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!

Oak running game (1 Viewer)

rawdog

Footballguy
So Fargas looked OK yesterday, but Jordan was in sweats and Rhodes barely used.

Are we getting closer to Mike Bush getting his shot?

 
He may play, but not much IMO. They have to make a decision in a week or so if they're going to activate him at all for the year. If they do I'd be surprised if he played more than a few snaps a game. Russell is going to play sooner rather than later and if he's in there, they're not going to want to get their #1 pick killed right out of the gate. They're going to have a guy who can block and pick up blitzes IMO. A few touches a game if at all.

 
He may play, but not much IMO. They have to make a decision in a week or so if they're going to activate him at all for the year. If they do I'd be surprised if he played more than a few snaps a game. Russell is going to play sooner rather than later and if he's in there, they're not going to want to get their #1 pick killed right out of the gate. They're going to have a guy who can block and pick up blitzes IMO. A few touches a game if at all.
The Raiders have until Wednesday to make the call on Bush.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
He may play, but not much IMO. They have to make a decision in a week or so if they're going to activate him at all for the year. If they do I'd be surprised if he played more than a few snaps a game. Russell is going to play sooner rather than later and if he's in there, they're not going to want to get their #1 pick killed right out of the gate. They're going to have a guy who can block and pick up blitzes IMO. A few touches a game if at all.
The Raiders have until tomorrow to make the call on Bush.
Thanks, I knew it was coming up soon.
 
So what exactly is the deal with Rhodes and Jordan? Are they just retreads now or will that have any value on another team?

 
So what exactly is the deal with Rhodes and Jordan? Are they just retreads now or will that have any value on another team?
I think Jordan could latch onto another team next year and have some fantasy value ( assuming he's cut in the off-season per salary rumors ). He was running very well prior to the back injury, and I believe its just a situational problem in OAK.I wouldn't consider Rhodes as anything more than a change of pace/3rd down back in any system.
 
Fargas has played very well for a team with no QB and average WR play.

Do not discount Bush and Fargas splitting carries next year.

 
He may play, but not much IMO. They have to make a decision in a week or so if they're going to activate him at all for the year. If they do I'd be surprised if he played more than a few snaps a game. Russell is going to play sooner rather than later and if he's in there, they're not going to want to get their #1 pick killed right out of the gate. They're going to have a guy who can block and pick up blitzes IMO. A few touches a game if at all.
The Raiders have until tomorrow to make the call on Bush.
Doesn't sound right. Oakland gets 3 weeks to activate Bush.

It's only been 2 weeks.

:moneybag:

 
He may play, but not much IMO. They have to make a decision in a week or so if they're going to activate him at all for the year. If they do I'd be surprised if he played more than a few snaps a game. Russell is going to play sooner rather than later and if he's in there, they're not going to want to get their #1 pick killed right out of the gate. They're going to have a guy who can block and pick up blitzes IMO. A few touches a game if at all.
The Raiders have until Wednesday to make the call on Bush.
Doesn't sound right. Oakland gets 3 weeks to activate Bush.

It's only been 2 weeks.

:confused:
Yeah it really doesn't. I thought the 3 weeks thing as well, which may be that the paper meant **next** wednesday. edited to continue the ambiguity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top