Tim Tebow - Let's Talk

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 6:47 am

[QUOTE
I just don't like fantasy-relevant QBs coming off the waiver wire because it diminishes the draft efforts/strategies of those who used early picks to get stud QBs (i.e. Vick last year). Nothing single-handedly disrupts the QB landscape more than getting such an added (lucky!) boost in the middle of the season. [/QB][/quote]

This just doesn't make much sense to me. Couldn't the same be said for any position??? There are waiver wire pickups at every position - correct? Plus I know at least one high stakes players that was picking up TEbow the week before he was announced as a starter and he was getting him for $1 instead of the $200 - $400 were spending a week later. Very good move on his part and that's one of the reasons he is very succesful.

Wayne

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:10 am

We only start 1 QB vs 3-4 WRs. So I think it's easier to makeup for a deficiency at WR than QB. Also, there are historically far more viable WR options on the wire compared to QBs. Every week, most of us are continuously upgrading our bench WRs, a few points here and there. So even though someone could grab this year's breakout WR off the wire, chances are many other owners in the same league are incrementally upgrading their bench players, thereby diminishing the value of the owner who acquired the breakout WR. Not so with QBs because they just aren't out there. How many teams that got Vick off waivers last year won their league? WHY?

It's really that simple IMO.

[ October 29, 2011, 01:24 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

fflmaster · Post by **fflmaster** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:40 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
We only start 1 QB vs 3-4 WRs. So I think it's easier to makeup for a deficiency at WR than QB. Also, there are historically far more viable WR options on the wire compared to QBs. Every week, most of us are continuously upgrading our bench WRs, a few points here and there. So even though someone could grab this year's breakout WR off the wire, chances are many other owners in the same league are incrementally upgrading their bench players, thereby diminishing the value of the owner who acquired the breakout WR. Not so with QBs because they just aren't out there. How many teams that got Vick off waivers last year won their league? WHY?

It's really that simple IMO. It's really that simple IMO

shrink no arrogance in this statement at all. LOL

I already said I agree he is and most likely will never be a good NFL QB.

I am just amazed that we have 8 and soon to be many pages talking about him.

There is no question in my mind that people have drawn a line in the sand when it concerns Tebow.

Right or wrong people are never going to agree on him.

fflmaster · Post by **fflmaster** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 7:54 am

What is going to really fun is someone is GOING TO BE WRONG.

When the season is over one group will get to say they are right.

Will it be the pro-Tebow group or the Tebow is a bust group.

Will make for some good jabbing.

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:46 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
We only start 1 QB vs 3-4 WRs. So I think it's easier to makeup for a deficiency at WR than QB. Also, there are historically far more viable WR options on the wire compared to QBs. Every week, most of us are continuously upgrading our bench WRs, a few points here and there. So even though someone could grab this year's breakout WR off the wire, chances are many other owners in the same league are incrementally upgrading their bench players, thereby diminishing the value of the owner who acquired the breakout WR. Not so with QBs because they just aren't out there. How many teams that got Vick off waivers last year won their league? WHY?

It's really that simple IMO. I just dont' see it. I didn't have Vick anywhere and won a ton of leagues last year To me it's easier to pick up a quality QB off the waiver wire. Every year there seems to be multiple QB's outside of the "top tier" that put up very nice QB1 numbers. To single out one position just doesn't make any sense to me. Maybe I'm missing something. And I don't see how somebody else picking up a Tebow type QB can hurt your drafting strategy. It just seems kind of weird to me.

Wayne

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:19 am

Originally posted by Sandman62:
We only start 1 QB vs 3-4 WRs. So I think it's easier to makeup for a deficiency at WR than QB. Also, there are historically far more viable WR options on the wire compared to QBs. Every week, most of us are continuously upgrading our bench WRs, a few points here and there. So even though someone could grab this year's breakout WR off the wire, chances are many other owners in the same league are incrementally upgrading their bench players, thereby diminishing the value of the owner who acquired the breakout WR. Not so with QBs because they just aren't out there. How many teams that got Vick off waivers last year won their league? WHY?

It's really that simple IMO. Mike,

Then wouldn't logic tell you to wait on a QB each year???

I agree with Wayne, and the fact is most (including myself) are afraid to wait and draft a Sam Bradford, Josh Freeman, etc. because if you DON'T hit on that QB like Tebow (and a lot grabbed him BEFORE he became the starter), you are toast.

Many just got to the waiver wire first.....I don't consider that lucky in most cases.

For the record I have Tebow on ZERO teams.

I also want to see him against a GOOD defense before we annoint him the "next coming", as Miami's defense is not good. The fact he couldn't do anything for 55 minutes makes me have my doubts as well.

We shall see.....

[ October 29, 2011, 03:21 PM: Message edited by: BillyWaz ]

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:16 am

Yes Wayne, you and many others did win leagues last year. But we can't deny that there were a LOT of winning teams with Vick on them. I even seem to remember some threads here or articles elsewhere that made that point.

But let''s be honest here - people aren't referring to him just as some nice QB off the wire; he's being predicted to be a top 10 or 5 or whatever from here on. Those level of QBs don't often come off the wire to my knowledge (Vick being the exception).

Ffl "master": yes, some will be wrong and some right on this. In the end, who "wins" that debate on this board won't matter. All that will matter is how our teams did and who acquired Tebow and who avoided and how that effected our teams.

Obviously, we don't have him on a single team out of 9 - mostly because we try to draft top tier QBs in the first few rounds. I suspect many Tebow supporters waited on drafting QBs and desperately want an upgrade. Just a hunch. But I may be wrong on that too.

Billy, I'm sorry but I don't get your point.

I was making a case NOT to wait on a QB (which we don't). My contention was that for those who do, when a top QB comes available off waivers (like Vick did last year), they get a much-needed upgrade. What am I missing?

[ October 29, 2011, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

Sandman62 · Post by **Sandman62** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 10:26 am

Originally posted by fflmaster:
quote:Originally posted by Sandman62:
We only start 1 QB vs 3-4 WRs. So I think it's easier to makeup for a deficiency at WR than QB. Also, there are historically far more viable WR options on the wire compared to QBs. Every week, most of us are continuously upgrading our bench WRs, a few points here and there. So even though someone could grab this year's breakout WR off the wire, chances are many other owners in the same league are incrementally upgrading their bench players, thereby diminishing the value of the owner who acquired the breakout WR. Not so with QBs because they just aren't out there. How many teams that got Vick off waivers last year won their league? WHY?

It's really that simple IMO. It's really that simple IMO

shrink no arrogance in this statement at all. LOL [/QUOTE]Wayne asked me a question. I answered it. I added that it was "in my opinion" pretty straightforward ("simple"). If you think that makes me arrogant, then you need to grow thicker skin. THERE! Now I'm being arrogant (and perhaps accurate too).

[ October 29, 2011, 04:27 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]

Coltsfan · Post by **Coltsfan** » Sat Oct 29, 2011 11:15 am

I typically wait at QB but it's just because there have been guys out there the last few years that I felt like would put up nice numbers and come at a value. This year I was targeting Eli Manning and Ryan Fitzpatrick. I have them all over the place. I also took Matthew Stafford on a lot of teams. So far, so good. In the Super I passed on my target QB's and for whatever reason I took Sam Bradford. It's the only place I took him and now that's the team I'm starting Tebow. Since Bradford wrecked my team already it isn't really relevant. I would need Tebow to put up Aaron Rodgers type numbers to have a chance and that isn't happening.

But to get back to where I was heading. You have to wait at QB, TE, WR3 or RB2. So it's best to determine where you can get the best upside guys late and wait at that position. It just happens that I feel like many times it's QB. Now if Rodgers keeps doing what he's doing I might have to re-evaluate next year.

Wayne

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Sun Oct 30, 2011 1:25 am

Originally posted by Liquid Hippo:
quote:Originally posted by Shrink Attack:

The comparison to Peyton Manning is absurd.If you would be so kind, could you post specifically the comparison you speak of(or simply point me to it, I searched this thread and could not find any Peyton/Tebow comparison) and what you found so absurd about it? Did the poster state that Tebow was better than Peyton Manning? That they were on equal footing? Did they post or state something that was factually incorrect?

thanks [/QUOTE]Fishing trip?

http://nffcboards.stats.com/cgi-bin/ult ... 166#000002