All Bengal's not named.... never mind.All Rams not named Jackson come to mind.
I wouldn't mind moving SJAX, this team look completely lost !If the offer's good I might take it.All Rams not named Jackson come to mind.
I don't know.....I kinda liked how McMichael looked. Not a stud, but might be a good cheap TE pick up.All Rams not named Jackson come to mind.
thinking about panic cutting Josh Morgan and/or Ike Bruce
Tom Brady....oh...wait...nm
fasano maybe. difficult for me to vote for him considering pennington threw the ball ALOT this week. royal and rosario will be the #3 - at best - options on their teams. steve smith returns next week remember.I'm seriously considering dumping Todd Heap and picking up Fasano, Royal or Rosario.
O'Sullivan did not look bad yesterday. It was AZ offense that hurt him more than their defense. Time of possession was AZ-37 minutes SF-23 minutes. This included a 10 minute drive in the 4th quarter and a 6 1/2 minute drive in the 3rd quarter.I bought into the J.T. O'Sullivan hype and picked him up as my #3 QB (10 teams, start 2 QBs). Unfortunately there aren't very many QBs on the waiver wire (Cassel, Flacco, Ryan, Orton). But I still can't help but think that O'Sullivan is dead weight.
I did drop Heap this morning for Fasano. That Bal offense scares me - and I spent pick 2.12 (12 team league) on McGahee!fasano maybe. difficult for me to vote for him considering pennington threw the ball ALOT this week. royal and rosario will be the #3 - at best - options on their teams. steve smith returns next week remember.I'm seriously considering dumping Todd Heap and picking up Fasano, Royal or Rosario.
good post. that 2nd half went long drive by AZ, fumbled KO by SF, long drive by AZ, long drive by SF, long drive by AZ that ended with less than 2 minutes to go. also, with alex smith possibly needing season-ending surgery, o'sullivan has zero competition for the gig.edit to add: with osullivan, hopefully you don't play in a league that penalizes TOs heavily though.O'Sullivan did not look bad yesterday. It was AZ offense that hurt him more than their defense. Time of possession was AZ-37 minutes SF-23 minutes. This included a 10 minute drive in the 4th quarter and a 6 1/2 minute drive in the 3rd quarter.I bought into the J.T. O'Sullivan hype and picked him up as my #3 QB (10 teams, start 2 QBs). Unfortunately there aren't very many QBs on the waiver wire (Cassel, Flacco, Ryan, Orton). But I still can't help but think that O'Sullivan is dead weight.
plus this was pretty much JTO's first time ever playing with Bryant Johnson, and he had limited playing time with Bruce. Give the SF offense time to gel, and I think you will be pleasantly surprised.good post. that 2nd half went long drive by AZ, fumbled KO by SF, long drive by AZ, long drive by SF, long drive by AZ that ended with less than 2 minutes to go. also, with alex smith possibly needing season-ending surgery, o'sullivan has zero competition for the gig.edit to add: with osullivan, hopefully you don't play in a league that penalizes TOs heavily though.O'Sullivan did not look bad yesterday. It was AZ offense that hurt him more than their defense. Time of possession was AZ-37 minutes SF-23 minutes. This included a 10 minute drive in the 4th quarter and a 6 1/2 minute drive in the 3rd quarter.I bought into the J.T. O'Sullivan hype and picked him up as my #3 QB (10 teams, start 2 QBs). Unfortunately there aren't very many QBs on the waiver wire (Cassel, Flacco, Ryan, Orton). But I still can't help but think that O'Sullivan is dead weight.
I agree that O'Sullivan didn't look bad, and the time of possession did hurt him. BUT........I'm concerned that most of his passes were checkdowns to the RB or TE. It's easy to complete 70% of your passes when your main target is your RB.J R said:good post. that 2nd half went long drive by AZ, fumbled KO by SF, long drive by AZ, long drive by SF, long drive by AZ that ended with less than 2 minutes to go. also, with alex smith possibly needing season-ending surgery, o'sullivan has zero competition for the gig.edit to add: with osullivan, hopefully you don't play in a league that penalizes TOs heavily though.O'Sullivan did not look bad yesterday. It was AZ offense that hurt him more than their defense. Time of possession was AZ-37 minutes SF-23 minutes. This included a 10 minute drive in the 4th quarter and a 6 1/2 minute drive in the 3rd quarter.I bought into the J.T. O'Sullivan hype and picked him up as my #3 QB (10 teams, start 2 QBs). Unfortunately there aren't very many QBs on the waiver wire (Cassel, Flacco, Ryan, Orton). But I still can't help but think that O'Sullivan is dead weight.
Much as I hated drafting Heap, as I waited very late on TE, he's the guy I'll drop for a different TE-hopefully Fasano.I did drop Heap this morning for Fasano. That Bal offense scares me - and I spent pick 2.12 (12 team league) on McGahee!fasano maybe. difficult for me to vote for him considering pennington threw the ball ALOT this week. royal and rosario will be the #3 - at best - options on their teams. steve smith returns next week remember.I'm seriously considering dumping Todd Heap and picking up Fasano, Royal or Rosario.
Unless they play in a 6 team league, Managers who drop those guys after week 1 should have their fantasy licenses revoked.Possible panic cuts:
Santonio Holmes: Ward caught two TDs from Big Ben and Holmes was only able to reel in two passes for 19 yards.
Carson Palmer: Throwing for only 99 yards and an interception, I see people jumping ship on him...I won't, but some will
Dallas Clark: Manning seemed out of sorts and Clark only got one reception for eight yards
Thinking about cutting himTed Ginn
Not that big of a leap there, pull the trigger.I'm seriously considering dumping Todd Heap and picking up Fasano, Royal or Rosario.
That may be the case, but he also threw for 195 yds on only 20 attempts for a fantastic 9.75 YPA. So, it's not as if they were simply dink and dunks. He had passing plays of 37, 31, 22, and 16 yds. If he gets up in the normal Martz range of 30-35 pass attempts, he's going to approach 250-300 yds on a regular basis. The TDs will come with that. Now, if he completed 70% of his passes at a 5 ypa clip, then I'd be much more concerned, even if he scored 1-2 TDs along with that.I agree that O'Sullivan didn't look bad, and the time of possession did hurt him. BUT........I'm concerned that most of his passes were checkdowns to the RB or TE. It's easy to complete 70% of your passes when your main target is your RB.J R said:good post. that 2nd half went long drive by AZ, fumbled KO by SF, long drive by AZ, long drive by SF, long drive by AZ that ended with less than 2 minutes to go. also, with alex smith possibly needing season-ending surgery, o'sullivan has zero competition for the gig.edit to add: with osullivan, hopefully you don't play in a league that penalizes TOs heavily though.O'Sullivan did not look bad yesterday. It was AZ offense that hurt him more than their defense. Time of possession was AZ-37 minutes SF-23 minutes. This included a 10 minute drive in the 4th quarter and a 6 1/2 minute drive in the 3rd quarter.I bought into the J.T. O'Sullivan hype and picked him up as my #3 QB (10 teams, start 2 QBs). Unfortunately there aren't very many QBs on the waiver wire (Cassel, Flacco, Ryan, Orton). But I still can't help but think that O'Sullivan is dead weight.
I did this... mostly because of Heap's injury. I suffered through that once before and hope I didn't just buy into a Frisman situation with Fasano.I'm seriously considering dumping Todd Heap and picking up Fasano, Royal or Rosario.