no longer be taking players off the waiver wire, which could help those that are still in the playoffs. If Don Quixote were still alive, and took Webb and buried him, then that's "strategy."I'm not sure I understand what the "strategy" is when a dead team takes a player off the waiver wire.I agree that strategy doesn't stop when the playoffs begin. I'm not sure I agree that strategy doesn't stop for those teams who are eliminated the second they are eliminated. This opens up the issue of collusion.But, I'd argue it's far more egregious for a team who is no longer in contention to pluck players from the waiver wire that those in contention could use than to play Joe Webb at his listed Yahoo! position.

But his team isn't eliminated - he's playing for 5th place still.

Sure it is. The value of 5th is the same as last - nothing. His team has been eliminated from contention for the title.

 

[faulknromos]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

10-12 out of your QB in the playoffs is a terrible hole FYI...

 

[Kenny Powers]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

10-12 out of your QB WR4 in the playoffs is a terrible hole is pretty good FYI...

fixed

 

[faulknromos]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

10-12 out of your QB in the playoffs is a terrible hole FYI...

10+ in the playoffs from a WR is more of an advantage than hole.Agree to disagree then. I lived in Birmingham for 7 years so I'm little biased, but not that much I'm a UA fan. I think he is one the most athletic players, regardless of being a QB, I've ever seen in my life. His pro-day proved it. Name me a single WR, JUST 1, that had a more impressive pro-day/combine. Your stance is that it won't translate this week, I'm on the side that he will take advantage of his shot. We'll see Monday.

 

[Jed]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

10-12 out of your QB in the playoffs is a terrible hole FYI...

Come on man. Virtually nobody is starting him as their QB.

 

[two_dollars]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

Exactly...they will key on the run all night.. Urlacher and Briggs...fugeddaboutit.

Just wait 2 days. I'll bet anybody anything that he gets double digits.

10-12 out of your QB WR4 in the playoffs is a terrible hole is pretty good FYI...

fixed

How many receptions do you think he'll have?

 

[griff321]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

My feeling is that you're the one on crack. What do you know about Webb that gives you the evidence to make this assertion? I feel the field condition is more advantageous to Webb then the Bears D. I mean they showed last week how well they play in bad weather and the same inclimate weather is predicted for Monday's game. From everything that I've seen of him he has demonstrated that he is a gifted athletic freak. I've never seen a QB with his insane strength, size, and speed. In preseason he would be in the grasps of a DE and then just shimmy his hips and the DE would go flying. He has an amazingly quick step for someone with as long of a stride as he has and then he takes great angles on defenders to avoid would be tacklers. Granted these clips are preseason, but they also demonstrate just a limited glimpse of his insane ability.

TD run vs SF

I love that second clip the most, because it shows that teams can bring 7 guys on a blitz, get immediate penetration, and then get owned.

 

[two_dollars]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

My feeling is that you're the one on crack. What do you know about Webb that gives you the evidence to make this assertion? I feel the field condition is more advantageous to Webb then the Bears D. I mean they showed last week how well they play in bad weather and the same inclimate weather is predicted for Monday's game. From everything that I've seen of him he has demonstrated that he is a gifted athletic freak. I've never seen a QB with his insane strength, size, and speed. In preseason he would be in the grasps of a DE and then just shimmy his hips and the DE would go flying. He has an amazingly quick step for someone with as long of a stride as he has and then he takes great angles on defenders to avoid would be tacklers. Granted these clips are preseason, but they also demonstrate just a limited glimpse of his insane ability.

TD run vs SF

Preseason? Seriously? Is anyone he played against still ON an NFL team? He's not going to "shimmy" away from Peppers, I promise you that. And about the weather, I don't think Webb is Brady LOL!You think we know something the Bears don't?

 

[griff321]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

My feeling is that you're the one on crack. What do you know about Webb that gives you the evidence to make this assertion? I feel the field condition is more advantageous to Webb then the Bears D. I mean they showed last week how well they play in bad weather and the same inclimate weather is predicted for Monday's game. From everything that I've seen of him he has demonstrated that he is a gifted athletic freak. I've never seen a QB with his insane strength, size, and speed. In preseason he would be in the grasps of a DE and then just shimmy his hips and the DE would go flying. He has an amazingly quick step for someone with as long of a stride as he has and then he takes great angles on defenders to avoid would be tacklers. Granted these clips are preseason, but they also demonstrate just a limited glimpse of his insane ability.

TD run vs SF

My point is that even at the NFL level he has that rare ability to make men look like boys.Far as the weather goes, Tom Brady is no Joe Webb when it comes to running the ball. Since I was replying to your assertion that anyone that thinks Webb will rush for more then 60 yards is on crack.

 

[Max Maximus]

Playing Webb over Lloyd (Tebow starting, heavy rain at OAK...)

 

[Hanz]

Playing Webb over Lloyd (Tebow starting, heavy rain at OAK...)

Same here!

 

[faulknromos]

People are predicting 60+ yards of rushing from Webb vs the Bears? You must be on crack!

My feeling is that you're the one on crack. What do you know about Webb that gives you the evidence to make this assertion? I feel the field condition is more advantageous to Webb then the Bears D. I mean they showed last week how well they play in bad weather and the same inclimate weather is predicted for Monday's game. From everything that I've seen of him he has demonstrated that he is a gifted athletic freak. I've never seen a QB with his insane strength, size, and speed. In preseason he would be in the grasps of a DE and then just shimmy his hips and the DE would go flying. He has an amazingly quick step for someone with as long of a stride as he has and then he takes great angles on defenders to avoid would be tacklers. Granted these clips are preseason, but they also demonstrate just a limited glimpse of his insane ability.

TD run vs SF

I'm just going to keep re-posting this.42.5 Vertical, 11.05 Broad Jump, 21 reps, 4.44 40, 6.71 3 cone, 4.04 shuttle.

Pretty positive if you ranked the WR's proday/combines in each of those categories that Joe would be #1 on 3, #2-#5 on 2 of them, and a little lower on the 40 time.

Vick said he runs around a 4.4 now, he doesn't look slow to me.

 

[dmonte]

Would anyone start Webb over LeGarrette Blount in a Flex position? My league scores all TD's 6 pts, however, INT's are -3. Yardage is 10 yds/pt.

Gotta make a quick decision ... I would have posted this over in The Assitant Coach, but was directed here since this thread was active.

Clarify: Rushing/Receiving yards 10 yds/pt; Passing yards 30 yds/pt

 

[barista]

I'm only starting him in points per completion... I don't think he'll be a great QB starter but given the point system I'm predicting

15 for 150ish, 30 yds rushing, 1 INT. that's about 18 points in this particular league- translates to - 7, 100yds, 1td...

and that's what I see his FLOOR being.

Hoping for 20 for 180 1td, 1int 40yds... that's 30+ - that would make the other guys gripe.

 

[wilked]

Would anyone start Webb over LeGarrette Blount in a Flex position? My league scores all TD's 6 pts, however, INT's are -3. Yardage is 10 yds/pt.Gotta make a quick decision ... I would have posted this over in The Assitant Coach, but was directed here since this thread was active.Clarify: Rushing/Receiving yards 10 yds/pt; Passing yards 30 yds/pt

I would avoid if INTs are -3. Go with Blunt

 

[UnderDawgs]

Playing Webb over Lloyd (Tebow starting, heavy rain at OAK...)

Same here!

Add me to this list.

 

[Kenny Powers]

Just put Joey Webbs in as my 2nd flex for my final lineup. Cant wait for tomorrow night. Lets Go

ETA: Go Big or Go Home

 

[Utter Chaos]

Sure, if you are eliminated from playoff contention, you should no longer be taking players off the waiver wire, which could help those that are still in the playoffs. If Don Quixote were still alive, and took Webb and buried him, then that's "strategy."I'm not sure I understand what the "strategy" is when a dead team takes a player off the waiver wire.I agree that strategy doesn't stop when the playoffs begin. I'm not sure I agree that strategy doesn't stop for those teams who are eliminated the second they are eliminated. This opens up the issue of collusion.But, I'd argue it's far more egregious for a team who is no longer in contention to pluck players from the waiver wire that those in contention could use than to play Joe Webb at his listed Yahoo! position.

But his team isn't eliminated - he's playing for 5th place still.

Sure it is. The value of 5th is the same as last - nothing. His team has been eliminated from contention for the title.

I believe there are some leagues out there that the winner of the toilet bowl (non-playoff teams) determines who gets first draft pick next season. That is plenty of reason to continue picking guys off the waiver wire despite being "eliminated from contention for the title".

 

[skins001]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

 

[griff321]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

That was so thick you could cut it with a knife.

 

[Insein]

This is completely ridiculous to me. I'm out of the playoffs but in our league we start 2QBs. The scoring for QBs makes them the high scorers in the league by far. So one guy in the semi-finals is starting Webb as a 3rd QB this week against a team who's beating him right now. A WR3 would have trouble catching the lead that has been set but a QB would have no trouble with a half decent night. If I was playing that guy, I would be pissed that I could lose by a yahoo loophole.

 

[GDogg]

Sure, if you are eliminated from playoff contention, you should no longer be taking players off the waiver wire, which could help those that are still in the playoffs. If Don Quixote were still alive, and took Webb and buried him, then that's "strategy."I'm not sure I understand what the "strategy" is when a dead team takes a player off the waiver wire.I agree that strategy doesn't stop when the playoffs begin. I'm not sure I agree that strategy doesn't stop for those teams who are eliminated the second they are eliminated. This opens up the issue of collusion.But, I'd argue it's far more egregious for a team who is no longer in contention to pluck players from the waiver wire that those in contention could use than to play Joe Webb at his listed Yahoo! position.

But his team isn't eliminated - he's playing for 5th place still.

Sure it is. The value of 5th is the same as last - nothing. His team has been eliminated from contention for the title.

I believe there are some leagues out there that the winner of the toilet bowl (non-playoff teams) determines who gets first draft pick next season. That is plenty of reason to continue picking guys off the waiver wire despite being "eliminated from contention for the title".

Sure. He's given us no indication that his league is one of those, though, considering he has stated he's playing for 5th place (not any "bowl" game) a couple times. On top of that, his reasoning for doing it is to prevent one of the teams still in "contention" from using Webb, not to utilize him himself.

 

[Insein]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

So you're all in for 10 best players league. Start 10 RB's? Go right ahead. 10 QB's? Why not. They can play anywhere theoretically in the NFL, so why not fantasy. I mean Peyton Manning has never played WR or RB but why can't he be listed as one? Its ridiculous that other leagues havent adopted this measure yet.

 

[proninja]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

So you're all in for 10 best players league. Start 10 RB's? Go right ahead. 10 QB's? Why not. They can play anywhere theoretically in the NFL, so why not fantasy. I mean Peyton Manning has never played WR or RB but why can't he be listed as one? Its ridiculous that other leagues havent adopted this measure yet.

You argue like my ex wife

 

[Insein]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

So you're all in for 10 best players league. Start 10 RB's? Go right ahead. 10 QB's? Why not. They can play anywhere theoretically in the NFL, so why not fantasy. I mean Peyton Manning has never played WR or RB but why can't he be listed as one? Its ridiculous that other leagues havent adopted this measure yet.

You argue like my ex wife

Can't imagine why she's ex.

 

[proninja]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

So you're all in for 10 best players league. Start 10 RB's? Go right ahead. 10 QB's? Why not. They can play anywhere theoretically in the NFL, so why not fantasy. I mean Peyton Manning has never played WR or RB but why can't he be listed as one? Its ridiculous that other leagues havent adopted this measure yet.

You argue like my ex wife

Can't imagine why she's ex.

Glad to see you understand my point

 

[thehornet]

I'm glad the NFL would never allow a player to play a position that wasn't his "official" listed position. Otherwise we might have teams making "unethical" moves such as lining up an RB at the QB spot, having a LB line up to catch a goal line TD pass, or splitting a RB out wide for an empty backfield. All this does is to confuse the defense and ruin the integrity of the game.

So you're all in for 10 best players league. Start 10 RB's? Go right ahead. 10 QB's? Why not. They can play anywhere theoretically in the NFL, so why not fantasy. I mean Peyton Manning has never played WR or RB but why can't he be listed as one? Its ridiculous that other leagues havent adopted this measure yet.

You argue like my ex wife

Can't imagine why she's ex.

based on the way you argue, i can.

 

[Insein]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

 

[footballnerd]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

not this again. if its allowed for Danny Woodhead and the likes, its allowed for all. you Webb haters are the only ones making him out to be this horrible disadvantage like he's scoring 24 fantasy points when all the Webb owners are anticipating negative points to maybe 14 fantasy points.

 

[Trizzler]

As for the whole Favre story; I'm not convinced that he actually plays the majority of the game. A guy who was ruled out three days ago does not seem to be a sure-fire starter who's going to play a full 60 minutes in a blizzard.

Webb should still be good for 6-7 points. Pulling him from your lineup for the likes of Berrian, Camarillo, or Knox in desperation mode would be a huge mistake.

 

[GDogg]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

 

[Insein]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

 

[Insein]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

not this again. if its allowed for Danny Woodhead and the likes, its allowed for all. you Webb haters are the only ones making him out to be this horrible disadvantage like he's scoring 24 fantasy points when all the Webb owners are anticipating negative points to maybe 14 fantasy points.

So starting a declared QB at WR is not a loophole to you? If Favre were starting and they said Webb would get a lot of snaps as a wildcat type player, I get starting him as a flex or WR. But when he's declared the starting QB, how can you justify calling him a WR?

 

[two_dollars]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

There IS intelligent life on this board!

 

[footballnerd]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

Danny Woodhead (RB/WR) is avg 8 to 15 fantasy points per week over the past month or so, if the commish has not stopped that I see no reason to stop Webb who will be lucky to get that much. So where is the Danny Woodhead hating threads?

 

[thehornet]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

i dont remember this type of outcry when colston was destroying as a tightend. you guys need to chill out. this isn;t that big of a deal to get so worked up over.

 

[Insein]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

Danny Woodhead (RB/WR) is avg 8 to 15 fantasy points per week over the past month or so, if the commish has not stopped that I see no reason to stop Webb who will be lucky to get that much. So where is the Danny Woodhead hating threads?

Really? Danny Woodhead is a RB/WR. 99% of leagues that have a flex have it as RB/WR and maybe TE. You're going to argue that a guy who could be a flex in almost any league is the same situation as a starting QB being used as a flex in leagues that don't allow QB's as the flex?

 

[thehornet]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

Danny Woodhead (RB/WR) is avg 8 to 15 fantasy points per week over the past month or so, if the commish has not stopped that I see no reason to stop Webb who will be lucky to get that much. So where is the Danny Woodhead hating threads?

Really? Danny Woodhead is a RB/WR. 99% of leagues that have a flex have it as RB/WR and maybe TE. You're going to argue that a guy who could be a flex in almost any league is the same situation as a starting QB being used as a flex in leagues that don't allow QB's as the flex?

ahh, yeah. you're the one playing hardball with the rules. last week webb returned a kick. how do you explain that?

 

[Insein]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

i dont remember this type of outcry when colston was destroying as a tightend. you guys need to chill out. this isn;t that big of a deal to get so worked up over.

I wasn't here then. I would have. Its a loophole. People want to feel all warm and fuzzy like they're in the right. They need to realize that they are taking advantage of a flaw in the system. Again, you can do it, but it doesn't make it right.

 

[GDogg]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

It's not a loophole. It's his listed position on Yahoo (and supposedly other sites). There is no circumvention of any rules or anything. By rule, he is a WR and a QB. Some owners of Webb are playing him at one of the two listed positions. Thus, it's not a loophole. Loophole does not mean what it appears you think it means.As for Brad Smith, what is so hard to understand? Well, he has almost ten times as many rushes as he has receptions on the year. That's pretty unique for a WR, is it not? He also has a pass completion and a TD pass. The Jets have acknowledged that they have a passing package for Smith at QB. They drafted Smith as a WR/RB/QB. So, if Smith had a WR/RB/QB designation, exactly when would it be ok to play him at each of those spots? And, you realize you are deciding his position on a play by play basis, right (if Smith does, then he's X; if he does this, then he's Y.)? Lineups and position designations are made before games start. What if (and it's not an if because he usually does) he does all of those things? What's his position for fantasy-purposes?

 

[footballnerd]

I am just astonished by this thread as to how many people would willingly allow a declared starting QB to be entered into a FF lineup during a playoff game as a WR or flex. All these people that talk about integrity of the game and all that nonsense would allow a loophole to let a guy get an extra QB in the game. Amazes me.

How is it a loophole? What position does the host fantasy league site list him at?What position do you think Brad Smith should be listed?

If Mark Sanchez is out and Brad Smith lines up under center, he should be a QB. What is so hard to understand? If Smith lines up as a WR and returns kicks, he should be a WR. If he runs an occasional wild cat but still plays primarily WR, then he's a WR. Its a loophole. If Brett Favre were starting this game but they said, Joe webb would run some wildcat a lot, I get starting him at WR or flex. But he's been declared the Starting QB. Putting him in as a flex is taking advantage of a loophole. You can do it all you want. Doesn't make it right.

Danny Woodhead (RB/WR) is avg 8 to 15 fantasy points per week over the past month or so, if the commish has not stopped that I see no reason to stop Webb who will be lucky to get that much. So where is the Danny Woodhead hating threads?

Really? Danny Woodhead is a RB/WR. 99% of leagues that have a flex have it as RB/WR and maybe TE. You're going to argue that a guy who could be a flex in almost any league is the same situation as a starting QB being used as a flex in leagues that don't allow QB's as the flex?

you must play in 99% yahoo leagues then because in none of my MFL leagues is Woodhead or Webb allowed to play two positions. And yes if its not addressed at the beginning of the season that you cant, then owners have every right to play a position allowed by the website, especially if other owners have been doing it with other players.

 

[Insein]

ahh, yeah. you're the one playing hardball with the rules. last week webb returned a kick. how do you explain that?

I'm sorry. Is it so hard to understand the concept that a declared starting QB for the given week in play should disqualify a guy from the flex position regardless of where he played previously? I guess most can't wrap their minds around that.

 

[thehornet]

ahh, yeah. you're the one playing hardball with the rules. last week webb returned a kick. how do you explain that?

I'm sorry. Is it so hard to understand the concept that a declared starting QB for the given week in play should disqualify a guy from the flex position regardless of where he played previously? I guess most can't wrap their minds around that.

no i dont agree. it's just your interpration. sorry not everyone shares the same opinions. is yahoo supposed to keep swatiching the designation on payers whn they do different things on the field? so when he returns kicks he should be listed as a wr but when he comes in to throw change it to qb? makes no sense.

 

[footballnerd]

ahh, yeah. you're the one playing hardball with the rules. last week webb returned a kick. how do you explain that?

I'm sorry. Is it so hard to understand the concept that a declared starting QB for the given week in play should disqualify a guy from the flex position regardless of where he played previously? I guess most can't wrap their minds around that.

what about avoiding selective enforcement because the league was allowing someone to play Woodhead at the WR (non-flex) spot all year. mind numbing i know....