Philip Rivers not *so* bad, eh? (1 Viewer)

[Marc Faletti]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!!

Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this.

The moral of the story: Patience.

 

[Bri]

He took a beating when the team struggled and he deserves the praise now that they did well.

 

[fred_1_15301]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Until he throws out a clunker next week? Come on man.....from a fantasy standpoint, this guy has been the model of inconsistency this year.

 

[parrot]

He runs like a duck.

 

[Marc Faletti]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Until he throws out a clunker next week? Come on man.....from a fantasy standpoint, this guy has been the model of inconsistency this year.

Welcome to the world of a second-year starting QB...

 

[perry147]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

River took far too much heat for the losing. He had a very solid game against the broncos. However I will not forget this awful throws I saw him make during the weeks past - but I think that will go away in time.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

The offensive line gave him time and he looked good. Against the Cheifs they did not give him time and he looked rough. The common denominator, much like it is for most proffessional QBs worth their salt goes like this... Time to pass = QB looks good. No time to pass = qb looks bad.

 

[Franchise Playa]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

They ran the ball more against the worst run D in the league and Champ Bailey left the game early. It's more like he benefited from those 2 things than any real progression on his part.He plays better when the run game is first and him throwing is second...I chalk this up to Mcnabb against a weak Detroit secondary/Usi again Winston Justice. He had a great matchup....Im not gonna "crown him" until he shows this on a weekly basis and against better comp....I mean it's Denver without Champ Bailey...

 

[NatronIsMean]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

The offensive line gave him time and he looked good. Against the Cheifs they did not give him time and he looked rough. The common denominator, much like it is for most proffessional QBs worth their salt goes like this... Time to pass = QB looks good. No time to pass = qb looks bad.

True. DEN doesn't get much right now from their DLine. Also, their shutdown CB was out of the game, so this was a MUCH weakened DEN D. Still, Rivers is very startable against any team that doesn't pressure the QB very well.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

 

[NorrisB]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

Dont forget that MRLockDown himself was injured and didnt return early in the game.

 

[Marc Faletti]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

This thread is a Rivers thread, Jeff. You're welcome to apply it to this year or any year you like. There was a growing mentality on the board that Rivers is actually a bad QB, and I think it's too early to proclaim him a bust. Even in some of his lesser games this year, Rivers has shown a number of promising signs.Oh, and the last thing to worry about is Rivers' arm. It's the one weapon that hasn't let him down at ANY point.

 

[Tau837]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

Dont forget that MRLockDown himself was injured and didnt return early in the game.

Bailey may have gone out reasonably early, but he was covering Gates while he played, and there was no hesitation on Rivers' part going after him, with success.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12.

He's number 9 as of right now, although not every QB has played five games.

 

[PranksterJD]

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

The problem isn't Rivers' numbers, so much as it is his consistency. In my league, he's scored [ -1, 9, 22. -2, 23 ]. That's good enough to put him at #12, but far from what I'd want from my starting QB. I'd much rather have guys like Roethlisberger, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Schaub, Eli, or even Derek Anderson ( ) who are much less likely to lose a game for me by themselves.

 

[NatronIsMean]

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

The problem isn't Rivers' numbers, so much as it is his consistency. In my league, he's scored [ -1, 9, 22. -2, 23 ]. That's good enough to put him at #12, but far from what I'd want from my starting QB. I'd much rather have guys like Roethlisberger, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Schaub, Eli, or even Derek Anderson ( ) who are much less likely to lose a game for me by themselves.

Agree. Real tough to pick out the starts at this point...

 

[tommyGunZ]

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

The problem isn't Rivers' numbers, so much as it is his consistency. In my league, he's scored [ -1, 9, 22. -2, 23 ]. That's good enough to put him at #12, but far from what I'd want from my starting QB. I'd much rather have guys like Roethlisberger, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Schaub, Eli, or even Derek Anderson ( ) who are much less likely to lose a game for me by themselves.

Those negative pt games are anomalies. Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

 

[PranksterJD]

Those negative pt games are anomalies. Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

I could just as easily say that the 20+ games were anomalies and he's a 20-25 QB in fantasy and real life. I won't, because, I don't believe it, but I could.Really, Rivers is a fine "real life" QB. He **should not** be a top 10 QB in fantasy, because that offense **should** run through Tomlinson. Rivers needs to be there to take the role of Dilfer to the Ravens... just get in there an protect the ball. TD here and there, great. Just DO NOT throw a pick. Who knows with Norv though.I was a huge Rivers fan before this year, but what I've seen from him so far made me settle my expectations a bit. Long term I think he'll be good. I'm envisioning Steve McNair numbers??Rivers himself gave the key in his post-game, its all around his O-line. If they play well, he's going to do well. Problem is, there's not a whole lot that can tell you whether those 5 guys are going to show up to play or not, and until they do Rivers is riding my bench.

 

[Koya]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

 

[TwinTurbo]

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

The problem isn't Rivers' numbers, so much as it is his consistency. In my league, he's scored [ -1, 9, 22. -2, 23 ]. That's good enough to put him at #12, but far from what I'd want from my starting QB. I'd much rather have guys like Roethlisberger, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Schaub, Eli, or even Derek Anderson ( ) who are much less likely to lose a game for me by themselves.

Exactly. There's only been two good games from Rivers and he was on my bench due to the clunkers he had the week before. I doubt very many owners started him this week if they had a better matchup at QB. And of course this was the week he blew up against the "formidable" Denver pass D. Rivers was drafted by many QBBC teams and he is killing them.

 

[jonessed]

Bailey was on Gates most of the time and he was getting beat pretty regularly. Obviously losing him made it that much easier, but Rivers would have had a good game regardless.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Really, Rivers is a fine "real life" QB. He **should not** be a top 10 QB in fantasy, because that offense **should** run through Tomlinson.

I think the offense should be top five in scoring, as it has been for the last three years -- and generally when an NFL team scores a lot of points the QB scores a lot of fantasy points. Even if Tomlinson takes them down to the goal line all the time, Rivers is going to get some TD passes to Gates and VJ down there.

Rivers needs to be there to take the role of Dilfer to the Ravens...

The Ravens' offense went like five games without a TD that year. That shouldn't happen with the Chargers. I understand your point, but the Chargers offense should not just be trying to run the clock out -- they should be putting 30+ points on the board each week, very much unlike the 2000 Ravens.

I was a huge Rivers fan before this year, but what I've seen from him so far made me settle my expectations a bit.

He went through a bad five-game stretch last year as well (toward the end of the season). I hope the Rivers we saw yesterday is the one we'll see the rest of the season, but he is prone to hitting a bad streak here and there.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

 

[tommyGunZ]

"Well out of the top Top 12." Besides Palmer, Brady, Romo, Manning and Favre which QBs are well in the Top 12? All of the other QBs run hot and cold from week to week. Among QBs that have played in all their teams' games Rivers is 10th in PPG in my league. Ahead of guys like McNabb, Hasselbeck, Schaub, Vince Young and Jay Cutler.

The problem isn't Rivers' numbers, so much as it is his consistency. In my league, he's scored [ -1, 9, 22. -2, 23 ]. That's good enough to put him at #12, but far from what I'd want from my starting QB. I'd much rather have guys like Roethlisberger, Hasselbeck, Kitna, Schaub, Eli, or even Derek Anderson ( ) who are much less likely to lose a game for me by themselves.

Exactly. There's only been two good games from Rivers and he was on my bench due to the clunkers he had the week before. I doubt very many owners started him this week if they had a better matchup at QB. And of course this was the week he blew up against the "formidable" Denver pass D. Rivers was drafted by many QBBC teams and he is killing them.

Yep. I started Rivers in weeks 1 and 4, and benched him weeks 2, 3, and 5.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

I think you underestimate how good Rivers was last year in his first year as a starter.

 

[perry147]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

I think you underestimate how good Rivers was last year in his first year as a starter.

Tommy that is absolutely NUTS - there is no way that he is top 5.

 

[shakeybarn]

But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12.

He's number 9 as of right now, although not every QB has played five games.

Hmm, he's #14 in my expert league...actually #15 if you average in McNabb. Yep , just checked another league I'm in... he's Regardless, total pts don't matter when it's boom or bust. Something should be said for consistency (see Willis McGahee quietly in the top 5... with one game barely over 100 yards, much less rushing TDs (he has zero, by the way).Rivers putting up single digits then 25 pts at random wll end up screwing owners.... unless you use a cumulative format (very rare, these days).I'd rather have David Garrad (right next to Rivers...actually much higher if you average out his bye week)... a QB who puts up 17, 19, 15, 16 vs 4, 5, 25, 5, 26 ...that's a 2-3 record... per se.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

I think you underestimate how good Rivers was last year in his first year as a starter.

No, I don't. Rivers simply has to consistently play at a high level before he can be considered top 5. Even top 10 is borderline right now.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

I think you underestimate how good Rivers was last year in his first year as a starter.

Tommy that is absolutely NUTS - there is no way that he is top 5.

Manning, Brady, Palmer, Favre, and McNabb are all better NFL QBs, IMO. After that I think Rivers is about as good as anyone else.

 

[BeachBums]

Really, Rivers is a fine "real life" QB. He **should not** be a top 10 QB in fantasy, because that offense **should** run through Tomlinson. Rivers needs to be there to take the role of Dilfer to the Ravens... just get in there an protect the ball. TD here and there, great. Just DO NOT throw a pick. Who knows with Norv though.

Rivers himself gave the key in his post-game, its all around his O-line. If they play well, he's going to do well. Problem is, there's not a whole lot that can tell you whether those 5 guys are going to show up to play or not, and until they do Rivers is riding my bench.

Was it me or did it look to you all that Turner started off the game running the offense through Rivers? The game was well in hand early and Rivers only ended up throwing 18 times, but to me there was more emphasis on the passing game than I expected. IIRC, for most of the first half LT had more receiving yards than rushing yards. A lot of the 18 were screens to LT and short passes to Gates, but there were more over the top to Jackson than I was expecting. Maybe Turner isn't as quick to give up on Rivers as we are?

 

[shakeybarn]

Rivers is a top 5-10 QB, both in fantasy and real life.

You are high. Rivers isn't as bad as some say, but to suggest that he might be a top 5 NFL QB, is just crazy.

I think you underestimate how good Rivers was last year in his first year as a starter.

Tommy that is absolutely NUTS - there is no way that he is top 5.

Manning, Brady, Palmer, Favre, and McNabb are all better NFL QBs, IMO. After that I think Rivers is about as good as anyone else.

We talking fantasy or general football?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

There's only been two good games from Rivers and he was on my bench due to the clunkers he had the week before. I doubt very many owners started him this week if they had a better matchup at QB. And of course this was the week he blew up against the "formidable" Denver pass D. Rivers was drafted by many QBBC teams and he is killing them.

This is a fair point. I generally think that consistency is an attribute of previous performances, not an attribute of players. I.e., it is like luck in that it isn't something that carries over from the past into the future. The fact that Rivers has been inconsistent so far this year doesn't really make him much more likely to be inconsistent the rest of the way. I've forgotten exactly what Doug Drinen did to study the subject, but in general I remember he found it hard to predict consistency in Year N+1 from consistency in Year N. (I don't remember whether he looked at QBs as opposed to just RBs, etc.)But the reality is that Rivers' inconsistency early this season did hurt his fantasy owners if they benched him for his good games. I happened to start Rivers in nearly every league yesterday -- but I'm familiar with the general principle since I benched McNabb in week three in a few leagues. That's one of the reasons a guy like Manning is worth a premium. You don't have to play guessing games about when to start him. Rivers isn't there yet.

 

[Resident A]

It's a trap! We'll all start him next week, thinking he's turned the corner only to be enfuriated by his 160 yards/0TD,/3INT performance.

Now I don't doubt Rivers will contend for the top-10 fantasy QBs, his overall numbers will be decent.

The problem is inconsistency. He'll have a 2 TD game, then 2 games w/ no TDs, the a 3 TD game, then 0 TD, etc. . You can't rely on a guy like that. I am most likely starting Schaub over him every week, due to the consistent production.

 

[Tau837]

I know many will take issue with this statement, especially since I am known as a Rivers fan, but I think he he will play well from here forward. Not that he won't have a bad game or two, but I expect him to have about 8 good to great games from here forward. If he does, that would bring him to 10 good to great games on the season. Not too many fantasy QBs will have more than that.

Someone posted he'd rather have Garrard than Rivers. I couldn't disagree more. I would love it if the Rivers owner in my league would trade him to me for Garrard, who I have.

 

[Tau837]

Oh yeah, and by the way, Rivers played well against Denver twice last season, despite the general perception that they have/had a great pass defense... Maybe it was just because I'm a big believer in him, but I didn't think he deserved to be benched this week. He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

 

[shakeybarn]

I know many will take issue with this statement, especially since I am known as a Rivers fan, but I think he he will play well from here forward. Not that he won't have a bad game or two, but I expect him to have about 8 good to great games from here forward. If he does, that would bring him to 10 good to great games on the season. Not too many fantasy QBs will have more than that. Someone posted he'd rather have Garrard than Rivers. I couldn't disagree more. I would love it if the Rivers owner in my league would trade him to me for Garrard, who I have.

That someone was me... and points are points, and consistency is consistency. I wouldn't personally take Garrard... but his output has been surely better than Rivers... moreover, you know what you are going to get week in/week out. Thusly the point of my comment.

 

[shakeybarn]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

He played very well in the first game against Oakland last year -- and in fact, after week one (vs. OAK) I believe he led the entire NFL in passer rating.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

in my two main leagues, Phil is currently ranked 12th and 10th at QB respectively

 

[BeachBums]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

The Oakland D was a different animal last year. They finished the season #1 against the pass and allowed an average of 150 yds/gm in 2006. This year they're ranked 22 and are allowing 226 yds/game.

 

[shakeybarn]

in my two main leagues, Phil is currently ranked 12th and 10th at QB respectively

Is that bye adjusted???... Jason Campbell and McNabb both currently rank higher once bye-adjusted. [just keepin' it honest]

 

[Tau837]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

Well, I'd throw out the first game, since that was the opener last season and Marty gave him only 11 passing attempts. He actually played well getting 108/1 on only 11 attempts. Agree his second game was poor. So it's a split. I'd play him.

 

[Tau837]

I know many will take issue with this statement, especially since I am known as a Rivers fan, but I think he he will play well from here forward. Not that he won't have a bad game or two, but I expect him to have about 8 good to great games from here forward. If he does, that would bring him to 10 good to great games on the season. Not too many fantasy QBs will have more than that.

Someone posted he'd rather have Garrard than Rivers. I couldn't disagree more. I would love it if the Rivers owner in my league would trade him to me for Garrard, who I have.

That someone was me... and points are points, and consistency is consistency. I wouldn't personally take Garrard... but his output has been surely better than Rivers... moreover, you know what you are going to get week in/week out. Thusly the point of my comment.

Understood. And the point of my post is that I think Rivers will play well for the rest of the season... better than Garrard's steady level of play so far... which is why I'd rather have him.

 

[shakeybarn]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

The Oakland D was a different animal last year. They finished the season #1 against the pass and allowed an average of 150 yds/gm in 2006. This year they're ranked 22 and are allowing 226 yds/game.

Ranked 22nd in yardage... yes... but middle of the pack on TDs... and I believe lead the NFL in INTS per game.Since yer tossing out stats... 3 of the 4 teams the Raiders have faced are Top 10 passing offenses in the NFL... and Miami is middle of the road.

 

[shakeybarn]

I know many will take issue with this statement, especially since I am known as a Rivers fan, but I think he he will play well from here forward. Not that he won't have a bad game or two, but I expect him to have about 8 good to great games from here forward. If he does, that would bring him to 10 good to great games on the season. Not too many fantasy QBs will have more than that.

Someone posted he'd rather have Garrard than Rivers. I couldn't disagree more. I would love it if the Rivers owner in my league would trade him to me for Garrard, who I have.

That someone was me... and points are points, and consistency is consistency. I wouldn't personally take Garrard... but his output has been surely better than Rivers... moreover, you know what you are going to get week in/week out. Thusly the point of my comment.

Understood. And the point of my post is that I think Rivers will play well for the rest of the season... better than Garrard's steady level of play so far... which is why I'd rather have him.

He should improve... o-line is healthy, LT & Turner, Gates, VJax... Eric Parker will be back soon... but facing Oak x2, Min, Indy, Jax, Bal, Ten, at HOU, at KC... there's a slew of tough matchups the rest of the way. So maybe he can finish just in the Top 12... but all that means is at least 1/2 to 2/3 your fantasy league has a better QB than you. Ppl always seem to forget that notion when ranking QBs....

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12.

He's number 9 as of right now, although not every QB has played five games.

I don't have the projections at my fingertips, but IIRC Rivers was projected as outside of the Top 20 the last 3 weeks in Dodds' projections.Rivers will likely finish in the Top 12 this year because of the flawed view of his total annual points.It is much better to look at a "quality start" for fantasy purposes for QBs rather than an annualized average.What would you rather have, a QB who plays 10 games and puts up 20 pts on average, or a QB who puts up 15 a week for 16 weeks?I'll take the guy with 10 games and 20 and then find a QB2/3 combo to replace his 7 games missed.As for Rivers, IIRC I said a "good start" was 20+ FP, a "bad start" was 12 or under. So far Rivers has 2 of each and one in-between. That works ok as long as you picked the right 2 or 3 weeks or had a best ball option.Remember many deemed Rivers as a Top 12 / QB1 in preseason, which I vehemently disagreed with and still do.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Only 13/18 for 270 and 2 against the formerly impenetrable Denver pass D. Oh, and he ran one in too. Get Whitehurst in there!!!! Seriously, though, we have to remember that young QBs will be up and down. Is Rivers a finished product yet? No. Will he struggle again from time to time? Yes. But he's still on the upswing, and games like Sunday's dismantling of the Broncos should remind us all of this. The moral of the story: Patience.

Dre Bly was injured some, but I will give him credit for this game.But from a fantasy standpoint, he remains well out of the Top 12. I'd also be surprised if someone started him over many other candidates.I still don't trust his arm nor his fantasy numbers going forward.Also at one point, none of the SD WRs had a catch - I think that may have been through the second half?This feels more like a Dynasty thread than a 2007 thread, Marc.

This thread is a Rivers thread, Jeff. You're welcome to apply it to this year or any year you like. There was a growing mentality on the board that Rivers is actually a bad QB, and I think it's too early to proclaim him a bust. Even in some of his lesser games this year, Rivers has shown a number of promising signs.Oh, and the last thing to worry about is Rivers' arm. It's the one weapon that hasn't let him down at ANY point.

Marc,Considering that about 80% of FF players don't play Dynasty, and there's no mention of Dynasty in your OP, nor is there a "Crown" symbol on the thread, I wanted to make sure of your timeline.Since FBG is about fantasy football more often than not, most of the bashing of Rivers (myself included) has been focused on that definition - how is Rivers as a FF QB. If that is still your discussion point, and you can still "apply this to this year", then there is no way you can have patience. It's 5 weeks into the 2007 season and most leagues last 13 weeks or fewer for a regular season. That means he is one start away from half done (Week 7 bye) for the regular season. Patience is a luxury most do not have for 2007.I've gone on record (probably before your time, I think it was a playoff game last year) that I didn't like Rivers' arm. It may not be his arm but more his timing / touch and not delivering the ball soon enough, but I am not impressed with his use of what many deem to be one of his better skills.

 

[BeachBums]

He has now played 3 games against Denver since he took over as full time starter. In those games, Rivers was 47/67 (70%) for 771 yards (11.5 ypa), 6 passing TDs, and 2 interceptions, plus 1 rushing TD. Too bad he can't play Denver every week.

He also played well against Denver in week 17 in 2005, although his stats didn't reflect it. (It was in the rain, and there were some drops.) He was able to move the ball in the second half after Brees had been completely ineffective in the first half.

In his two games vs Oakland...108/1/0133/0/1So are Rivers owners going to bench him this week, since Denver was such a "lock" by those in the historical know....

The Oakland D was a different animal last year. They finished the season #1 against the pass and allowed an average of 150 yds/gm in 2006. This year they're ranked 22 and are allowing 226 yds/game.

Ranked 22nd in yardage... yes... but middle of the pack on TDs... and I believe lead the NFL in INTS per game.Since yer tossing out stats... 3 of the 4 teams the Raiders have faced are Top 10 passing offenses in the NFL... and Miami is middle of the road.

You're right, the Raiders aren't that bad and they're leading the division. They've beaten the Browns and the Dolphins and barely lost to the Broncos.