ffplayer302

Pittsburgh area has it in HD, channel 279. Funny thing is, I had to call Comcast earlier this week (an unrelated matter) and their "on hold" recording was announcing that Red Zone HD was NOT available in this area.

It seems to me that this guy IS trying to win, the point of fantasy football. I suspect that if not every team made the playoffs, he would be trying to win as many regular season games as possible and try to sneak into the playoffs. Clearly he has decided that tanking for now is his best strategy for the chosen rules.

Martinez muffs the punt, and TEN recovers. Should that not be a Fumble Recovery credit for TEN Def/ST? MFL.com is not showing it as such.

I stuck with SJax last week instead of D. Foster, and the difference cost me the game. This week, I'm benching M. Harrison for W. Welker.

At the 3 spot I'd probably be tempted by the potential upside of Addai, but in the end feel safer about picking Gore. His hand should be fine by opening day. What interested me about your comments was that this is a NON-ppr league. Don't join in that second round run on WR's that you foresee. There should be some nice RB2 available, and that would be more valuable in a non-ppr league anyway. Depending on your scoring rules, I'd likely go 1st tier QB with that early 3rd round pick.

I caught the Thus SEA SF game on Comcast's INHD channel a couple weeks ago. At 11 pm, the channel switched back to its regular programming even though the game wasn't finished. I haven't watched any other NFL Network games on INHD since, so I don't know if that is a regular occurrence.

In our redraft league, LJ went 1st, and I picked SA 2nd. I squeaked into the playoffs, but have to play the division winner this week (the guy who picked 3rd, and took LT). I DID know of the Madden curse, and (unfortunately) didn't let that be a part of my decision. I was unsure of how a new QB in San Diego would change the chemistry on the team, and went with what I thought was the "safer" pick in SA. I have hung onto him all year, and his sub-par performance on Thursday night will make my matchup against LT all the more difficult.

Why? I'll tell you why. Because I've had to pick two of Johnson, Moss, R. Brown and Berrian all year long. Because it is inevitable that I will leave the wrong one on the bench. Because I'd chosen Johnson every game this year, believing that he just HAD to eventually break out, only to be disappointed. Because San Diego's pass defense is rated high (Johnson's opponent this week), while Denver's and Washington's are rated low (Brown and Moss opponents). Because, even when you make your best guess based on the numbers and matchups, it doesn't always work out. R. Brown and Moss end up getting me zippo this week (or near enough) while Johnson laughs at me from my bench. It just isn't my year

I went S. Alexander, C. Johnson, R. Moss, and M. Hasselbeck with my first 4 picks. Do Johnson and Moss count as "broken"?? I vote yes.

In our league, our rules state that the status of each individual player is locked to the previous week's status if a lineup is not submitted before that player's game time. Other positions may be changed, so long as BOTH the starter from last week AND the player you want to put in instead have not started their games yet. This does not allow for any "wait and see" about whether to submit a lineup or not, since the outcome for that position would be the same either way. In the case of your situation, both players would have been stuck with Harrison and Stokely, whether they wanted them or not, on the basis that they had started them the previous week. This would not stop them from making OTHER changes to their roster, but those positions would be locked.