Trip's Preseason Week 1 Takeaways (1 Viewer)

[GrandpaRox]

appreciate the comments. would just the obvious warning out there that you're basing your commens in some cases off of just a handful of plays.

You obviously did not see the Texans game. Blue was not proficient as a starting RB. He had a couple of good runs but most of the time gets next to nothing.

Watched the Texans game twice actually. Thanks for your opinion.

Well we all know what they say about opinions.

 

[GrandpaRox]

appreciate the comments. would just the obvious warning out there that you're basing your commens in some cases off of just a handful of plays.

You obviously did not see the Texans game. Blue was not proficient as a starting RB. He had a couple of good runs but most of the time gets next to nothing.

Watched the Texans game twice actually. Thanks for your opinion.

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Do you think Polk has a chance to pass Blue up on the depth chart? They played in two different offenses last season so it's not necessarily a fair comparison, but Polk looked like the better back to me.

Depth charts are not as important as situation. Blue will probably be first and second down back, Polk third down for his pass catching ability. Hilliard was supposed to be short yardage back but he did not impress. Of course it may have been due to the Oline players playing at the time.

IMHO the Texans need to set up the run with the passing game instead of the other way around. Also a lot of folks are expecinjg Foster back in 4-6 weeks of the season, personally I am not as optimistic as some. He will not come back and be the same old Foster, it will take at least a few weeks. I would not expect much before week 10 which is after the bye.

 

[TripItUp]

IMHO the Texans need to set up the run with the passing game instead of the other way around. Also a lot of folks are expecinjg Foster back in 4-6 weeks of the season, personally I am not as optimistic as some. He will not come back and be the same old Foster, it will take at least a few weeks. I would not expect much before week 10 which is after the bye.

Stefania Bell directly contradicted this sentiment in today's ESPN podcast...where she said the situation was "fluid" and Foster could be ready to go as soon as week 4.

 

[FF Ninja]

appreciate the comments. would just the obvious warning out there that you're basing your commens in some cases off of just a handful of plays.

You obviously did not see the Texans game. Blue was not proficient as a starting RB. He had a couple of good runs but most of the time gets next to nothing.

Watched the Texans game twice actually. Thanks for your opinion.

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Do you think Polk has a chance to pass Blue up on the depth chart? They played in two different offenses last season so it's not necessarily a fair comparison, but Polk looked like the better back to me.

Talent-wise? Yes. I've been lagging behind this year so I don't have my finger on the Texans pulse, though, so I don't know if Bill will stay loyal to Blue or not. Given that he's already signed two of his old backup QBs, I'd be wary that he's one of those overly loyal coaches (*cough* Kubiak) and will let Alfred plod it up until Foster returns. I've got nothing against the guy, but his measurables were terrible coming out of college IIRC and he has done nothing to make me think he can be an exception to the rule like Jeremy Hill.

 

[FF Ninja]

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Actually, Matthew Berry said pretty much the exact same thing in his podcast today....so are you just making stuff up now?

Oh... you get your info from Matthew Berry. Strike two.

 

[GrandpaRox]

IMHO the Texans need to set up the run with the passing game instead of the other way around. Also a lot of folks are expecinjg Foster back in 4-6 weeks of the season, personally I am not as optimistic as some. He will not come back and be the same old Foster, it will take at least a few weeks. I would not expect much before week 10 which is after the bye.

Stefania Bell directly contradicted this sentiment in today's ESPN podcast...where she said the situation was "fluid" and Foster could be ready to go as soon as week 4.

As a Texans fan I hope she is correct, but I also said 4-6 weeks to return. That does not mean he will be 100% mentally. I will stick with the week after the bye before he is a viable option. I hope I am looking too far out. It is just my unprofessional opinion.

 

[TripItUp]

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Actually, Matthew Berry said pretty much the exact same thing in his podcast today....so are you just making stuff up now?

Oh... you get your info from Matthew Berry. Strike two.

I wrote this yesterday, ESPN podcast was today...just here to share information.

 

[Freelove]

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Actually, Matthew Berry said pretty much the exact same thing in his podcast today....so are you just making stuff up now?

Oh... you get your info from Matthew Berry. Strike two.

I wrote this yesterday, ESPN podcast was today...just here to share information.

Matthew Berry has way more to say, and is way more correct, than 99.99% of the people here could ever hope. He gets bashed because he's popular.

 

[Yenrub]

New York Giants – No big surprises for me here. Cruz not suiting up is a bit of a red flag.

Shouldn't be a red flag at all. He wasn't expected to play until game 3 of the preseason

Turns out he is ahead of schedule and will see some action in week 2

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2015/08/giants_victor_cruz_no_longer_limited_at_all_may_pl.html

 

[TripItUp]

New York Giants – No big surprises for me here. Cruz not suiting up is a bit of a red flag.

Shouldn't be a red flag at all. He wasn't expected to play until game 3 of the preseason

Turns out he is ahead of schedule and will see some action in week 2

http://www.nj.com/giants/index.ssf/2015/08/giants_victor_cruz_no_longer_limited_at_all_may_pl.html

 

[FF Ninja]

I appreciate the effort you put into the thread, but this admission just voided the usefulness of it all for me. No one with at least one functional eyeball has watched Blue and used the word proficient. Even the ever hopeful local radio hosts couldn't find anything good to say about Blue.

Actually, Matthew Berry said pretty much the exact same thing in his podcast today....so are you just making stuff up now?

Oh... you get your info from Matthew Berry. Strike two.

I wrote this yesterday, ESPN podcast was today...just here to share information.

Matthew Berry has way more to say, and is way more correct, than 99.99% of the people here could ever hope. He gets bashed because he's popular.

I don't hold his popularity against him. He's just not out there doing analysis for the likes of us. He's there for the masses... the people who are in 10-team work leagues with no flex and 5-man benches. We are a niche audience whether we want to believe it or not.

 

[ORC]

[SIZE=medium]Green Bay Packers – Nothing groundbreaking here as the starters looked good as usual. Like Latimer, Janis is a WR to watch for….looks like he could fill in competently if any of the starting WRs go down.[/SIZE]

Thing that really stuck out about the Packers: Randall Cobb mentioned that the Packers ran 33 plays in the first quarter. Cobb was on the field for 33 of them, Nelson was on the field for 32 of them, and Davante Adams was on the field for 33 of them. Cobb was targeted once, Nelson twice, and Adams 7 times (all coming from Rodgers).

Obviously they just spent a bunch of money on Cobb, but Adams should be expected to be on the field A LOT. They basically ran 3 wide with a tight end and no fullback for the entire first quarter. There are going to be a ton of points to go around, but you've got to believe Adams is going to get a decent amount more than the 66 targets he had last year, especially if they continue to keep up the tempo and run more plays. Could be real good value.

 

[iamkoza]

[SIZE=medium]Green Bay Packers – Nothing groundbreaking here as the starters looked good as usual. Like Latimer, Janis is a WR to watch for….looks like he could fill in competently if any of the starting WRs go down.[/SIZE]

Thing that really stuck out about the Packers: Randall Cobb mentioned that the Packers ran 33 plays in the first quarter. Cobb was on the field for 33 of them, Nelson was on the field for 32 of them, and Davante Adams was on the field for 33 of them. Cobb was targeted once, Nelson twice, and Adams 7 times (all coming from Rodgers).

Obviously they just spent a bunch of money on Cobb, but Adams should be expected to be on the field A LOT. They basically ran 3 wide with a tight end and no fullback for the entire first quarter. There are going to be a ton of points to go around, but you've got to believe Adams is going to get a decent amount more than the 66 targets he had last year, especially if they continue to keep up the tempo and run more plays. Could be real good value.

cobb is still playing the same slot role he always has in 3 wide sets right? if you believe nelson and cobb will continue to feast is there really enough leftover for adams to be anything more than a lucky shot in the dark bye week filler? looking at the past 4-5 years of packers WR stats, they've only produced at most 2 viable fantasy WR'ers each year.... so i cant see an argument that adams will become viable for fantasy (bsrring an injury to cobb or nelson of course) unless your argument is adams will eat in to either nelson or cobb's production thus the story being nelson adn cobb should be slightly downgraded

to OP: thanks for the game notes, although your not helping me restrain my unreasonably high outlook for the jags skill players (thomas, robinson, yeldon etc.)

 

[FF Ninja]

[SIZE=medium]Green Bay Packers – Nothing groundbreaking here as the starters looked good as usual. Like Latimer, Janis is a WR to watch for….looks like he could fill in competently if any of the starting WRs go down.[/SIZE]

Thing that really stuck out about the Packers: Randall Cobb mentioned that the Packers ran 33 plays in the first quarter. Cobb was on the field for 33 of them, Nelson was on the field for 32 of them, and Davante Adams was on the field for 33 of them. Cobb was targeted once, Nelson twice, and Adams 7 times (all coming from Rodgers).

Obviously they just spent a bunch of money on Cobb, but Adams should be expected to be on the field A LOT. They basically ran 3 wide with a tight end and no fullback for the entire first quarter. There are going to be a ton of points to go around, but you've got to believe Adams is going to get a decent amount more than the 66 targets he had last year, especially if they continue to keep up the tempo and run more plays. Could be real good value.

cobb is still playing the same slot role he always has in 3 wide sets right? if you believe nelson and cobb will continue to feast is there really enough leftover for adams to be anything more than a lucky shot in the dark bye week filler? looking at the past 4-5 years of packers WR stats, they've only produced at most 2 viable fantasy WR'ers each year.... so i cant see an argument that adams will become viable for fantasy (bsrring an injury to cobb or nelson of course) unless your argument is adams will eat in to either nelson or cobb's production thus the story being nelson adn cobb should be slightly downgraded

to OP: thanks for the game notes, although your not helping me restrain my unreasonably high outlook for the jags skill players (thomas, robinson, yeldon etc.)

This is a good point. The Packers have averaged 229/3294 from their WRs the past two years. It is enough to support 3 relevant WRs, but it would cost the top 2 guys. The real question mark is going to be touchdowns (avg of 27 the past 3 years). Personally, I think Cobb is the riskiest. Article from Faust: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/fantasy-football-today/25273416/dont-pay-for-last-years-touchdowns-in-fantasy

If Davante Adams can be the next James Jones (64/784/14) then he'll win somebody a championship thanks to unpredictable TDs.