Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Denver Broncos playing tomorrow without any of their main qbs

whole-show

By whole-show,
in The Shark Pool (NFL Talk)

 Share Followers 3

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

ghostguy123

Last week?

Stat Correction

Johnny Manziel - Browns - Dec. 27th 2015

trader jake

Is he eligible at TE on ESPN?!?! 😇

Cobbler1

Cobbler1 1,121

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Twenty-Four Eighty-Four said:

The only league I have him and am not starting him (as of right now) is where I have DeVante Parker as my second flex. Can't seem to make that switch yet.

Assuming PPR I’d keep Parker for sure. Little closer in standard. I’m leaning towards starting him over Tee Higgins in ppr and I’m starting him in a bunch of places over Steelers wrs unless there’s some really positive news on that game today. Hoping the kid doesn’t throw too many picks and gobbles up some yards on the ground.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
FUBAR

FUBAR 3,203

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

This is a cowards way out in my opinion.

Dual eligibility, no, not for anyone. But allowing a guy who is only suppose to be a QB today based off media reports is the weakest thing MFL has done.

Taysom hill played multiple position, this guy is a WR and is an emergency QB clearly. Calling him a QB is a way for them to keep paying customers happy. 

This is the loophole it was intended for. Picking up a guy late who may get snaps at QB. Picking up a guy who is a QB who will be allowed to play TE, weaksauce.

:2cents:

Taysom had played more snaps at other positions. 

I could be wrong but I don't think Hinton has taken a snap in an NFL game at any position. So when he gets added, it's at the position he was signed to play. 

Although, he's still a wr in my sleeper league, he was in the database before. So at least that's somewhat consistent. Taysom was always a qb there so... :shrug:

Edited by FUBAR
Link to post
Share on other sites
DocHolliday

DocHolliday 4,341

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

Yeah if only some one had talked to the coach about the possibility of this happening and how he could prevent it.

Oh never mind. Freeman or bust then!

Denver is probably kicking themselves for not keeping one QB separated from the other QBs.   All other teams better be paying attention.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
BoerumHill

BoerumHill 171

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

Denver is probably kicking themselves for not keeping one QB separated from the other QBs.   All other teams better be paying attention.  

As the quote upthread makes clear, Fangio considered it too far fetched in September to worry about. He was also fined $100K after Week 2 for not wearing a mask on the sideline. Maybe he’s a #justtheflubro kind of guy?

:shrug:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ghost Rider

Ghost Rider 6,439

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Cobbler1 said:

Ravens and Titans are/were having several players pop up with positive tests across multiple days. Their games were moved to prevent actively infected players from taking the field. That doesn’t appear to be a concern for the Broncos and wasn’t for the Niners or several teams earlier. The NFL is clear they won’t move games to prevent teams from taking the field at a competitive disadvantage but they will move them to prevent teams from blatantly spreading the virus on the field.

Yep. I am a longtime Broncos fan and they have no but themselves to blame for this fiasco.  The QB's should have been safer, and the coaching staff should have done a better job in making sure the players were following protocol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Cobbler1

Cobbler1 1,121

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Ghost Rider said:

Yep. I am a longtime Broncos fan and they have no but themselves to blame for this fiasco.  The QB's should have been safer, and the coaching staff should have done a better job in making sure the players were following protocol. 

Yup. And the Ravens have no one to blame but themselves as well and the league would happily make them play Pitt with a shell squad but can’t risk infected players taking the field and causing very publicly visible on field spread.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BoerumHill

BoerumHill 171

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, starks said:

They should come out first play with 5 wide lol run fly pattern and throw it as hard as he can 

I’m gonna be impressed if he completes ONE pass over 10 yards. There’s nothing in his life - OK, maybe a few Clemson games - that has adequately prepared Kendall Hinton for the speed at which they will becoming at him today.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BoerumHill

BoerumHill 171

Posted
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Twenty-Four Eighty-Four said:

I'm tryna to figure out if having this guy @ QB today will benefit Cam Jordan, DE for the Saints, or Malcolm Jenkins, Safety for the Saints. IDP league, obviously.

Who’s their stud edge guy? Trey Hendrickson?

That guy couldn’t sleep last night. Like being 7, dozens of presents under the tree, Christmas Eve cannot sleep

Edited by BoerumHill
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Drunken Cowboy

Drunken Cowboy 1,620

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, QuizGuy66 said:

At QB or WR I mean what is the realistic point total?

-QG

My first thought was he was a must pickup in leagues where you can play him at WR, but now I am not sure. How many carries could he possibly get? 100 passing yards seems about a ceiling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
SoBeDad

SoBeDad 2,412

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

Denver is probably kicking themselves for not keeping one QB separated from the other QBs.   All other teams better be paying attention.  

The best strategy would be to keep QB #1 and QB #2 separated, as much as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
wgoldsph

wgoldsph 970

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Razors Edge said:

This is a cowards way out in my opinion.

Dual eligibility, no, not for anyone. But allowing a guy who is only suppose to be a QB today based off media reports is the weakest thing MFL has done.

Taysom hill played multiple position, this guy is a WR and is an emergency QB clearly. Calling him a QB is a way for them to keep paying customers happy. 

This is the loophole it was intended for. Picking up a guy late who may get snaps at QB. Picking up a guy who is a QB who will be allowed to play TE, weaksauce.

Hill has been an mfl qb for years now.  He's been on my roster in my deepest dynasty as a long shot on the off chance that just this thing happens.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Schnoo

Schnoo 0

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, SoBeDad said:

Are Lindsay and Gordon startable? My alternates include Murray, who might get a boost in a blowout.

Same concern here with Gordon on my roster. Denver stands to run the ball a lot but hire effective will they be with 8-9+ defenders in the box every play?

Link to post
Share on other sites
beef

beef 3,075

Posted
Posted

The NFL denied repeated requests from the Denver Broncos to postpone their game against the New Orleans Saints from Sunday to Tuesday so they could field a quarterback, sources told Adam Schefter of ESPN.

 

What criteria did Balt, Pitt, KC, NE all meet to get their games postponed?  Winning records?  Better ratings?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
NotSmart

NotSmart 2,887

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, beef said:

The NFL denied repeated requests from the Denver Broncos to postpone their game against the New Orleans Saints from Sunday to Tuesday so they could field a quarterback, sources told Adam Schefter of ESPN.

 

What criteria did Balt, Pitt, KC, NE all meet to get their games postponed?  Winning records?  Better ratings?  

Username checks out.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
da_budman

da_budman 294

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Razors Edge said:

This is a cowards way out in my opinion.

Dual eligibility, no, not for anyone. But allowing a guy who is only suppose to be a QB today based off media reports is the weakest thing MFL has done.

Taysom hill played multiple position, this guy is a WR and is an emergency QB clearly. Calling him a QB is a way for them to keep paying customers happy. 

This is the loophole it was intended for. Picking up a guy late who may get snaps at QB. Picking up a guy who is a QB who will be allowed to play TE, weaksauce.

How so?  he guy is being brought up to play QUARTERBACK and as such should be listed that way.  If not for the lack of quarerbacks he wouldnt be brought up.  There are never intended loopholes... just people who try to take advantagh of an unusual situation.  We dealt with this in my league years ago when cordell slash stewart played.  When he was a gadget player he could be played at wr BUT the day he became pitts staring QB  he had to be played as such.  Its for differen reasons but hinton is being brought up to play QB  not wr.  

 

Edited by da_budman
Link to post
Share on other sites
Courtjester

Courtjester 3,411

Posted
Posted

Schefter put out there that Denver's lack of having an owner to advocate moving the game could have really hurt them here.

Denver also tried to sign one of their coaches to QB this week and the league wouldn't allow it either.

This is going to be a crazy game.I just feel bad for the defense, who have been exceeding expectations in the face of all the injuries. They are going to be on the field a lot today.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
DocHolliday

DocHolliday 4,341

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Courtjester said:

Schefter put out there that Denver's lack of having an owner to advocate moving the game could have really hurt them here.

Denver also tried to sign one of their coaches to QB this week and the league wouldn't allow it either.

This is going to be a crazy game.I just feel bad for the defense, who have been exceeding expectations in the face of all the injuries. They are going to be on the field a lot today.  

I want to watch this game more than any other so far this year.  

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
GroveDiesel

GroveDiesel 9,393

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Courtjester said:

Schefter put out there that Denver's lack of having an owner to advocate moving the game could have really hurt them here.

Denver also tried to sign one of their coaches to QB this week and the league wouldn't allow it either.

This is going to be a crazy game.I just feel bad for the defense, who have been exceeding expectations in the face of all the injuries. They are going to be on the field a lot today.  

Well yeah, the league wouldn’t allow them to sign one of their coaches to play QB because they’ve long had a rule specifically against doing so to avoid teams illegally expanding rosters by signing a player as a “coach”.

And I don’t think that having an owner would have changed anything for them. The team made the decision to not isolate a QB for just three situations. The team made the decision to put all of their QBs in situations where they were in close contact without masks. The team tried to game the system by having their players not wear their tracking devices at times. The team initially lied to the NFL about contact tracing. 

This was an organizational decision to fail. Vic Fangio’s comments in September made it clear that he considered a game without his top 2 QBs as being essentially a loss anyway, so now Broncos fans and players know who to actually blame. The organization made the decision to essentially punt any game without their top QBs and now we’re seeing it play out. Frankly, I think their decision looks even worse because Lock has been awful anyway, so the idea that the backups would be a lost cause compared to Lock seems like bad calculus.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea Duck

Sea Duck 1,488

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Razors Edge said:
5 hours ago, trader jake said:

MFL has him in the database now...as a QB.

This is a cowards way out in my opinion.

Dual eligibility, no, not for anyone. But allowing a guy who is only suppose to be a QB today based off media reports is the weakest thing MFL has done.

Taysom hill played multiple position, this guy is a WR and is an emergency QB clearly. Calling him a QB is a way for them to keep paying customers happy. 

This is the loophole it was intended for. Picking up a guy late who may get snaps at QB. Picking up a guy who is a QB who will be allowed to play TE, weaksauce.

I think it's fine for MFL to go with whatever designation is used by the team. If a team announces that a player has switched from WR to QB, then the fantasy services should follow suit.

Although the Broncos have not updated the roster on their website, they have officially announced that Hinton will be the team's quarterback today. At least that is a more consistent rationale than what ESPN did with Taysom Hill.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Buffaloes

Buffaloes 3,060

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Razors Edge said:

This is my problem, these reporters who said Hinton would start, are they ever held accountable when they are wrong? 

you can call them out on twitter and ask for your league fees back i'm sure.

but seriously, did you start a practice squad WR who has never even practiced at QB this week?

Edited by Buffaloes
  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Sea Duck

Sea Duck 1,488

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, whole-show said:

Broncos covid tests came back negative this morning per Schefter. Makes you wonder why they couldn’t postpone the game to today or tomorrow. 

The NFL has a 5-day quarantine requirement for anyone who comes into close contact with an infected player. Since all 3 quarterbacks came into contact with Jeff Driskel (who did reportedly test positive), it meant that none of them would have been eligible to play by Tuesday.

Of course, the reasonable common sense solution here would have been to just waive the 5-day requirement for anyone who tests negative and doesn't have any symptoms. But it's pretty obvious that the NFL had no interest in being reasonable. They wanted to make an example of someone.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Insein

Insein 10,986

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

The NFL has a 5-day quarantine requirement for anyone who comes into close contact with an infected player. Since all 3 quarterbacks came into contact with Jeff Driskel (who did reportedly test positive), it meant that none of them would have been eligible to play by Tuesday.

Of course, the reasonable common sense solution here would have been to just waive the 5-day requirement for anyone who tests negative and doesn't have any symptoms. But it's pretty obvious that the NFL had no interest in being reasonable. They wanted to make an example of someone.

So long as they aren't a playoff contender.

  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Followers 3
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...