Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
true....and again just being devils' advocate....let's say you were an owner that has been carrying him all year and maybe plugging him in as your TE because the position has been such a wasteland and you figured he is as good as any other roll of the dice.....now you could be looking at him losing his TE designation after this week......is that "fair" to that guy....?
The Saints recently signed him to a 2 year $21 million deal as a backup QB. That’s what he’s listed on in the team depth chart. Let’s be real hear. Congrats on playing this loophole this week in your ESPN league, but there is no reason to carry water for ESPN based on their incompetence. They are a trash platform that was asleep at the wheel on this.
so he should have been designated as a QB only at the start of the season and that could never change......and there should be no changing of any players designation once week one starts....?
To bank on that, I think it really has to be a true starting QB, Winston holding a clipboard all game situation. Most likely, there will be at least 2 TEs going for 18 plus. I actually think there's a good chance that all of this fuss results in a boring 8.5 point game at the TE situation:
you could argue that based on what he actually does/has been doing..... that they actually have had his designation closer to the truth then designating him as a QB.....
I don't think he's going to blow up or play all the snaps. But I think he has a decent chance of running it in the red zone and possibly scoring a TD. You won't start him over a stud TE, but if you have one of the many average ones, then your odds with Hill may be slightly better...
Disagree. It's technically a 'typo'... he has never been a TE the last two years, there is ZERO reason for him to be a TE. What if ESPN had Kyler as a RB/QB all year and everyone knew about it and had the same shot... still fair? There's absolutely no excuse for ESPN to have this massive blunder.
He is a no risk option at TE imo. I would start him over every TE in the nfl this week. Willing to bet he outscores Kelce this week. I'd say he definitely has an over 50% shot of outscoring an average "stud" TE this week.
I don't play in ESPN so have no vested interest. Just think it's entirely unfair for ESPN to have him in a position that he has never really been in with the Saints. This is the equivalent of a typo.
He is a utility player so he is designated many different positions. Carrying him on your roster this was kind of what was hoped for.
Well there's many many fantasy platforms out there and ESPN is the ONLY one that doesn't designate him as a QB.... so no, he is not designated many different positions and should not be designated anything but a QB. ESPN screwed this up by having a typo in his position.
Wrong. Before this week Yahoo had him as Qb and TE. Fleaflicker has him currently as WR and QB.
So why did Yahoo change it? Because they realized it was a mistake?
I don't work for Yahoo so I can't answer why they changed it. You are asking the wrong person.
Not "my" list, those are the most used. As for why Yahoo changed it, it's clear that it's because a player playing QB should not be allowed to be used in a non QB position as it is an unfair advantage.
You could argue that, but you’d be wrong. Do you want ESPN to change the designation of any player when they happen to take some snaps out of their natural position? So you want Deebo and Aiyuk to have RB eligibility now that they draw up some runs for them? How about Claypool as well since they run sweeps with him at the goaline? Hell, Nick Foles ran the Philly Special that one time, let’s get him some WR eligibility while we are at it.
Hill has always been labeled a TE, so everyone has played that way through 10 weeks. Changing it now would be unfair imo.
Exactly. And Apparently ESPN knows better than all the other major fantasy sites too.
You could argue this, but the actual team labels him as a QB.
That's admirable. It's funny though because it's not even a 'technicality'. TECHNICALLY, he is a QB. All official team data, websites, etc. have him as a QB. I would call ESPN calling him a TE a 'mistake" rather than a "technicality"
They have said they will if he ends up playing most of his snaps at QB.
Has he not played the majority of his snaps at QB this year? (I know most of the times he runs with it).
first bolded.....its not an argument....based on what he has actually been doing.....ESPN designation is actually more accurate then even the Saints.....
What are his snap counts lined up at QB vs TE?
So he gets to count as 3 positions than? Even if QB was the position he played the most? In college as well?
the saints list him as a QB.....but thats not what he has been playing.....he hasn't even been presented as the backup QB......
Pahleese. I guess that it is technically unfair and unethical for a head coach to target throws towards a defensive back that is obviously hobbled on the field. But, it is wise.
How has he not been playing QB? He has taken 39 snaps as the QUARTERBACK this year. He has caught 6 catches as a WR/TE, and taken 0 hand offs as a RB.
this is not true either as apparently Shefter report was premature and Peyton hasn't announced a starting QB.......Hill could be same ol same ol......
Coach Speak. He took all the first team QB reps in practice. He is the starting QB.
ESPN lists him as a QB on their player page.... why would they do this do you think?
sorry....I was responding to all your other inaccuracies......to answer your question....I have no idea....look it up....not doing unnecessary homework for you....
first bolded....I have no idea....honestly I am assuming he is like a pinball machine in that building....
What other inaccuracies?
first bolded....on ESPN yes he can be played at QB/TE/Flex.....
You have quite the way of dancing around questions by calling anything that may be a counterpoint to you as "irrelevant" or that you 'don't know"
bolded....I am suggesting that Hill has been more of a flex than he has been a QB.....he has not been a starting QB......nor has he even been the backup QB....the team that lists him as a QB played Winston as the backup......many teams don't even "activate" a third string QB.....Hill is active because he plays other positions and has the ability to play QB "if needed"....and a do it all gadget type of guy.....limiting him to a QB is actually an insult to him and what he does/can do....
yes....I think based on what Hill's roll has actually been on his team up to this point that ESPN designation is more accurate to what he does in real life than just "QB".....so far he is closer to a TE/RB/WR/FLEX than a QB.....even tho the Saints "list" him as a QB....
Even though he has touched the ball 39 times as a Quarterback this year, and 6 times as a non QB. Ok.
unlike some....I have no problem admitting when I was wrong.....I have been humbled on this site many many times since the early 90's.....
