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!
You really HAVE to start reading those daily emails--you know the ones with the big red headlines: Item #1 - Our $35,000 Subscriber ContestDarn. It's my first year on this site and I didn't know about the contest until it was too late
Sorry, gbDarn. It's my first year on this site and I didn't know about the contest until it was too late
But I will let you know that there are a couple of cool free contests on the board (offense/defense and survivor) in a couple of the threads on the board. Also, there (hopefully - as in they've done one every year) will be a playoff contest as well later on in the year.-QG
The contest ends before the playoffs start.
That's the only one.-QG
Yeah, Week 10 will be my biggest hurdle, but lots of others have Rodgers or Finley or Brees or Mathew or Rivers, so the cutoff should be lower from that.I wish the guys in my auction draft thought like that -- the problem with your logic is you can't play those 9 guys against those 2 guys. You have to choose the best 2 from those 9 to go against 2 studs. They could do that, but the team with the 2 studs might also have some of those guys -- I have 4 of them, which addresses the 3 issues you mention. I'll take 2 players who score 24 points each in a week over 9 players who score 14 points each when you can only start 2 of them. Points on the bench don't count.Man, good luck in week 10 with both Rodgers and Finley out - and the competition getting fierce at that point.Two WRs frequently mentioned are Calvin Johnson and Wes Welker. According to the latest projections (with ppr), they are projected at 275.1 points and 202.6 points for a total of 477.7 points. They cost a total of $48.I had 22 or 23 players last year and lasted pretty late, but this year is very different, with much cheaper studs and much more expensive lower-end players for the value. The shorter rosters last year probably didn't have many of the great $1-4 players that were common. This year, there are very few such bargains, so it's apples and oranges.
This year, I have only 18 players, but I have 4 of the above value WR's to go along with Andre Johnson and Welker. I also have Rodgers, Chris Johnson, Ray Rice, and Finley, so went with the stud theory combined with value. With less depth, I may be more susceptible during byes than a 26-player team, but if I can survive the bye weeks and the top guys stay healthy, I think I'll have a better chance of winning than most 26-player teams (projected #29 in week 1). Hopefully the rest of the studs and value players will make up for the studs on bye.
To win, you need to get lucky either by having your guys stay healthy, hitting on some lower-priced guys who turn out to perform like studs, or probably both. Just because last year higher-player teams had a higher chance of lasting to the final 250 doesn't mean this year's the same and those with 18-player rosters are clueless. I think the numbers will look different this year because of the changes, but many 18-player teams will still get knocked out during the bye weeks and because of injury. I think there's a good chance the winner, or many of the top 100, will have shorter rosters this year.
For a total of $48, you could get a total of 1,302 points from the following:
Mike Williams, TB - $8 [194.8 pts]
Nate Washington, TEN - $8 [147.3 pts]
Bernard Berrian, MIN - $7 [162.9 pts]
Laurent Robinson, STL - $7 [165.4 pts]
Brian Hartline - $6 [137.5 pts]
Louis Murphy, OAK - $4 [163.3 pts]
Deion Branch, SEA - $3 [121.4 pts]
Jordan Shipley, CIN - $3 [101.3 pts]
Justin Gage, TEN - $2 [ 108.4 pts]
Plus you get (1) a substantial amount of diversification, (2) insurance against injuries, (3) better coverage of the flex position, and (4) reduction of bye week problems. Unless the projections are flawed, it's a no-brainer. It's harder the find outright value-priced players at QB (except for Anderson) and at RB (except for Foster and maybe Leon Washington or Thomas Jones or Fred Taylor), but there are a lot of value-priced TEs. My conclusion is that the most effective strategy is to use all 30 roster slots and pack your lineup with value-priced players along with some selected studs.
what does this comment mean? are there projected performances available somewhere?ctriopelle said:
Um, either
or more likely never mind. Working on some metrics. Somehow I missed Tynes in a data-transfer :( or the Turk is lightning fast 
-QG
guessing that the entries are listed in order of simulation results? yes?
If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.Good luck.
I understand. But he just needs to finish top 6 to be worth it. Barring injury he should do that. I don't think he will throw for over 3,000 yds, because he could only catch 20 Td's then.If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.Good luck.
http://subscribers.footballguys.com/contes...eweekonly-1.phpthis really needs its own link on the site somewhere...
Curious for why the need to mock? Only reason I ask is what specifically in what we have seen with respect to Finley's game play, all the coach speak from McCarthy about all-pro or pro-bowl status for him this year, and Rogers admitted trust for him does not add up to top 3 production? Yes there is a lot of hype, but it is coming from the right people. His play late last year and into this pre-season shows the AR12 to JF88 connection to be firing on all cylinders. Again, I know the hype is insane right now, but what about it is not justifiable? Was $21 really at all too much to pay for him all things considered?If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.Good luck.
)
I dont mean to belabor the point, but why? Does he have the production history? Does his team have strong recent production history at this position? Does this team have a scarcity of valid WR options?I understand. But he just needs to finish top 6 to be worth it. Barring injury he should do that. I don't think he will throw for over 3,000 yds, because he could only catch 20 Td's then.If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.
Good luck.
Yeah...I doubt I would do much mocking, tbh. I guess I just find it surprising that so many have drank the koolaid without a nice fat history set. People said Brian Bosworth was going to be the greatest defensive player ever, etc etc. It will be interesting to watch what happens...Curious for why the need to mock? Only reason I ask is what specifically in what we have seen with respect to Finley's game play, all the coach speak from McCarthy about all-pro or pro-bowl status for him this year, and Rogers admitted trust for him does not add up to top 3 production? Yes there is a lot of hype, but it is coming from the right people. His play late last year and into this pre-season shows the AR12 to JF88 connection to be firing on all cylinders. Again, I know the hype is insane right now, but what about it is not justifiable? Was $21 really at all too much to pay for him all things considered?If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.Good luck.
I'm guessing you don't subscribe to the theory that staying with the pack is often good and protects your team. Finley doesn't have to be TE1 for it to be worth it for him to be on your team IN THIS CONTEST. Guys like Finley and Foster could be average and you'll still be OK because so many people own them that they move the cut line. So the "secret" which I think has more or less been true every year of the contest, is to have most of the highly owned guys, with a zag or two, and then get your sleepers to hit it big at the end of the year.If Finley meets or exceeds projections, I will bow my head and say congrats to those who took him. If he finishes outside of the top 8 TEs, and I submit there's a reasonable chance this happens, I will mock those who bought him mercilessly.Good luck.
I took that combo but I have 5 other RBs that will be running Week 7.Week 7 ultimately put me off taking LT in the end, but I was set on Best and Foster.
Not only did I pair Andre and Calvin Johnson, but I also took 28 others for a 30-man roster. Did well enough to rank #35 for Week 1 simulation. I'm sure a Week 7 simulation might be a little scarier:Entry 105181
This entry is still alive. 
1 ------------------------------------Philip Rivers $19 0.00 Matt Ryan $16 0.00 Derek Anderson $6 0.00 Jerome Harrison $18 0.00 C.J. Spiller $17 0.00 Tim Hightower $13 0.00 Arian Foster $13 0.00 Leon Washington $8 0.00 Thomas Jones $7 0.00 Sammy Morris $3 0.00 Andre Johnson $32 0.00 Calvin Johnson $27 0.00 Mike Williams $8 0.00 Bernard Berrian $7 0.00 Laurent Robinson $7 0.00 Louis Murphy $4 0.00 Deion Branch $3 0.00 Justin Gage $2 0.00 Anthony Fasano $7 0.00 Jermaine Gresham $6 0.00 Brandon Pettigrew $4 0.00 Daniel Graham $3 0.00 Olindo Mare $2 0.00 Graham Gano $2 0.00 Matt Bryant $2 0.00 Rian Lindell $2 0.00 New Orleans Saints $4 0.00 Cleveland Browns $3 0.00 Tampa Bay Buccaneers $3 0.00 Detroit Lions $2 0.00 ------------------------------------TOTAL 0.00 CUTOFF 0.00I'm surprised that there's any, considering they're both off the same week and it's week 10.
Thats a very good team. I would have a hard time believing you got all that for only $250. I rolled with R. Matthews, A.Foster, Mike Willliams, Vernon, Louis Murphy, Derek Alexander and 49ers as well. I differ by having G.Jennings, Desean Jax and Crabtree at WR instead of Andre and Driver and LT and Forte at RB.
Click on the "My FBG" link on the FBG Home Page. Scroll down for the link to your team.
Same argument was applied last year and the later in the year we went, the more the short rosters got decimated. As that destruction was in full swing the new argument became that the short rosters would dominate the post season. Well only one made the top ten as I recall.Once weeks 14-16 roll around, the guys with the 2010 version of Harrison, Charles, Finley, Bryant, etc will be right on par with the stud rosters and weilding the extra depth especially at K and D to edge ahead of the stud roster teams. As I recall, Detriot D was the difference between last year's winner taking home the big check and finishing second.I had 22 or 23 players last year and lasted pretty late, but this year is very different, with much cheaper studs and much more expensive lower-end players for the value. The shorter rosters last year probably didn't have many of the great $1-4 players that were common. This year, there are very few such bargains, so it's apples and oranges.
This year, I have only 18 players, but I have 4 of the above value WR's to go along with Andre Johnson and Welker. I also have Rodgers, Chris Johnson, Ray Rice, and Finley, so went with the stud theory combined with value. With less depth, I may be more susceptible during byes than a 26-player team, but if I can survive the bye weeks and the top guys stay healthy, I think I'll have a better chance of winning than most 26-player teams (projected #29 in week 1). Hopefully the rest of the studs and value players will make up for the studs on bye.
To win, you need to get lucky either by having your guys stay healthy, hitting on some lower-priced guys who turn out to perform like studs, or probably both. Just because last year higher-player teams had a higher chance of lasting to the final 250 doesn't mean this year's the same and those with 18-player rosters are clueless. I think the numbers will look different this year because of the changes, but many 18-player teams will still get knocked out during the bye weeks and because of injury. I think there's a good chance the winner, or many of the top 100, will have shorter rosters this year.
WRs and TEs are very hit or miss from week to week. If a WR scores a TD, they'll likely wind up with 14 or more points (including ppr) and make it as one of the top 3 WR's or the Flex. If they don't score a TD, they probably won't be included in your team's weekly score.Last year, even Andre Johnson had 7 mediocre games scoring 7.5 pts, 8.2 pts, 8.6 pts, 11.7 pts, 12.3 pts, 12.6 pts and 13.2 pts (including ppr) in weeks he did not score a TD -- and how many WRs will put up 101 catches, 1,569 yards, and 9 TDs this season like AJ did last year.Coming back to my comparison above, Calvin Johnson and Wes Welker are projected to score a total of 15 TDs this season. The 9 value-priced WRs are projected to score a total of 39 TDs this season. IMO the much larger group of value-priced players is a better investment of $48 than two studs.This is all speculation at this point. I think I'll keep track of the top-10 rated WRs and see how they do - week by week - compared to the group of value-priced WRs.
