LolZyphros said:Buffalo's defense carried that team for so long.
Would you trust Tyrod to go out and win you a game? He's probably even behind Tebow in my rankings for that.
LolZyphros said:Buffalo's defense carried that team for so long.
Would you trust Tyrod to go out and win you a game? He's probably even behind Tebow in my rankings for that.
rule #1 of survivor pools: Don't "save" teams or look far down the road. You'll always be shocked at how early most people are out. Take the sure things, worry about the rest later.Dr. Dan said:So lany people in my 2 strike league have 1 strike on NO. what a terrible pick.
Onto week 2
Survivorgrid.com shows that WAS isnt a bad pick vs IND, and they hold very little value rest of season.
Theres also NO over CLE, with little value rest of season. Not sure how I feel about that after last week though.
LAC @ BUF is the 2nd highest right now, but the Chargers have decent value this year.
DEN vs OAK isnt bad either.
What I'm looking at is rest of season value, and while week 2 isnt updated yet, the Chargers have some decent value whereas this year it's pretty tough overall- so many teams with just 1 star already. it's possible it might be beneficial to save the Chargers. I get the idea of picking against Buffalo this year... they look really bad. that might not be a bad strategy.
I'm probably going Chargers or Saints
Ya but coming off that loss, and playing Buffalo, you gotta think that's a win. If I don't go with the Chargers then I think I might use the Rams now, or the Saints.Pip's Invitation said:The Chargers often start slow, so I’d rather not pick them in a week 2 game on the other coast, no matter how bad the opponent. Don’t know what I’m gonna do yet. Maybe pick NO on the grounds of the “hopping mad” theory— good teams that lose to bad teams don’t let it happen again if they play another bad team the following week.
TB isn't a bad teamPip's Invitation said:The Chargers often start slow, so I’d rather not pick them in a week 2 game on the other coast, no matter how bad the opponent. Don’t know what I’m gonna do yet. Maybe pick NO on the grounds of the “hopping mad” theory— good teams that lose to bad teams don’t let it happen again if they play another bad team the following week.
This is a good call.I like the VIKINGS if Aaron Rodgers is deemed inactive.
Wow! I had no idea.Quick word on the Saints: The last time they did NOT start a season 0-2 was 2013. They start slow.
Beat me to it!Quick word on the Saints: The last time they did NOT start a season 0-2 was 2013. They start slow.
I like the LAC with Peterman at QB, but we have Josh Allen this week. Plus I can't trust the LAC on the east coast. Better options out there, imo.chargers are probably the safest even though they're going cross country. the bills are just so much worse than any other team in the nfl.
Agreed, but why not save the Vikings for next week, when they host the Bills?Zyphros said:I like the Vikings call quite a bit if there is no Rodgers.
Vikings will be a lock for a win after losing to the packAgreed, but why not save the Vikings for next week, when they host the Bills?
Because I don't believe looking ahead is smartAgreed, but why not save the Vikings for next week, when they host the Bills?
It being a division game doesn’t scare you off? Hell even the Patriots lose division games from time to time.zftcg said:The only reason not to pick the Rams is to save them for later in the season
No, most important factor is what's "on paper". Cards should have little success on O and D. If they do pull it out somehow then...oh well.It being a division game doesn’t scare you off? Hell even the Patriots lose division games from time to time.
A little bit, but the Rams won both meetings last year scoring 33 and 32 points - I know every year is different but do you see the Cards scoring 30+ against the Rams? I've already locked in the Rams.It being a division game doesn’t scare you off? Hell even the Patriots lose division games from time to time.
For the Raiders? Can’t blame you but personally wouldn’tsaving this
no, saving what you said. it's not lock of the week by any means. I'd be real shakey picking it. Stafford isnt throwing 5 ints every week.For the Raiders? Can’t blame you but personally wouldn’t
Serious question: are there any stats showing division games are more likely to result in upsets? I feel like that's a truism we all repeat but I wonder what the data actually show.It being a division game doesn’t scare you off? Hell even the Patriots lose division games from time to time.
Please note that this analysis does not take road/home teams into account. I suspect a home underdog fares even better than these stats suggest.Serious question: are there any stats showing division games are more likely to result in upsets? I feel like that's a truism we all repeat but I wonder what the data actually show.