What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

M. Vick....QB....STEAL OF YOUR DRAFT! (1 Viewer)

Don't expect Michael Vick to block after handoffs in the read-option as he did in Monday's 33-27 win over the Washington Redskins. Don't expect him to suddenly slide as an act of safety, either. Eagles coach Chip Kelly said Tuesday that Vick's blocking was not by design. He will instruct Vick not to block in those situations. "We're going to constantly coach it, emphasize it with him," Kelly said. "There's a lot of things I saw out of Mike that we've emphasized since I got here that we're happy with, other things we're still working on, other things he needs to work on." But sliding is one area in which Kelly conceded that Vick will not change. Vick dives headfirst instead of sliding. Sometimes, that exposes him to hits. But he struggles sliding.
Click to expand...
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20130911_Kelly_hopes_Vick_s_days_as_a_blocker_are_over.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It is week 1 so I highly doubt a team is tanking already. If that is the deal he wants it should stand.

 
Mr. Retukes said:
Rick James said:
I play in a 15-team, PPR, 4 points for passing TD, 6 points all other TDs....

drafted Mike Vick as my #1 and Sam Bradford as my backup. I'm pretty high on Bradford this year, so I think this combo could be deadly.
Click to expand...
I also ended up with Vick and Bradford as my only QBs (12 team, start 2 QB league).

Only QBs left on the WW are Pryor, Gabbert, and Sanchez. :X

:pray:
Click to expand...
+1 on Vick/Bradford :hifive:

Home vs SD this weekend? Yes, please. :banned:

 
Kool-Aid Larry said:
Don't expect Michael Vick to block after handoffs in the read-option as he did in Monday's 33-27 win over the Washington Redskins. Don't expect him to suddenly slide as an act of safety, either. Eagles coach Chip Kelly said Tuesday that Vick's blocking was not by design. He will instruct Vick not to block in those situations. "We're going to constantly coach it, emphasize it with him," Kelly said. "There's a lot of things I saw out of Mike that we've emphasized since I got here that we're happy with, other things we're still working on, other things he needs to work on." But sliding is one area in which Kelly conceded that Vick will not change. Vick dives headfirst instead of sliding. Sometimes, that exposes him to hits. But he struggles sliding.
Click to expand...
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/20130911_Kelly_hopes_Vick_s_days_as_a_blocker_are_over.html
Click to expand...
Its important to remember this is not a finished product. There's a lot of talk about the league catching up to it, players won't last, wore down as the game went on, etc. But this was game 1 under this system, which quite frankly looked very good for a first time out. Defenses will make adjustments no doubt, but Kelly's not done either and he still has some tricks up his sleeve as well.

 
The preseason "shark move" was to draft Vick.

The post week 1 "shark move" is to go get Foles and stash him on your bench.

 
The Ref said:
The preseason "shark move" was to draft Vick.

The post week 1 "shark move" is to go get Foles and stash him on your bench.
Click to expand...
The shark move was to draft Vick as your 2. Now you can ship him for something valuable or ride the gravy train while still having another number 1 qb (the one you drafted before Vick) on the bench until further notice.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with personal preference, and everything to do with rationale. I couldn't care less about preseason ADP, are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.

I agree some other system would be better than owner veto, but this is a league with friends so Im not just going to leave it, and I doubt they'd ever change that part of the rules. I enjoy my 2 leagues like that much more than any other I do. One of my friends actually texted me today and said in one of his other leagues, a trade that got accepted this week was Trent, Kaepernick, Brandon Myers for Daryl Rich, Knowshon, Witten. I would veto that if I could just the same because its simply too one sided.

 
Kenny Powers said:
are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.
Click to expand...
how do you know how each one will do?You don't think it is equal based on your personal perceived value. Not everyone values players in the same way. Maybe the guy wants to shore up WR depth and he thinks his other QB will perform equal to Vick and he wants to grab Pryor off waivers.

For him, maybe Tate and QB X will project to perform better than Vick and his current WR3 or whatever.

Maybe the guy thinks Vick will get hurt next week and Tate is the best he can do after asking other owners to trade better WRs.

Either way #### and let the trade through.

There should never ever ever ever be a clause in a league for vetoing trades as that actually results in more collusion than is prevented by having votes in the first place.

For people to think they somehow have the last word on "value" is arrogant and idiotic.

 
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with personal preference, and everything to do with rationale. I couldn't care less about preseason ADP, are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.

I agree some other system would be better than owner veto, but this is a league with friends so Im not just going to leave it, and I doubt they'd ever change that part of the rules. I enjoy my 2 leagues like that much more than any other I do. One of my friends actually texted me today and said in one of his other leagues, a trade that got accepted this week was Trent, Kaepernick, Brandon Myers for Daryl Rich, Knowshon, Witten. I would veto that if I could just the same because its simply too one sided.
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with your personal preference with the Vick deal.

Don't want to burst your bubble, you aren't getting great value for Michael Vick in a 12 team start 1 QB league. You already said the owner has Russell Wilson (who THAT owner, not you, is comfortable rolling with)

Manage your own team and not others. :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with personal preference, and everything to do with rationale. I couldn't care less about preseason ADP, are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.

I agree some other system would be better than owner veto, but this is a league with friends so Im not just going to leave it, and I doubt they'd ever change that part of the rules. I enjoy my 2 leagues like that much more than any other I do. One of my friends actually texted me today and said in one of his other leagues, a trade that got accepted this week was Trent, Kaepernick, Brandon Myers for Daryl Rich, Knowshon, Witten. I would veto that if I could just the same because its simply too one sided.
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with your personal preference with the Vick deal.

Don't want to burst your bubble, you aren't getting great value for Michael Vick in a 12 team start 1 QB league. You already said the owner has Russell Wilson (who THAT owner, not you, is comfortable rolling with)

Manage your own team and not others. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I posted that trade primarily for other people if theyre considering flipping Vick while he's healthy to give an idea of what his value is. And then I posted my thoughts on it. Im not trying to manage anyone's team, and Im not voting to veto it either because the person getting Tate currently has Colston, James Jones, Wright, Dobson, Little at WR.

 
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with personal preference, and everything to do with rationale. I couldn't care less about preseason ADP, are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.

I agree some other system would be better than owner veto, but this is a league with friends so Im not just going to leave it, and I doubt they'd ever change that part of the rules. I enjoy my 2 leagues like that much more than any other I do. One of my friends actually texted me today and said in one of his other leagues, a trade that got accepted this week was Trent, Kaepernick, Brandon Myers for Daryl Rich, Knowshon, Witten. I would veto that if I could just the same because its simply too one sided.
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with your personal preference with the Vick deal.

Don't want to burst your bubble, you aren't getting great value for Michael Vick in a 12 team start 1 QB league. You already said the owner has Russell Wilson (who THAT owner, not you, is comfortable rolling with)

Manage your own team and not others. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I posted that trade primarily for other people if theyre considering flipping Vick while he's healthy to give an idea of what his value is.
Click to expand...
WR3 type with upside (Tate) is probably what you're looking at in return.

I own Vick (and Luck) and am not even entertaining dealing him. He looks to be a strong QB1 when healthy and my expectation is that I wouldn't get more than a WR3 type right now (which are a dime a dozen). And after watching Indy O-line, I'm not comfortable enough that even Luck will stay healthy 16 games.

The same reason people didn't spend a high pick on Vick is the same reason they won't go overboard in trading something for him one week into the season. And you saw in that one week why he hasn't played in more than 13 games the past 4 seasons. Nothing has changed with Vick.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub said:
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
Craig_MiamiFL said:
Kenny Powers said:
A trade tonight got accepted in my league, Vick for Golden Tate. While the Vick owner also has Russell Wilson, trading Vick for Tate - even considering Vick's injury risk - seems like giving up Vick for way too little to me. I almost want to veto it, but I doubt there will be enough votes anyway, and the guy getting Vick had by far the worst points in week 1.
Click to expand...
Why I hate owner vetoes. Either all trades go through or use a 3rd party not involved as owner in the league. There's not one convincing argument to do owner veto system. You worried that much about collusion, you A) should find another league or B) Use a 3rd party (I'm sure commish & commish of another league can easily swap free services as 'Trade Refs' for one another's leagues -- as unbiased parties not involved in the league.

Tate was the golden child this preseason. Few wanted anything to do with Vick. [ADP's separated by 1/2 a round in drafts since 8.25.13]. Now all of a sudden.....

Vetoing deals like this -- based on personal preference -- makes me sick.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with personal preference, and everything to do with rationale. I couldn't care less about preseason ADP, are you seriously trying to say that Golden Tate has anywhere close to the value of Michael Vick? He doesn't, and that's what it comes down to.

I agree some other system would be better than owner veto, but this is a league with friends so Im not just going to leave it, and I doubt they'd ever change that part of the rules. I enjoy my 2 leagues like that much more than any other I do. One of my friends actually texted me today and said in one of his other leagues, a trade that got accepted this week was Trent, Kaepernick, Brandon Myers for Daryl Rich, Knowshon, Witten. I would veto that if I could just the same because its simply too one sided.
Click to expand...
It has everything to do with your personal preference with the Vick deal.

Don't want to burst your bubble, you aren't getting great value for Michael Vick in a 12 team start 1 QB league. You already said the owner has Russell Wilson (who THAT owner, not you, is comfortable rolling with)

Manage your own team and not others. :shrug:
Click to expand...
I posted that trade primarily for other people if theyre considering flipping Vick while he's healthy to give an idea of what his value is.
Click to expand...
WR3 type with upside (Tate) is probably what you're looking at in return.

I own Vick (and Luck) and am not even entertaining dealing him. He looks to be a strong QB1 when healthy and my expectation is that I wouldn't get more than a WR3 type right now (which are a dime a dozen). And after watching Indy O-line, I'm not comfortable enough that even Luck will stay healthy 16 games.

The same reason people didn't spend a high pick on Vick is the same reason they won't go overboard in trading something for him one week into the season. And you saw in that one week why he hasn't played in more than 13 games the past 4 seasons. Nothing has changed with Vick.
Click to expand...
I'm debating between Vick & Luck as we speak....Tough call.

 
Tony Jabroni said:
Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub said:
WR3 type with upside (Tate) is probably what you're looking at in return.


I own Vick (and Luck) and am not even entertaining dealing him. He looks to be a strong QB1 when healthy and my expectation is that I wouldn't get more than a WR3 type right now (which are a dime a dozen). And after watching Indy O-line, I'm not comfortable enough that even Luck will stay healthy 16 games.

The same reason people didn't spend a high pick on Vick is the same reason they won't go overboard in trading something for him one week into the season. And you saw in that one week why he hasn't played in more than 13 games the past 4 seasons. Nothing has changed with Vick.
Click to expand...
I'm debating between Vick & Luck as we speak....Tough call.
Click to expand...
Im debating between Luck & Romo. If I had Vick, he wouldnt leave my starting lineup until he's hurt (assuming most people who drafted him didnt also draft a Top 5 QB)

 
Kool-Aid Larry said:
[quote name="Acrobat7" post="15926182"
Click to expand...
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game

Not starting Vick because you think he will get hurt to start the game is stupid. Not only you are predicting he is getting hurt this week you are also predicting it happens in the first couple plays. How do you know he won't get hurt in the 4th quarter after he throws for 320/3tds & runs for 2 more.

It is fine if you think stafford is a better play. But don't tell me you are making a decision because you know what play Vick will get hurt in.

 
Short Corner said:
Starting over Eli this week.
Click to expand...
I would not do that. Eli is going to throw for a lot of yards and TDs - expect shoot out. Denver will score at least 25....NYG have 3 stud WRs (Randle; Cruz; Nicks) and a very solid TE (Myers). Running game might be iffy leading to lots of throwing to get 1st downs.....and Denver has no pass rush (see Flacco last week scoring pretty well on the road) and Champ Bailey might not play again or not be 100% and Rodgers Cromartie gets burnt by any decent QB. T

Denver-NYG is going to be a high scoring game with lots of passing.....

 
skinsrule05 said:
Kool-Aid Larry said:
[quote name="Acrobat7" post="15926182"
Click to expand...
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game

Not starting Vick because you think he will get hurt to start the game is stupid. Not only you are predicting he is getting hurt this week you are also predicting it happens in the first couple plays. How do you know he won't get hurt in the 4th quarter after he throws for 320/3tds & runs for 2 more.

It is fine if you think stafford is a better play. But don't tell me you are making a decision because you know what play Vick will get hurt in.
Click to expand...
well, I obviously don't know, but there is such a thing as risk management

 
skinsrule05 said:
Kool-Aid Larry said:
[quote name="Acrobat7" post="15926182"
Click to expand...
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game

Not starting Vick because you think he will get hurt to start the game is stupid. Not only you are predicting he is getting hurt this week you are also predicting it happens in the first couple plays. How do you know he won't get hurt in the 4th quarter after he throws for 320/3tds & runs for 2 more.

It is fine if you think stafford is a better play. But don't tell me you are making a decision because you know what play Vick will get hurt in.
Click to expand...
I disagree. If there was a big difference in expected points (say 5+) from Vick over Stafford then the risk would be worth it. However, when they are very close like they are it's not.

 
Kool-Aid Larry said:
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game
Click to expand...
That could happen in any game so you will never start him? Why'd you draft him?

 
Acrobat7 said:
Kool-Aid Larry said:
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game
Click to expand...
That could happen in any game so you will never start him? Why'd you draft him?
Click to expand...
because I got him for 8 bux and he hadn't already pulled the groin

figured I'd give him a couple games to blow up and move him before he's crippled.

 
Starting Vick over RG3....both have great matchups, but RG3 looked like he could barely get out of the pocket. I'm also worried about his recovery on a short week on that knee.

Hopefully I can ride Vick until RG3 gets the rust off and becomes more mobile.

 
Screw it, until/if/when he gets injured (Fantasy gods, I am only speculating), he's in the starting lineup. Back up as stated above is Luck. I got laughed at for picking Vick, too. I love it when a plan comes together...

 
skinsrule05 said:
Kool-Aid Larry said:
[quote name="Acrobat7" post="15926182"
Click to expand...
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game

Not starting Vick because you think he will get hurt to start the game is stupid. Not only you are predicting he is getting hurt this week you are also predicting it happens in the first couple plays. How do you know he won't get hurt in the 4th quarter after he throws for 320/3tds & runs for 2 more.

It is fine if you think stafford is a better play. But don't tell me you are making a decision because you know what play Vick will get hurt in.
Click to expand...
It is, eh?

 
cstu said:
skinsrule05 said:
Kool-Aid Larry said:
[quote name="Acrobat7" post="15926182"
Click to expand...
I'm starting stafford over vick -- don't want to be caught with 2 pts when he pulls a groin early in the game
Click to expand...
Not starting Vick because you think he will get hurt to start the game is stupid. Not only you are predicting he is getting hurt this week you are also predicting it happens in the first couple plays. How do you know he won't get hurt in the 4th quarter after he throws for 320/3tds & runs for 2 more.

It is fine if you think stafford is a better play. But don't tell me you are making a decision because you know what play Vick will get hurt in.
Click to expand...
It is, eh?

Horrible bump, bro. Vick was injured before the game even started. The only reason he started this game is because Foles looked so bad last week (and supposedly still has concussion symptoms).

 
Rotoworld:

Michael Vick was removed from Sunday's Week 8 game against the Giants in the second quarter.
Vick was extremely immobile from the opening snap, suggesting that his hamstring wasn't even near the 80 percent he said it was. Then, on his lone scramble of the game, he appeared to aggravate his pull. Vick came back in, but he couldn't even move well enough to protect himself in the pocket. With Nick Foles (concussion) inactive, rookie Matt Barkley has come on. Vick will only come back in if Barkley sustains an injury. He's 6-of-9 for 31 yards with no touchdowns and one interception.

Related: Matt Barkley
Click to expand...
 
Horrible bump, bro. Vick was injured before the game even started. The only reason he started this game is because Foles looked so bad last week (and supposedly still has concussion symptoms).
Click to expand...
Considering FBG's had him as a QB1 this week I think it's fair.

 
Would think he is done and they look to the younger guys but they are only a game back in this horrid division...any chance they go back to him?

 
I never post this but I think Vick might be done, maybe see the field once or twice more but his days are going to be over very soon, perhaps an invite next year as a back up but he's done.

Philly is playing for 2014, they need a QB but I'm not convinced this offense is gonna work in the NFL.

 
Ministry of Pain said:
I never post this but I think Vick might be done, maybe see the field once or twice more but his days are going to be over very soon, perhaps an invite next year as a back up but he's done.

Philly is playing for 2014, they need a QB but I'm not convinced this offense is gonna work in the NFL.
Click to expand...
The offense was top 3 in the league before the QBs started getting hurt.

 
Amused to Death said:
Ministry of Pain said:
I never post this but I think Vick might be done, maybe see the field once or twice more but his days are going to be over very soon, perhaps an invite next year as a back up but he's done.

Philly is playing for 2014, they need a QB but I'm not convinced this offense is gonna work in the NFL.
Click to expand...
The offense was top 3 in the league before the QBs started getting hurt.
Click to expand...
OK, who you gonna draft? Jax, TB, they have the 1-2 locked up for now. You all will win a couple more this year. Year 2 under Chip wadda you gonna do?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hot Sauce Guy
Voltron QB - build the best to ever play
Replies
44
Views
929
IHEARTFF
I
Ministry of Pain
  • Poll Poll
Would you fire Dan Quinn if you were the owner?
2 3
Replies
119
Views
1K
Runkle
Runkle
JohnnyU
Arch Manning vs LaNorris Sellers, which is best for fantasy?
2
Replies
60
Views
2K
JohnnyU
JohnnyU

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top