barackdhouse
Footballguy
I think you gotta just stay the course and compete. I think the team should be in the thick of the playoff race. Need some luck to beat the big boys but there's room for that to happen.
Ask and ye shall receiveWe will likely need a big game from the Bears defense with a return TD to stand a chance.
Let’s Go!!!Not sure about your first statement. Definitely would have lost last week if we still had Evans. Fitz is on pace for 96/1350/11. Other than Brown in Week 1, all the other RB's we had on the roster originally have been abysmal.
We are losing by 22.08 heading into tonight. We have either Cohen or Peterson and the Bears defense to catch up. IMO, those two backs are pretty close projection wise this week. The Bears really haven't utilized Cohen much at all. Peterson is probably 25-35% to get a goal line TD. Neither one is a great option, as I doubt either one will have a noteworthy fantasy week. We will likely need a big game from the Bears defense with a return TD to stand a chance.
Sliding scale for points and yards. Allowing a FG cost 2 points. Giving up 100 yards will cost 2 points. Yes, 15 points in the books so far.How many guaranteed points do you have from the Bears right now? TD = 6, 3 TO = 6, and 3? sacks = 3 for a total of 15? Do you get bonus points for yardage and the score of the opponent? Either way the Bears have a chance for much more in the 2nd half given the score and the ineptitude of the WAS offense.
So minus 2 for the 24 yards and plus 1 for the sack on the last play of the game - so you won by 0.62 ???Currently “ahead” by 1.62. Will lose another point if WAS gets to 21 points. Will lose 2 points in another 24 yards for the Redskins.
I think there was also a fumble recovery in there.So minus 2 for the 24 yards and plus 1 for the sack on the last play of the game - so you won by 0.62 ???
Oh yeah, forgot about that one - so "we" definitely won, I think.I think there was also a fumble recovery in there.
FWIW, I like your version better, where the last play flips a loss to a win...Oh yeah, forgot about that one - so "we" definitely won, I think.
The snarky "nobody cares about your fantasy team!" needs a refresh: "nobody cares about your fantasy team, you're not anarchy!"This is probably the only time I've ever cared about someone else's team. Hope he pulled out the W.
Hurray - so you are 2 and 1 now? Also, need an update on your roster, thanx.Pulled it out by 2 points and change. Had WAS scored on the last drive would have lost. Would have lost 4 points for points and yardage allowed. Nothing more stressful than hoping your defense hangs on for dear life.
Just names I like. Would be cool to pair Robinson with Mahomes. When Hill comes back maybe he has some value over Hardman. IDK. OBJ has a bye week 7.Anarchy99 said:Up to 3rd place. LOL.
Mahomes, Wilson
Peterson, Cohen, MBrown, Hilliard, MGordon, TMostert (bye), Montgomery (bye)
Hopkins, OBJ, Fitzgerald, Crowder (bye)
Hooper, Ebron
Zuerlein
Bears
Put a waiver claim in for Gallman (dropping Montgomery)
Other free agents . . .
Jeff Wilson, Darrel Williams, Ito Smith, Darrell Henderson, Brian Hill, Darren Sproles
Taylor Gabriel, Demarcus Robinson, Paul Richardson, Mecole Hardman
Jordan Akins, Chris Herndon
This week facing . . .
Jones, Garoppolo (bye)
Elliott, Conner, Ingram, Murray, Pollard, Edwards, Mattison
Allen, Thielen, MJones, Westbrook, Tate
Harris
Fairbairn
Ravens, Packers
0.5 ppr.
Anderson was never a free agent. He was drafted and never dropped. We ended up getting Darrel Williams.Consider CJ Anderson
Darrel was a good pick up. Anderson didn't seem to latch on anywhere yet. I know I have to root for Gordon for you, but I own Ekeler without MG. So, who ya thinking about starting at RB?Anderson was never a free agent. He was drafted and never dropped. We ended up getting Darrel Williams.
Mahomes, Wilson
Peterson, Cohen, MBrown, Hilliard, MGordon, Darrel Williams, TMostert (bye)
Hopkins, OBJ, Fitzgerald, Crowder (bye)
Hooper, Ebron
Zuerlein
Bears
I'll believe the Gordon news when he actually appears in a game.
After last week Wilson (at RB), but I think that would be against the rules.Darrel was a good pick up. Anderson didn't seem to latch on anywhere yet. I know I have to root for Gordon for you, but I own Ekeler without MG. So, who ya thinking about starting at RB?
Your autodraft just woulda picked 15 TE's thenAnd since I am on a roll, why are many (most) fantasy leagues still requiring two starting RB's? Most NFL teams have 3 WR and 1 RB on the field the majority of the time. IMO, instead of requiring 2 RB, 2 WR, and a flex, fantasy leagues should be 1 RB / 1 WR / 3 Flex. In a league like this one, that would have made life so much easier (and fairer).
3 weeks x 2 RB = something like only 33 points scored. In a 0.5 PPR league, I would gladly have played two extra TE over two crappy RB. But there are a ton of free agent WR on the wire. Those would score way better than the TEs.Your autodraft just woulda picked 15 TE's then
Our long time league of 29 years just voted to do this for that very reason.And since I am on a roll, why are many (most) fantasy leagues still requiring two starting RB's? Most NFL teams have 3 WR and 1 RB on the field the majority of the time. IMO, instead of requiring 2 RB, 2 WR, and a flex, fantasy leagues should be 1 RB / 1 WR / 3 Flex. In a league like this one, that would have made life so much easier (and fairer).
I wouldn't do it from their side either, but Wilson has been a Top 5 QB in 3 of the past 5 years and is currently ranked QB 4 (and only 4 points from being the QB 1). The point being, no matter how he scores he has been one of the best fantasy QB's (was top 10 the other 2 seasons).If I'm the Ingram owner I'm holding out for this week to get another look at Jones. Wilson doesn't pass enough save for last week's monstrous week.
I'm talking solely this year and excluding last week, which might be silly. I guess I got scared off by his volume the first week amidst all the Carroll announcements. He threw 35 times Wk 2 and 50 Wk 3. He is QB4 right now.I wouldn't do it from their side either, but Wilson has been a Top 5 QB in 3 of the past 5 years and is currently ranked QB 4 (and only 4 points from being the QB 1). The point being, no matter how he scores he has been one of the best fantasy QB's (was top 10 the other 2 seasons).
In any event, if you were us and wanted to target the potential offer I mentioned (Wilson and Ebron for Ingram and ??? Who would you suggest we add as a second player coming back (if anyone)?I'm talking solely this year and excluding last week, which might be silly. I guess I got scared off by his volume the first week amidst all the Carroll announcements. He threw 35 times Wk 2 and 50 Wk 3. He is QB4 right now.
I'm still honestly skeptical he's going to want to give something in addition to even Ingram, so I'm a bit stuck. I guess a fair offer would include either a backup RB like Mattison or Murray, or a back end WR like Westbrook or Tate. I'm guessing he drafted Tate and held him, so he's going to be a little reluctant to part with him in light of Jones's outing on Sun.In any event, if you were us and wanted to target the potential offer I mentioned (Wilson and Ebron for Ingram and ??? Who would you suggest we add as a second player coming back (if anyone)?
Tate was a free agent pick up that sat on the waiver wire for weeks. Since there are a fixed set of roster spots, any 2 for 1 deal means that another player would have to be cut anyway. So a 2 for 1 swap turns into a 2 for 2 deal in that a player will have to be trimmed from the roster to make room. Probably the best way to make an offer would be Wilson and Ebron for Ingram and anyone else on their roster (ie, whomever they would have to drop). I agree that I wouldn't consider the trade from their side, but my son really wants Ingram and has rostered him many other times.I'm still honestly skeptical he's going to want to give something in addition to even Ingram, so I'm a bit stuck. I guess a fair offer would include either a backup RB like Mattison or Murray, or a back end WR like Westbrook or Tate. I'm guessing he drafted Tate and held him, so he's going to be a little reluctant to part with him in light of Jones's outing on Sun.
Not that this is how I would think or how one should think. It's trying to suss out how people will think.
This might be fairest if done two-for-one, if that's at all appealing to him. (And all things constant, it could be.)
Gotcha. Yeah, I figured he'd have a full bench and would need to drop one. In that case, you could take from him the player he wants least and then you could drop him.Tate was a free agent pick up that sat on the waiver wire for weeks. Since there are a fixed set of roster spots, any 2 for 1 deal means that another player would have to be cut anyway. So a 2 for 1 swap turns into a 2 for 2 deal in that a player will have to be trimmed from the roster to make room. Probably the best way to make an offer would be Wilson and Ebron for Ingram and anyone else on their roster (ie, whomever they would have to drop). I agree that I wouldn't consider the trade from their side, but my son really wants Ingram and has rostered him many other times.