Week 1 Sit Em' (1 Viewer)

[JuniorNB]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this weekBut the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea.

And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

This is the kind of stuff I really expected to see when I came to FBG. I really thought that with so many members, one person would start a list (or a discussion) and it would just fill up with more data than I could read. But instead, its like Amateur open-mike night everytime somone says anything.With that being said, I agree the list was weak. If things are said that are SO obvious to seemingly everyone, why exactly do we need to take the time to point it out? But that's the point. With all of us here, why don't we shore it up instead of tear it down?

So here's one. SIT FRED JACKSON.

In the last 5 games against the Jets, FJAX has not scored a single TD nor toped 90 yards. He did have a decent game last year with ~12 PPR points, but outside that he has hit in the 5-7 point range each game.

It's no longer a bunch of guys offering opinions and seeking out info. It's a contest to see who can be first to ask the OP if he's in a four team league or ask if there's an opening in his league because the other players are obviously not as brilliant as the guy responding is. Also, I hope you're wrong about Fred Jackson. I need to start him until Peterson is up to speed.

 

[12punch]

I'm not crazy about f jax this week, but I don't hate him either.

I went after him in a few leagues, and if you drafted him I think it becomes one of those 'start your studs' situations, unless you're deep at stud rb and looking at match ups.

last year, and I'd give more weight to last year than a couple years ago, he played nyj once and put up 120 total yards in a 27-11 loss.

I think the buf defense is improved many times over, and the scoring should be more favorable for fred, although, jets will be running a lot of 46 which might be tough to run on.

I'm hoping fred sees all nickel and dime, as buf likes to flood receivers, which helped him put up those superstud numbers last year.

that fearsome buf d=line should produce a few nyj turnovers, and get fred a few more td opps.

 

[ratbast]

I wish people would just mind there own business. I didn't know the SP sucked right now. You are advertising all the unfortunately bad threads.

Everyone should work on commenting only on good threads, then the bad ones wont matter.

Good luck week 1 all!

 

[Team ROFLCOPTERS]

Just got a PM from this guy:Zimm said:======================================================================Your one of the biggest idiots on the boards i don't wanna hear #### from you. Your two word answer to everything and your consistently wrong all the time and what players were spelled wrong? Jackass's like you make the shark suck.======================================================================I'd like to apologize that I made the shark suck.

Not supposed to post PM's bro.

 

[12punch]

doesn't pm = public message?

 

[brednbuddah]

QuarterbackPeyton Manning - Denver BroncosManning will have a tough match-up in Sunday nights game vs the Pittsburgh Steelers. Coming off injury i think he will have some rust and facing a very good Steelers defense i would sit Manning just to be safe.

I tend to agree with your assessment regarding Manning, but considering the Steelers will be without Ryan Clark and James Harrison on defense, does this figure into your equation?

 

[whatadai]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this weekBut the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea.

And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

This is the kind of stuff I really expected to see when I came to FBG. I really thought that with so many members, one person would start a list (or a discussion) and it would just fill up with more data than I could read. But instead, its like Amateur open-mike night everytime somone says anything.With that being said, I agree the list was weak. If things are said that are SO obvious to seemingly everyone, why exactly do we need to take the time to point it out? But that's the point. With all of us here, why don't we shore it up instead of tear it down?

So here's one. SIT FRED JACKSON.

In the last 5 games against the Jets, FJAX has not scored a single TD nor toped 90 yards. He did have a decent game last year with ~12 PPR points, but outside that he has hit in the 5-7 point range each game.

Because he's not doing it to create a discussion, he's doing it to shamelessly plug his blog.

 

[identikit]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this weekBut the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea.

And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

This is the kind of stuff I really expected to see when I came to FBG. I really thought that with so many members, one person would start a list (or a discussion) and it would just fill up with more data than I could read. But instead, its like Amateur open-mike night everytime somone says anything.With that being said, I agree the list was weak. If things are said that are SO obvious to seemingly everyone, why exactly do we need to take the time to point it out? But that's the point. With all of us here, why don't we shore it up instead of tear it down?

So here's one. SIT FRED JACKSON.

In the last 5 games against the Jets, FJAX has not scored a single TD nor toped 90 yards. He did have a decent game last year with ~12 PPR points, but outside that he has hit in the 5-7 point range each game.

Because he's not doing it to create a discussion, he's doing it to shamelessly plug his blog.

Not to mention that the blog is pretty bad.

 

[shotgun72]

QuarterbackPeyton Manning - Denver BroncosManning will have a tough match-up in Sunday nights game vs the Pittsburgh Steelers. Coming off injury i think he will have some rust and facing a very good Steelers defense i would sit Manning just to be safe.

I tend to agree with your assessment regarding Manning, but considering the Steelers will be without Ryan Clark and James Harrison on defense, does this figure into your equation?

Factors pretty heavily if you ask me. If you are deciding between 2 mid tier QB, I would definitely put Manning in the discussion.

 

[JPeso]

Just got a PM from this guy:Zimm said:======================================================================Your one of the biggest idiots on the boards i don't wanna hear #### from you. Your two word answer to everything and your consistently wrong all the time and what players were spelled wrong? Jackass's like you make the shark suck.======================================================================I'd like to apologize that I made the shark suck.

Not supposed to post PM's bro.

The unwritten laws of FBG are unbeknownst to me. I apologize.

 

[matuski]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this weekBut the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea. And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

I am one of the cynical responses, but allow me to flip your post around a bit.A few years back, nobody would have started a thread recommending us to sit injured and hold out RB's, to sit a couple QBs fitting in somewhere between Blaine Gabbert and Tebow versus a strong defense, a TE with a lacerated spleen, etc....and then link to their blog. This cannot in anyway be spun as "trying to come up with a good thread idea."

 

[sho nuff]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this weekBut the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea. And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

I am one of the cynical responses, but allow me to flip your post around a bit.A few years back, nobody would have started a thread recommending us to sit injured and hold out RB's, to sit a couple QBs fitting in somewhere between Blaine Gabbert and Tebow versus a strong defense, a TE with a lacerated spleen, etc....and then link to their blog. This cannot in anyway be spun as "trying to come up with a good thread idea."

Yeah, I don't think anyone has a problem with people trying to generate good discussion.But do so with decent material, and don't get bent out of shape and insulting others if someone criticizes you at all.And don't do so with the attempt to publicize a poorly written blog.Or, don't do so with complete "look at me" over the top schtick ala one very prominent poster.

 

[finito]

Moore's going to be a top 10 WR this week

Denarious? Just curious why you think this, as he's got almost no work in with Palmer this offseason and is coming off a tricky hamstring injury that kept him out weeks. I'd love to plug him in, but don't feel comfortable at all at this point. I'm also sitting Stevie Johnson, who's dinged up already and will probably face Revis (though he's actually had some success against Revis in the past).

 

[squistion]

Thanks for taking the time to post some thoughts, Zimm. A few years back, this is the kind of thread that would have had two or three pages of other members posting their thoughts on who should be sat down this week

But the new cynical, 'everyone's a fantasy idiot except me' Shark Pool now has to try to make an ### out of anyone trying to come up with a good thread idea.

And so what that he posted a one word link to his blog. He didn't mention it or try shoving down anyone's throat. Lighten up folks. It's one guy's opinion of bad starts. Agree or disagree or post some of your own. Isn't that what this place is supposed to be?

I am one of the cynical responses, but allow me to flip your post around a bit.A few years back, nobody would have started a thread recommending us to sit injured and hold out RB's, to sit a couple QBs fitting in somewhere between Blaine Gabbert and Tebow versus a strong defense, a TE with a lacerated spleen, etc....and then link to their blog. This cannot in anyway be spun as "trying to come up with a good thread idea."

Yeah, I don't think anyone has a problem with people trying to generate good discussion.But do so with decent material, and don't get bent out of shape and insulting others if someone criticizes you at all.

And don't do so with the attempt to publicize a poorly written blog. Or, don't do so with complete "look at me" over the top schtick ala one very prominent poster.

I agree. If someone is holding themselves out as some sort of expert (if not, then why the link to the blog?) then they shouldn't be so thin skinned (particulary after some of these "Well, duh!" sit em' recommendations).