$996

[chriseibl]

Glenn,

I know you're a risk taker and you will always go for upside and take the risks. I saw you drafting Gronk all summer which could end up being huge for you! I definitely wasn't referring to you. But every year I see guys sit on free agent money and won't spend it. I used to be that way. And then they get half way through the year, they don't have much of a chance, and they go all in on some mediocre talent that has zero upside but had a big game. All because they were scared to spend it early on guys who might be breaking out.

But anyways, you are one of the most aggressive players I know and your track record shows that. I would never think you're playing for the middle! And no I don't believe that if you didn't go strong on Gordon that makes you a conservative player. That just isn't the case. But there are many players who would never bid high on an impact player because they want to keep money back for something "later". And next thing you know the year is half over and they have no depth.


Wayne

Thanks Wayne.

Just to clarify however, my issue isn't so much with the huge bids on Gordon per se or whether he's worth it one way or the other. Even a $900 bid can be justified in my mind, just not a bid I was willing to make at this time for my teams (not that it would have made a difference because he went for much more in just about every one of my leagues in which he was available ). I do obviously strongly believe that Gordon "can" return significant value as I've got him on quite a number of my teams.

My concern and point throughout this thread is not in regards to Gordon's potential value, but in regards to the "all-in" or practical all-in bids for Gordon, or for any player for that matter, at this early stage of the season. In a $10K draft for another contest provider, a player bid his full $1000 FAAB budget to obtain Gordon. He has no backup kicker, no backup D, no backup TE.... and now he's completely handcuffed.

I believe FAAB is as important a component to winning as the draft. You need flexibility and the ability to maneuver and adjust. I don't win the contest I took down last year without Zac Stacy, Keenen Allen, Jordan Reed (early season), even the Rams D and Novak, all picked up because I had some FAAB dollars to play with.

I doubt there's anyone in the pro-spending $900+ on Gordon crowd who thinks spending $1,000 is a good move (not sure any player here would disagree with you on that) so I think that extreme example is somewhat off topic because you're talking about a situation where a guy completely handcuffed himself to make any moves. That's just bad.

I believe you can do lots with a $1 but spending a full $1,000 on Adrian Peterson is a bad move if you have no flexibility and have to take zeros on bye weeks at certain positions. MASSIVE difference between spending $990 and spending $1,000. And while anyone would love to get Stacy and Allen in free agency like you did last year, there's a reason you won the contest, and one reason is there were very few players who skillfully acquired BOTH those guys in free agency. Additionally, Stacy and Allen went for a buck or two in some of my leagues as they were usually picked up before they really blew up.

[particra]

$950 made total sense when you thought he was getting his suspension completely reversed and would start Week 3. Completely justifiable in every way.

$950 when he's not going to play until Week 10 (after three months with no contact with the team, no NFL style training, etc) is almost invariably a bad deal for most teams. They will have injuries that will be difficult to fill with limited FAAB. In good leagues, other teams will go out of their way to make it difficult for teams that spent $950+ on Gordon to fill spots.

Of course, it wouldn't surprise me at all if there is a really strong team that paid big for Gordon that ends up winning an Overall. He's that good. But he's not going to step in and play 70 snaps in Week 10.

[particra]

Also would add that I'm really talking about Prime Times and Classics. You can survive an OC/Cutline while spending $990 on Gordon.

[Coltsfan]

$950 made total sense when you thought he was getting his suspension completely reversed and would start Week 3. Completely justifiable in every way.

$950 when he's not going to play until Week 10 (after three months with no contact with the team, no NFL style training, etc) is almost invariably a bad deal for most teams. .

I'm not worrying so much about no contact, no training, etc... I'm worries about him having 90 consecutive doobie free nights.....!


Wayne

[BLACKHAND]

You are also banking on him to stay out of trouble for the next 6-7 weeks which might be the largest gamble of all.

[boutrous11]

Of course, it wouldn't surprise me at all if there is a really strong team that paid big for Gordon that ends up winning an Overall. He's that good.

This is why a bunch of people went all(most)in w/ him.

[ALL-IN JD - Football]

The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports Josh Gordon will be suspended ten games under the terms of the NFL's new drug policy.

[kjduke]

Of course, it wouldn't surprise me at all if there is a really strong team that paid big for Gordon that ends up winning an Overall. He's that good.

This is why a bunch of people went all(most)in w/ him.

I think the all-in players are under-estimating the importance of FAAB. I'd be very surprised if this team could win their league much less an overall.

[BillyWaz]

Teams who grabbed him obviously need to be strong enough to make playoffs without much FAAB $, because he is virtually irrelevant for the 13 week regular season (can't return till week 12). I gotta believe it may take him a week or two to get his "football legs" under him as well.

I would love to revisit this thread before week 12, and see how many of the teams that spent $950+ are still "in the hunt", and who are not.

Certainly makes it entertaining, and good to have quality football talk back on the boards!!!

[afv]

Gordon would face another obstacle under a new policy. He has a hearing scheduled Nov. 18 for his July 5 driving while impaired charge in Raleigh, N.C. If convicted of DWI, Gordon would reportedly be suspended an additional two games under the proposed policy.