ilovefuzz.com

Vick is dominating in my Bad Quarterback Fantasy League right now. Pick 6s baby

pelliott wrote:As I said, I completely understand the move purely as a football move. I also, the more I've thought about it, appreciate the value of it.

As a fan, it's dogshit. It's an insulting PR move by a front office that's already been spotty, one that talks down to the fans, and entered the season on a "yeah ra ra let's fucking win some football games" approach, effectively giving up on the season after two games. It's a slap in the face.

Furthermore, it's jumping the gun a bit that SHOULD Bridgewater come out this year, and the Browns aren't picking first, the team picking first will jump at the chance to take our package of picks over the QB. It's part of the reason I'm skeptical.

I hear ya, like I said, I've been there. I remember the Pats' 1-15 season, that was a barrel of laughs. And the Celtics are doing that this year to the Boston fans, too. They traded away every decent player other than Rondo, and I just wish they'd trade him too and get it over with. If you're gonna be bad, go all the way and be fucking terrible. It makes no sense to be a mediocre team.

I agree, I've been sitting through three seasons of Tankstrong from the Cavs and patiently waiting for the year where they try to make a leap forward. I'm hoping it's this year. It should be, anyway.

bigchiefbc wrote:

pelliott wrote:As I said, I completely understand the move purely as a football move. I also, the more I've thought about it, appreciate the value of it.

As a fan, it's dogshit. It's an insulting PR move by a front office that's already been spotty, one that talks down to the fans, and entered the season on a "yeah ra ra let's fucking win some football games" approach, effectively giving up on the season after two games. It's a slap in the face.

Furthermore, it's jumping the gun a bit that SHOULD Bridgewater come out this year, and the Browns aren't picking first, the team picking first will jump at the chance to take our package of picks over the QB. It's part of the reason I'm skeptical.

I hear ya, like I said, I've been there. I remember the Pats' 1-15 season, that was a barrel of laughs. And the Celtics are doing that this year to the Boston fans, too. They traded away every decent player other than Rondo, and I just wish they'd trade him too and get it over with. If you're gonna be bad, go all the way and be fucking terrible. It makes no sense to be a mediocre team.

Nah, the Celtic's shouldn't trade Rondo now--his value is at its absolute lowest. Needs to come back and play to reestablish his unique skillset and show that the injury hasn't left a lasting imprint on his game.

Also, my guess is that he'll be kept out until December or January, and we have such a frontloaded schedule that we might be 5-30 by the time he comes back. Keep him, get the pick--this draft is absolutely loaded--and either trade out for some disgruntled allstars (I keep hearing Love and Aldridge, but I don't see those are real possibilities) to pair with him or snag some feisty new talent.

The team isn't that bad--its just a mess and a logjam. We still have quality starting and bench talent at the 1,3,and 4. Our 2-guard rotation is an absolute clusterfuck and I'm not sure Danny Ainge even knows what a center is anymore, but we're not the fucking Bucks.

[/hoops fan anxiously awaiting the 13-14 season]

D.o.S. wrote:

bigchiefbc wrote:

pelliott wrote:As I said, I completely understand the move purely as a football move. I also, the more I've thought about it, appreciate the value of it.

As a fan, it's dogshit. It's an insulting PR move by a front office that's already been spotty, one that talks down to the fans, and entered the season on a "yeah ra ra let's fucking win some football games" approach, effectively giving up on the season after two games. It's a slap in the face.

Furthermore, it's jumping the gun a bit that SHOULD Bridgewater come out this year, and the Browns aren't picking first, the team picking first will jump at the chance to take our package of picks over the QB. It's part of the reason I'm skeptical.

I hear ya, like I said, I've been there. I remember the Pats' 1-15 season, that was a barrel of laughs. And the Celtics are doing that this year to the Boston fans, too. They traded away every decent player other than Rondo, and I just wish they'd trade him too and get it over with. If you're gonna be bad, go all the way and be fucking terrible. It makes no sense to be a mediocre team.

Nah, the Celtic's shouldn't trade Rondo now--his value is at its absolute lowest. Needs to come back and play to reestablish his unique skillset and show that the injury hasn't left a lasting imprint on his game.

Also, my guess is that he'll be kept out until December or January, and we have such a frontloaded schedule that we might be 5-30 by the time he comes back. Keep him, get the pick--this draft is absolutely loaded--and either trade out for some disgruntled allstars (I keep hearing Love and Aldridge, but I don't see those are real possibilities) to pair with him or snag some feisty new talent.

The team isn't that bad--its just a mess and a logjam. We still have quality starting and bench talent at the 1,3,and 4. Our 2-guard rotation is an absolute clusterfuck and I'm not sure Danny Ainge even knows what a center is anymore, but we're not the fucking Bucks.

[/hoops fan anxiously awaiting the 13-14 season]

We should start a basketball thread so we don't clutter up the football thread with bball talk.

bigchiefbc wrote:I respect your opinion, but I definitely disagree with you. I don't think the Colts got a bad deal, but I don't think Richardson is as good as we all thought he was coming out of college. I know the Browns don't have the greatest offensive line, but Richardson is putting up terrible per-rush averages, and more importantly, just isn't breaking any big plays at all. Even RBs on shitty team occasionally break out a big run. Richardson just isn't. He only had a few runs over 20 yards last year, and none so far this year. I remember when he was coming out of college, everyone said he was the best RB to come out since Peterson, but Peterson showed in his first year that he could blow a run open to the house at any time. Richardson has just never shown that. I think he's a good RB, but he's not a franchise centerpiece, which is what the 3rd pick in the draft should be.

I think Lombardi knows what he's doing, and he's selling Richardson now, when his value is the highest it will ever be. If he hung onto Richardson for another year, and he put up another year of 250 rushes at 3.5 yards a pop, his value would go down, and maybe only fetch a second rounder. I agree with you that they're going for Bridgewater, and I think the Browns will be bad enough to get him. And then the Colts pick will probably be in the mid-to-late teens, and that's gonna be a nice piece, either on the line or on the D. I think they think they can replace what they were getting from Richardson in a later round. (Lombardi loves to talk about the Pats, who got Vereen and Ridley in the 2nd and 3rd round). And between Jordan Cameron and Josh Gordon, they're building the nucleus of what will eventually be a good team. I like the trade for the Browns, but I won't kill the Colts for it either. I consider it a rare win-win trade.

EDIT: Just to throw in a little barb against TRich, here is a stat that Matthew Berry tweeted that made me double take.

One of these guys is Trent Richardson so far in his career. The other is Mark Ingram. Just sayin'

295 rsh 1107 yds 10tds 3.8ypc
298 rsh 1055 yds 11tds 3.5ypc

trich has played 18 games in cleveland, whose only good o lineman is a blindside pass blocking LT. they suck at run blocking.
also in those 18 games, their qb has been brandon weeden or whatever backup filled him for him, i cant remember.
the point is, defenses have been stacking against the run.

the colts, on the other hand.
i would not be surprised to see trich break some of those big plays you're looking for, soon - or at least once he gets a handle on the offense.

time will tell on this, but you are trading a known quantity for an unknown quantity with a whole lotta variables between present day and getting to your goal.
but from the browns perspective, i totally understand how giving trich 300 carries a year until his rookie contract expires, then getting nothing for him when he becomes a FA, does you absolutely no good.
however i dont see 18 games on a #3 overall pick equals 20 draft spots.

yeah, every "expert" i've heard has the colts #1 pick next year being in the 20s

surprised the browns couldnt get a slightly better deal done with another team, maybe later this season or in the offseason. possibly even on draft day 2014 or leading up to it.

bigchiefbc wrote: If the Browns don't get the first pick, well now they can add in the Colts first and a couple other picks to move up to 1st overall and take Bridgewater.

Dude, if it's a team like the jags at #1, whoever it is, they will almost surely need a qb, and they will not trade that #1 pick - unless it is a completely horrible overbuy trade by the browns

whomever/whoever?

bigchiefbc wrote:

D.o.S. wrote:

bigchiefbc wrote:

pelliott wrote:As I said, I completely understand the move purely as a football move. I also, the more I've thought about it, appreciate the value of it.

As a fan, it's dogshit. It's an insulting PR move by a front office that's already been spotty, one that talks down to the fans, and entered the season on a "yeah ra ra let's fucking win some football games" approach, effectively giving up on the season after two games. It's a slap in the face.

Furthermore, it's jumping the gun a bit that SHOULD Bridgewater come out this year, and the Browns aren't picking first, the team picking first will jump at the chance to take our package of picks over the QB. It's part of the reason I'm skeptical.

I hear ya, like I said, I've been there. I remember the Pats' 1-15 season, that was a barrel of laughs. And the Celtics are doing that this year to the Boston fans, too. They traded away every decent player other than Rondo, and I just wish they'd trade him too and get it over with. If you're gonna be bad, go all the way and be fucking terrible. It makes no sense to be a mediocre team.

Nah, the Celtic's shouldn't trade Rondo now--his value is at its absolute lowest. Needs to come back and play to reestablish his unique skillset and show that the injury hasn't left a lasting imprint on his game.

Also, my guess is that he'll be kept out until December or January, and we have such a frontloaded schedule that we might be 5-30 by the time he comes back. Keep him, get the pick--this draft is absolutely loaded--and either trade out for some disgruntled allstars (I keep hearing Love and Aldridge, but I don't see those are real possibilities) to pair with him or snag some feisty new talent.

The team isn't that bad--its just a mess and a logjam. We still have quality starting and bench talent at the 1,3,and 4. Our 2-guard rotation is an absolute clusterfuck and I'm not sure Danny Ainge even knows what a center is anymore, but we're not the fucking Bucks.

[/hoops fan anxiously awaiting the 13-14 season]

We should start a basketball thread so we don't clutter up the football thread with bball talk.

ON IT. <3 da NBA

pigmaker wrote: trich has played 18 games in cleveland, whose only good o lineman is a blindside pass blocking LT. they suck at run blocking.
also in those 18 games, their qb has been brandon weeden or whatever backup filled him for him, i cant remember.
the point is, defenses have been stacking against the run.

the colts, on the other hand.
i would not be surprised to see trich break some of those big plays you're looking for, soon - or at least once he gets a handle on the offense.

time will tell on this, but you are trading a known quantity for an unknown quantity with a whole lotta variables between present day and getting to your goal.
but from the browns perspective, i totally understand how giving trich 300 carries a year until his rookie contract expires, then getting nothing for him when he becomes a FA, does you absolutely no good.
however i dont see 18 games on a #3 overall pick equals 20 draft spots.

yeah, every "expert" i've heard has the colts #1 pick next year being in the 20s

surprised the browns couldnt get a slightly better deal done with another team, maybe later this season or in the offseason. possibly even on draft day 2014 or leading up to it.

I agree teams have been stacking the line against him, but you could say the same thing about AP and CJ2K (Ponder and Locker aren't much better than Weeden), and they still break out a long TD every couple games, which TRich just hasn't been able to do for some reason. I just don't think he's a homerun kind of RB. Which is what I want at 3rd overall. Don't get me wrong, I think TRich is a good, above average RB. But I don't think he's a foundational, franchise player that you build a winning team around. You need the QB first (which even AP and CJ2K have proven). So unfortunately, the only real way to get a franchise QB anymore is in the very very top of the draft, and to get there, you need to be bad; REAL bad. I agree that Bridgewater is ultimately an unknown quantity, but he really is Cleveland's best shot at becoming an actually good team anytime in the foreseeable future. And Lombardi knows this, and has to take the shot. And I don't blame him. If I were in his position, I'd be tanking for Teddy, too.

As for getting more value for TRich, like I said, I think the worry is that another mediocre season for TRich in Cleveland would lower his value. As for the whole trading a 3rd overall pick for one in the 20s, I don't think Lombardi cares overmuch what pick the previous regime spent on TRich, that pick is a sunk cost, it's like in poker, once money is in the middle, it's not yours anymore, you can't include it in your calculations. I think Lombardi knows Cleveland was gonna be shitty this year even with him, and he worried that another mediocre year in Cleveland would lower Richardson's value even more. If a guy spends two years putting up 600 rushes of 3 and half yards, teams might start to worry that he's just not an explosive back. Whether you agree with it or not, that pretty much has to be Cleveland's rationale, it's the only explanation that makes sense.

I agree that if Jacksonville is the first pick, they're taking Teddy come hell or high water, no matter what Cleveland offers, and vice versa. Oakland actually looks like they'll be not-awful this year, so I consider it a two-man race for Teddy between Jacksonville and Cleveland.

If you want the worst record in the NFL you could always pick up Jamarcus Russell. Yes, I'm still bitter about that loser.

I'm also pissed that Smith has been ignoring Bowe 95% of the time, probably just going to drop him and pick up just about any other WR.

Don't worry, we don't have aaaaany problems with bad quarterbacks.

bigchiefbc wrote: I agree that Bridgewater is ultimately an unknown quantity, but he really is Cleveland's best shot at becoming an actually good team anytime in the foreseeable future. And Lombardi knows this, and has to take the shot. And I don't blame him. If I were in his position, I'd be tanking for Teddy, too.

I didnt mean that bridgewater is an unknown quantity - i meant that how they get the chance to draft him is an unknown quantity
i like bridgewater a great deal, i just hope he goes to a team that has help around him because he can be a star from game 1

it really seems to be down to jags and browns right now, but theres always a team or 2 that shocks everyone with how bad they end up being and they lose like 10 out of 12 and end up picking real early

2 wins at worst i think is what we expect for the #1 pick, it could come down to strength of schedule tiebreaker
the team with the easiest strength of schedule if 2 teams have the same record get first dibs
it's worth noting the raiders have 4th easiest
behind them is the browns, and the jags have a tougher schedule
so that bodes well for the browns if it comes down to browns and jags tied for worst

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... e-for-2013

this is how the colts ended up with the #1 overall (they drafted luck) when they were tied with the rams for worst record
rams of course traded down with the skins


you raise a very valid point about building an nfl team around a qb as opposed to an rb
after all this is without a doubt a pass first league now

I have no idea what I'm going to do when the sad day comes that I can no longer draft Vick in fantasy. He's the best kind of emotional roller coaster.

just confused, how did jamaal charles get 30.2 w/ 92 rushing yards and one touchdown? that'd be 15.2, what am i missing?

edit: ah i figured it out, he also had 7 receptions for 80 yards. way different scoring from my other league...

9.2 + 6 + 7 + 8 = 30.2. weird that there's a point per reception, i hadn't caught that. (ba dum bum ching)

space6oy wrote:just confused, how did jamaal charles get 30.2 w/ 92 rushing yards and one touchdown? that'd be 15.2, what am i missing?

edit: ah i figured it out, he also had 7 receptions for 80 yards. way different scoring from my other league...

9.2 + 6 + 7 + 8 = 30.2. weird that there's a point per reception, i hadn't caught that. (ba dum bum ching)

Yeah, sorry, we discussed PPR back when we were still planning the league. PPR does give WRs a boost, so I also gave a 1TD bonus for 100+ yard rushing games, that pretty much evens out the top 25 WRs and RBs scoring-wise. But it also makes pass-catching RBs really useful, like Charles, Bush and Sproles (who I was really damned close to drafting, and he was stolen the pick before me )