quote:Originally posted by Sandman62:
I'd like to know how the heck you even thought this, given that Gore said all week he wasn't sure he'd play and that less than an hour before gametime, a SF beat writer said Gore might even be inactive???
![Surprised :eek:](./images/smilies/icon_e_surprised.gif)
![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_e_wink.gif)
[We sat him for Hunter :rolleyes: ] It's not a crystal ball but rather a special or keen "sense". It's the same reason I started Cam instead of Cutler. [/QUOTE]May be keen sense. But unless your keen sense is right a lot more than wrong, it could also be just pure dumb luck.
Please share your tea leaf reading on Gore then? As I said in another thread... I'd venture a guess that 80+% of Gore owners played viable [no bench garbage who had 0 chance of breaking double digits] alternatives yesterday, especially those with Hunter. Let's take a poll? Gore owners??? How many started Gore (and please also specify if you had heard the news prior to game time that he might be deactivated)???
[ October 03, 2011, 12:38 PM: Message edited by: Sandman62 ]