Billy Please stop bringing this up, it cost 5,000 one year.
Thanks,
John
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
'Point is it happens about once every 3 years. Kinda like a FULLBACK scoring THREE TD's in one game'
Billy Please stop bringing this up, it cost 5,000 one year.
Thanks,
John
Billy Please stop bringing this up, it cost 5,000 one year.
Thanks,
John
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone.
[/QUOTE]I realize that, but couldn't an astute owner who DIDN'T have Bush or Royal pick up the Saints or Broncos too??? :rolleyes:
I guess that doesn't help your argument.
[ October 21, 2009, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: BillyWaz ]
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone.
[/QUOTE]I realize that, but couldn't an astute owner who DIDN'T have Bush or Royal pick up the Saints or Broncos too??? :rolleyes: I guess that doesn't help your argument.
[ October 21, 2009, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: BillyWaz ]
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone. [/QUOTE]We acquired Denver in the classic and New Orleans in the Prime time after week 2 (before week 3). Maybe that was luck?
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone.
[/QUOTE]We acquired Denver in the classic and New Orleans in the Prime time after week 2 (before week 3). Maybe that was luck?Hakuna Matata!
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:If I start Josh Cribbs and Cleveland's D each week, Why do you keep harping on players that are rarely on someone's roster? [/QUOTE]I also brought up D-Jax and Philly's D (but that doesn't help your argument).
Again, If you start BOTH of them HOPING for a return TD (assuming he returns TWO TD's in the first 16 weeks) so you can get the 12 points, you are going to VERY disappointed for 14 weeks.
Again, If someone wants to double the returner WITH the defense....GO FOR IT!!!
If it happened that I got DeSean Jackson and the Eagles....fine. I know I am most likely getting solid points outside of the return game from both.
However if I draft Devin Hester, why would I try and draft the Bears?? They aren't one of the better defenses (at least not statistically this year)
Over the long haul, it is obvious I am better with Hester and a "better" defense than doubling up with the Bears. [/QUOTE]I guarantee if this were to pass, and DJax ran back 5 or more TD's in one season, these boards would light up like a Xmas tree crying foul. [/QB][/QUOTE]If it is in the rules BEFORE the season, who would cry foul????
If people want to PREDICT that D-Jax would run back 5 kicks, and get him....WHY SHOULDN'T THEY BE REWARDED???
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward.
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:If I start Josh Cribbs and Cleveland's D each week, Why do you keep harping on players that are rarely on someone's roster? [/QUOTE]I also brought up D-Jax and Philly's D (but that doesn't help your argument).
Again, If you start BOTH of them HOPING for a return TD (assuming he returns TWO TD's in the first 16 weeks) so you can get the 12 points, you are going to VERY disappointed for 14 weeks.
Again, If someone wants to double the returner WITH the defense....GO FOR IT!!!
If it happened that I got DeSean Jackson and the Eagles....fine. I know I am most likely getting solid points outside of the return game from both.
However if I draft Devin Hester, why would I try and draft the Bears?? They aren't one of the better defenses (at least not statistically this year)
Over the long haul, it is obvious I am better with Hester and a "better" defense than doubling up with the Bears. [/QUOTE]I guarantee if this were to pass, and DJax ran back 5 or more TD's in one season, these boards would light up like a Xmas tree crying foul. [/QB][/QUOTE]If it is in the rules BEFORE the season, who would cry foul????
If people want to PREDICT that D-Jax would run back 5 kicks, and get him....WHY SHOULDN'T THEY BE REWARDED???
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward.
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Ugly Yellow Tomatoes Astute,
Is your name going forward or Yellow Astute Tomatoes which ever you like better.
Is your name going forward or Yellow Astute Tomatoes which ever you like better.
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
the points should only go to the individual player, and not the team DEF/ST. The ST really needs to be removed from the team defense because nobody drafts a defense based on how good their return men are. It might break a tie between two equally perceived defenses, but defense is defense, and special teams is special teams. Kicking is part of special teams, yet we have a separate position for that..makes no sense to me. Let defense be defense, and return points go to the rare breed of lightning quick offensive players. A lot of their real life value is based on their return ability, and aren't we trying to mimic real-life with this fantasy game of ours?
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by Ugly Yellow Tomatoes:
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone. [/QUOTE]We acquired Denver in the classic and New Orleans in the Prime time after week 2 (before week 3). Maybe that was luck? [/QUOTE]Of course not. You saw they were better than expected and you pounced....good for you.
The question is, would you have spent say 20% more on them had you had Royal or Bush so you could secure the "double points" (if implemented)?
quote:Originally posted by FantasyFactor:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Are you gonna tell me now that you had Denver and New Orleans in your top 5 ranked defenses coming into the season??? :rolleyes:
No, but an astute owner would have FAAB'd them in a heartbeat a few weeks ago if they had Royal or Bush.
The draft isn't the only place you can acquire someone.
[/QUOTE]We acquired Denver in the classic and New Orleans in the Prime time after week 2 (before week 3). Maybe that was luck? [/QUOTE]Of course not. You saw they were better than expected and you pounced....good for you. The question is, would you have spent say 20% more on them had you had Royal or Bush so you could secure the "double points" (if implemented)?
-
Gordon Gekko II
- Posts: 647
- Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 6:00 pm
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward. "skilled" owners thought about that b4 THIS season started and the kick/punt injury concern may have been the deciding factor for some owners NOT to take those types of players in the NFFC. all comes down to skill level IMO
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward. "skilled" owners thought about that b4 THIS season started and the kick/punt injury concern may have been the deciding factor for some owners NOT to take those types of players in the NFFC. all comes down to skill level IMO
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by jdoggmms:
the points should only go to the individual player, and not the team DEF/ST. The ST really needs to be removed from the team defense because nobody drafts a defense based on how good their return men are. It might break a tie between two equally perceived defenses, but defense is defense, and special teams is special teams. Kicking is part of special teams, yet we have a separate position for that..makes no sense to me. Let defense be defense, and return points go to the rare breed of lightning quick offensive players. A lot of their real life value is based on their return ability, and aren't we trying to mimic real-life with this fantasy game of ours? I would agree with this, but I highly doubt it gets changed. We are too "used to" getting the return TD's, and people fear change.
However, it there is one contest that doesn't mind change....this is the one (and that is a GOOD thing! )
It would solve the problems when people are complaining that they should receive ST points for when a team fakes a punt or field goal and runs it for a score.
the points should only go to the individual player, and not the team DEF/ST. The ST really needs to be removed from the team defense because nobody drafts a defense based on how good their return men are. It might break a tie between two equally perceived defenses, but defense is defense, and special teams is special teams. Kicking is part of special teams, yet we have a separate position for that..makes no sense to me. Let defense be defense, and return points go to the rare breed of lightning quick offensive players. A lot of their real life value is based on their return ability, and aren't we trying to mimic real-life with this fantasy game of ours? I would agree with this, but I highly doubt it gets changed. We are too "used to" getting the return TD's, and people fear change.
However, it there is one contest that doesn't mind change....this is the one (and that is a GOOD thing!
)It would solve the problems when people are complaining that they should receive ST points for when a team fakes a punt or field goal and runs it for a score.
Should We Include Individual ST Points In 2010?
Originally posted by Gordon Gekko II:
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward. "skilled" owners thought about that b4 THIS season started and the kick/punt injury concern may have been the deciding factor for some owners NOT to take those types of players in the NFFC. all comes down to skill level IMO [/QUOTE]I'm not going to shy away from a player who caught 90 balls on offense last year just because he returns kicks.
Just saying, if you are adding risk, there should be some added reward...no?
You wouldn't invest in a stock that only had risk, but no reward, would you?
quote:Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Again, no one is thinking about the ADDED RISK (injury) that these kick returners have with ZERO reward. "skilled" owners thought about that b4 THIS season started and the kick/punt injury concern may have been the deciding factor for some owners NOT to take those types of players in the NFFC. all comes down to skill level IMO [/QUOTE]I'm not going to shy away from a player who caught 90 balls on offense last year just because he returns kicks.
Just saying, if you are adding risk, there should be some added reward...no?
You wouldn't invest in a stock that only had risk, but no reward, would you?