Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Scott M

NFL Fantasy Weekly Sit/Start

17 posts in this topic

Allright, most people seem to like these, and for those of you who say "manage your own team" I have my opinion about what to do, thank you very much (see below). For those who are here for the fun of it, throw your takes out.

Here goes:

I've got 5 backs, I can only play 3.

LenDale White

Pierre Thomas

Ray Rice

Steve Slaton

MoJo Drew

Slaton and Drew are the obvious choices, White has a tough matchup, and Thomas is questionable for Sunday. I think my third is Rice, unless I hear better news about Thomas before Sunday. Any other takes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, we almost have the same RB's. I have Slaton, Pierre, and Rice on my FFB team too! (nothing to be proud of, Russ) I picked up Pierre as a risk/reward player for the oft injured Bush. Ironically Pierre is the one questionable for the first week. Ha!

I wouldn't put much faith in Pierre just yet. I'd go Rice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got MJD on my team but I'm a little worried about his "leg bruise". They aren't saying much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm starting Rice over White this weekend, KC has no run defense and White plays Pit so tough call! I start 2 RB and 3 WR in that league though, and im loaded at RB with Ronnie Brown(other starter), White, Rice, Donald Brown, Felix Jones and Derrick Ward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cadillac was named starter in TB the other day. FYI.

Donald Brown is still waiting in the wings of Addai but in a couple of weeks he could be in a similar situation as Pierre in NO, especially if Addai stinks it up like he did last year. They really like Brown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeepers creepers Cadillac starter lol wow....I can always cut Ward later on...I got a feeling quite a few RBs will go down this year so I like to be loaded or possibly trade. Trying to trade Ward for Colston as we speak..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only play two backs in my league. I have jones-drew, which I am starting for sure. But for my backup I have Kevin Smith (Det.)and Julius Jones from Seattle. Which one should I start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also torn between starting either Chad Ochocinco or Santonio Holmes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who do I start in my 3rd RB/WR slot?

The options are:

Donnie Avery

Percy Harvin

Jamal Lewis

Julius Jones

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harvin, think Avery still out, Lewis going against Vikes D, and don't think Jones will do much.

Hoping Favre gets Harvin involved and show off his skills

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I think Harvin has a shot at some big plays. Who should I start here. I can run 3 running backs and one wide out or vice versa.

Backs:

Tomlinson

Slaton

Barber

Addai

Wideouts:

V. Jackson

Desean Jackson

Lance Moore

Roy Williams

I'm leaning towards Barber, Tomlinson, Slaton and Moore. Any thoughts?

Tunrevir~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CREEP!! i hope you started holmes instead of CINCO hes doing nothing this year OCHO that is. if you are in reception league take kevin smith everytime, if not take J.J this week against rams!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those with or playing against Pierre Thomas, he has been ruled out for the week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am feeling good about my

  • Jay Cutler
  • LaDainian Tomlinson
  • Reggie Bush
  • Edgerrin James "Flex"
  • Randy Moss
  • Hines Ward
  • Kevin Boss

Was able to get the Vikings D and 13th round Ryan Longwell was still on the table, so I scooped him up. I went a little over board with RB's this year for my bench, but some good talent was sitting their. grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I screwed up today grin

Bush and EJ! Too much faith and too much pre-game drama press for me frown

CAN YOU READ INTO REPORTS PRE-GAME FANTY REPORTS TOO MUCH?

Answer: YES grin

I will not even admit to who I put down for these guy on a last minute "flash" reports! smirk More points I would even admit to grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    • Dave, if this many folks are not understanding the question, than maybe the question is unclear.  So rather then rant about it perhaps try rephrasing it.
    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
  • Our Sponsors