What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Perfect example of why Rotoworld SUCKS (1 Viewer)

rickyg

Footballguy
Here is the "analysis" blurb from them about Andre Ellington after last night's game. Which is all well and good if that's what they feel about Ellington, but look at their "analysis" after week 6 just 3 days ago beneath that. So let me get this straight, 3 days ago he was a book it weekly flex play, and after he faces perhaps the best run defense in the NFL and his ENTIRE TEAM lays an egg you pull back the reigns on him and call him a shaky weekly flex play? 3 days later? They do this kind of stuff all the time. It's just a shame that people actually pay for this type of advice.

  • New Player Note Fri, Oct 18

    Andre Ellington rushed three times for just three yards in Arizona's Week 7 loss to the Seahawks, adding two catches for 10 yards.

    Advice: Ellington caught a screen on Arizona's third play from scrimmage, almost busting a big play. He was tripped up for just five yards, however, and wouldn't notch a longer touch the rest of the night. Rashard Mendenhall was even worse, but neither player really stood a chance against Seattle's ferocious defense behind Arizona's atrocious offensive line. Capped at 30-32 snaps per game, Ellington is a shaky weekly FLEX play.

    (Rotoworld.com)
  • Player Note Tue, Oct 15

    Andre Ellington played on 31-of-68 snaps in Sunday's loss to the 49ers.

    Advice: Ellington is not some flash in the pan or a guy that's trending toward a weekly flex role. He's already there. Over the last four weeks, he's averaging 27.0 snaps, 9.0 touches and 70.2 total yards per game. Rashard Mendenhall is playing 30.0 snaps a day during that span. Ellington has a brutal matchup with the Seahawks on Thursday, but he's a must-own asset in all formats -- especially PPR.

    More: profootballfocus.com

    (Rotoworld.com)
 
Pretty much the prime example of why I gather information.........then form my own opinions.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I read these things I get the sense they have different guys writing different blurbs (the "analysis" part) at different times. I've noticed entries can have totally different rationales and writing styles.

The other day, I can't remember which player it was, but they actually used the word "crap" or something similar. I wondered if it had been written by a 12 year old.

They are based on content and volume.

FBG has a news feed I believe, but I'm not sure it as prolific as RW's.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.

 
I'm not defending it per se, but I'll just throw out there... these were probably(?) written by two different people, and with so many players in so many different situations every week, they probably(?) don't cross-reference every article or recommendation because that would probably(?) be prohibitively difficult.

Still... "[he is already] a weekly flex role" versus "he is a shaky weekly flex play" isn't that different. It's not like they went from "YOU MUST ROSTER HIM NOW!!!!" to "OMG GET HIM OFF YOUR ROSTER AT ALL COSTS!!!!" :D

But I do see what you're saying. It doesn't look good.

 
It's just a shame that people actually pay for this type of advice.
That"s why I don't pay for any FF service. Get better info from posters here, then most of the so called experts spew out.

 
Perhaps different people writing the blurbs. I don't see anything outlandish from the Ellington blurb. He's looked excellent all year, worthy of more snaps. Arians didn't use much vs. Seattle for whatever (so he's shakier now).

Some of their blurbs are awful. I think they spent 4 years saying Michael Turner is a fluke and breaking down. Congrats, 31 years old and 4 years later, Turner is out of work guys.

Watch the games yourselves and form your own opinion. :shrug:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It didn't occur to me that it might be different people writing the analysis, but then maybe they should announce who the authors of each piece of analysis are so that the readers can see it's a different person. Otherwise it just makes them look like they started playing fantasy football yesterday.

 
I know I'm a nerd but I've always been unnerved by how many grammar and spelling errors are usually in their write ups.

 
Perhaps different people writing the blurbs. I don't see anything outlandish from the Ellington blurb. He's looked excellent all year, worthy of more snaps. Arians didn't use much vs. Seattle for whatever (so he's shakier now).

Some of their blurbs are awful. I think they spent 4 years saying Michael Turner is a fluke and breaking down. Congrats, 31 years old and 4 years later, Turner is out of work guys.

Watch the games yourselves and form your own opinion. :shrug:
Of course, Craig - I NEVER...EVER follow rotoworld's advice. I use them only for news. But their analysis always follows directly under the news so I can't help but read it and chuckle at how bad and inconsistent it is. Either that or they will stick to their guns and go down with the ship on many players.

They are very late in coming around on players who are breaking out. Usually they acknowledge that he is worth a lot AFTER he has already been snatched up in every fantasy league bc the entire world already knows they are valuable.

 
IMO every bit of info needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Just this am a guy called into SirusXM Fantasy Sports asking the "Rotoexperts" what to do about week 9 with bye week and injuries to his WR's. A legit question, I thought and an opportunity to educate new FF players on how to view your roster and make moves for future weeks (redraft). Their response was, "I don't know. I have no idea what's going to happen in week 9." :mellow:

 
If you don't like Rotoworld, there are plenty of other sites to get your information from. As others here have mentioned, it's a great site for news and anylsis in the blue font lettering can usually be ignored. Do your own analysis and tea reading and stop beating up on a site that provides the most up to date FREE ff info on the web. Not all information is good. It's up to you to dig for more info either here on the SP boards or elsewhere to determine what to do with that info that Rotoworld gives you for nothing.

 
I only look at it for the news and skip their "analysis". I trust myself over these "experts".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That Ellington example is simply the tip of the iceberg, it gets MUCH worse IMO. Their bias at times is also laughable.

My favorite is when a player has a good game and he's approaching or has achieved "flex status" then drops a dud and all of a sudden he's no better than a WR5 or RB5. Yeah, it's bad.

 
I'm just curious - does anyone know where RW is actually based out of? That is, is their HQ at least located in a particular town or region?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're right - that does suck. Mendenhall was not worse than Ellington. Mendenhall's YPC was almost double what Ellington's was and Mendy at least got into the endzone. Bunch of newbs,

 
Here is the "analysis" blurb from them about Andre Ellington after last night's game. Which is all well and good if that's what they feel about Ellington, but look at their "analysis" after week 6 just 3 days ago beneath that. So let me get this straight, 3 days ago he was a book it weekly flex play, and after he faces perhaps the best run defense in the NFL and his ENTIRE TEAM lays an egg you pull back the reigns on him and call him a shaky weekly flex play? 3 days later? They do this kind of stuff all the time. It's just a shame that people actually pay for this type of advice.
if you paid somebody for rotoworld, you got rolled.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
they have guys they love and guys they hate just like most fantasy owners. they do seem to value their own judgment of talent too highly IMO and then search out blurbs and quotes to support "their guys" but it comes with reading the site for a long time that this can be sniffed out. David Wilson is obviously the biggest example of this, Silva had him #15 overall in his post camp top 150 and then the blurbs and quotes about him being a buy low and the Giants having to lean on their explosive and talented back began coming when he started struggling. heck, Silva's going forward rankings still had Wilson at RB30 this week, ahead of Bilal Powell by 6 spots. it's the best site for fantasy news but I don't trust their talent judging skills near as much as they do

 
if he would have had 7 catches and 100 scrimmage yards with a td He would be top 4 rest of way LOL. That's how rotoworld is they are week to week bs.

 
Not sure the issue here. One says he is must own in PPR (which he is) another says he is a Shakey Flex play, ie boom or bust. Sounds pretty spot on.

 
I've pointed out the same thing over the years from the CBS guys, but at least they put their names to it so you know they've flip-flopped. I find it best to consume mass volumes of info and decide which sources you trust over others, while never trusting any one to be the definitive source.

 
I go to Rotoworld for news, not analysis.
This 1,000,000%... if you're going to Rotoworld for their opinion then you've already lost your league. That said I happen to think they are the fastest and best news site out there. Usually they post a new blurb about an injury, starter change, signing, trade etc. within seconds of someone like Shefty or LaCanfora tweeting about it. Following Rotoworld for those types of things is MUCH easier than following the 60 nfl analysts from every city in the country to try and stay up to date on my fantasy injury news. That's what Rotoworld is for, their opinions are always laughable though.

 
Here I was just doing whatever rotoworld said to do in all my leagues. After this revelation, I might get to 1-6 this week in a couple of them once I form my own opinions.

 
I go to Rotoworld for news, not analysis.
This is what you have to remember.

Also, I read it to get their "analysis" to see if it is useful to me in other ways, like that time when they spent amonth talking about how Jamaal Charles was nothing more than a change of pace back at his size....cut, cut, paste, paste, send trade offer to Jamaal Charles owner. Tell him "Cause, you know, if it's coming from Rotoworld on the Internet, it must be true. How do I know that? I read it on the Internet." Bonjour new Jamaal Charles owner!!

 
I should also add that their app is fantastic; much better than Rotowire. Input your roster and get updates about those players in a separate column. I always make a point to check that an hour before gametime (and I also, after getting burned by Kaeding last year, make sure to add my kickers. If Calvin Johnson is a late scratch, you'll hear plenty of people talking about it. But if it's your kicker, a dedicated Rotoworld feed may be your only chance).

 
Here's the thing. At some point, what happens from game to game needs to change your evaluation of players.

Generally speaking, many here overreact to one game, and much of the chalk analysis is based on carrying forward what happened in the most recent performance. But at some point, opinions on players can and should change.

Take Tavon Austin for example. Many smarter football minds than me love his talent, and even thought the breakthrough was coming as recently as last week. But then he was barely in the field in week 6. So it's not unreasonable for an opinion to change in a three day period after seeing new data.

Perhaps it's the same with Ellington. They loved him last week, but now they saw he wasn't used as they thought he would be, so they temper expectations. I don't think it seems unreasonable at all. It's more egregious when opinions don't ever change.

 
Here's the thing. At some point, what happens from game to game needs to change your evaluation of players.

Generally speaking, many here overreact to one game, and much of the chalk analysis is based on carrying forward what happened in the most recent performance. But at some point, opinions on players can and should change.

Take Tavon Austin for example. Many smarter football minds than me love his talent, and even thought the breakthrough was coming as recently as last week. But then he was barely in the field in week 6. So it's not unreasonable for an opinion to change in a three day period after seeing new data.

Perhaps it's the same with Ellington. They loved him last week, but now they saw he wasn't used as they thought he would be, so they temper expectations. I don't think it seems unreasonable at all. It's more egregious when opinions don't ever change.
The one thing that struck me after actually watching a full Cardinals game last night for the first time this year that I didn't know before is that Ellington isn't trusted in pass protection enough to play in the hurry up offense. That really does hurt his value going forward IMO. He should bounce back next week though just based on the much easier matchup.

 
Yeah, I like their info, but they are probably the worst about putting their own biases into the writeups, even when they are just news. I temper my reactions accordingly.

 
Another here for advocating them as a news source, not analysis.

They are really on top of things when it comes to breaking news. Many times they will post the news aspect immediately, then fill in the analysis shortly after, which is a testament to them making getting the news out first the main priority.

They will go down with the ship on guys they tout before the season though, and rarely do they back off. Like most have said, take the analysis with a grain of salt, or ignore it all together if you choose... but when it comes to a free source for up to the minute news, they are tough to beat.

 
Rotoworld analysis is equivalent to putting on a blindfold then throwing a rock in a forest trying to hit the lone dead tree.

I have Kenbrell on my team. I think it was like going into week 1 he was a strong WR2 play. Following week 1 they knocked him down to a WR4. After 1 game. They're stupid as ####.

 
That Ellington example is simply the tip of the iceberg, it gets MUCH worse IMO. Their bias at times is also laughable.

My favorite is when a player has a good game and he's approaching or has achieved "flex status" then drops a dud and all of a sudden he's no better than a WR5 or RB5. Yeah, it's bad.
Their 'analysis' is simply over-reacting to anything that happens. They also have heavy biases towards players they like or don't like.

My advice - only use it for the news and form your own opinions.

 
not sure why this is one of the bad ones. Seen much worse from them. They are saying Ellington is a must own, but a shaky flex play and not a good start against Seahawks. Seems like valid points to me although I don't always agree with them. Form your own opinions and get a twitter account ;)

 
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.
This. Let's not forget how high they were on Isaiah Pead, David Wilson, and Lamar Miller.
Everyone was high on Miller and Wilson. Why they were high on Pead absolutely baffles me though. Nobody has been high on Pead since... Week 2 of 2012?
This simply isn't true. Not to toot my own horn, but I was super low on Miller, and pretty low on Wilson as well (especially relative to the hype). I know I was not the only one who held these views.

 
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.
This. Let's not forget how high they were on Isaiah Pead, David Wilson, and Lamar Miller.
Everyone was high on Miller and Wilson. Why they were high on Pead absolutely baffles me though. Nobody has been high on Pead since... Week 2 of 2012?
This simply isn't true. Not to toot my own horn, but I was super low on Miller, and pretty low on Wilson as well (especially relative to the hype). I know I was not the only one who held these views.
I too was extremely low on Miller. I never thought he was anything more than a straight line speed guy. I was extremely high on Wilson though. That aside, I meant like actual media outlets. Like FBG, Rotoworld, PFF, NFL.com you know people who get paid for their analysis.

 
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.
This. Let's not forget how high they were on Isaiah Pead, David Wilson, and Lamar Miller.
Everyone was high on Miller and Wilson. Why they were high on Pead absolutely baffles me though. Nobody has been high on Pead since... Week 2 of 2012?
This simply isn't true. Not to toot my own horn, but I was super low on Miller, and pretty low on Wilson as well (especially relative to the hype). I know I was not the only one who held these views.
I wasn't high at all on Miller either; I found the mad love for him all summer totally baffling (as I said in the main Lamar Miller thread several times).

 
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.
This. Let's not forget how high they were on Isaiah Pead, David Wilson, and Lamar Miller.
Everyone was high on Miller and Wilson. Why they were high on Pead absolutely baffles me though. Nobody has been high on Pead since... Week 2 of 2012?
This simply isn't true. Not to toot my own horn, but I was super low on Miller, and pretty low on Wilson as well (especially relative to the hype). I know I was not the only one who held these views.
I found out that by the time my drafts rolled around the hype engines had overpriced these guys so much I didn't really have to worry about drafting them. They were gone before I would have ever taken them. On topic: depending on who writes the blurbs, they can be informative, you just have to take opinion as just that and nothing more.
 
Rotoworld updates always sound like they were written by someone who just started playing fantasy football last week.
This. Let's not forget how high they were on Isaiah Pead, David Wilson, and Lamar Miller.
Everyone was high on Miller and Wilson. Why they were high on Pead absolutely baffles me though. Nobody has been high on Pead since... Week 2 of 2012?
This simply isn't true. Not to toot my own horn, but I was super low on Miller, and pretty low on Wilson as well (especially relative to the hype). I know I was not the only one who held these views.
I too was extremely low on Miller. I never thought he was anything more than a straight line speed guy. I was extremely high on Wilson though. That aside, I meant like actual media outlets. Like FBG, Rotoworld, PFF, NFL.com you know people who get paid for their analysis.
I see. That is true. I thought you were talking about individuals. I think what happens is these media outlets see these young guys with good opportunity, and they don't want to be the site that missed the boat on the next big thing.

 
I don't think RW sucks.

As everyone said, the news is great.

The analysis can be very good, but, like anyone else's, it needs to thoughtfully considered rather than followed to the letter. They tend to present their view as gospel rather than as a best guess based on stats and observation.

Also, I do agree they are quick to waffle and don't put enough context in their analysis. I'd prefer something such as "we thought RB X would get lots of carries, but we saw last night that he wasn't in pass protection situations. Keep an eye on this development; RB X's value could be less than we thought." It would improve their credibility. But it seems like they go from "player X had 27 yards today, he's just a WR5" to "player X had 120 yards today and is a locked-in WR1" from one game to the next without any explanation for the new stance.

There's another recent thread about FBG bias and in that one many posters say they use FBG mostly or exclusively for their FF info. I really think it's important to check out several sources to get other viewpoints. Each usually has its strengths and weaknesses.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think RW sucks.

As everyone said, the news is great.

The analysis can be very good, but, like anyone else's, it needs to thoughtfully considered rather than followed to the letter. They tend to present their view as gospel rather than as a best guess based on stats and observation.

Also, I do agree they are quick to waffle and don't put enough context in their analysis. I'd prefer something such as "we thought RB X would get lots of carries, but we saw last night that he wasn't in pass protection situations. Keep an eye on this development; RB X's value could be less than we thought." It would improve their credibility. But it seems like they go from "player X had 27 yards today, he's just a WR5" to "player X had 120 yards today and is a locked-in WR1" from one game to the next without any explanation for the new stance.

There's another recent thread about FBG bias and in that one many posters say they use FBG mostly or exclusively for their FF info. I really think it's important to check out several sources to get other viewpoints. Each usually has its strengths and weaknesses.
I think this would cure a lot of the hate they get. If they just ate a little crow every now and then, people would not dislike their analysis as much.

I agree the more sources the better. Using the sites wisely is essential to success in fantasy football, but taking one site's opinion as gospel is foolish.

 
Here's the thing. At some point, what happens from game to game needs to change your evaluation of players.

Generally speaking, many here overreact to one game, and much of the chalk analysis is based on carrying forward what happened in the most recent performance. But at some point, opinions on players can and should change.

Take Tavon Austin for example. Many smarter football minds than me love his talent, and even thought the breakthrough was coming as recently as last week. But then he was barely in the field in week 6. So it's not unreasonable for an opinion to change in a three day period after seeing new data.

Perhaps it's the same with Ellington. They loved him last week, but now they saw he wasn't used as they thought he would be, so they temper expectations. I don't think it seems unreasonable at all. It's more egregious when opinions don't ever change.
Don't disagree with this (I did finally bench Trent Richardson this week). But I think most people err too much in the other direction, as you said, overreacting to each week. I always try to look past the stats and figure out what was really going on there. Ellington is a perfect example. I'm inclined to cut a guy some slack if he has a bad game vs. a D like Seattle's. But the pass-protection issue is something to keep an eye on if it limits his snaps. I guess that's too wishy-washy to put in a Rotoworld analysis.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top