Gopher

Members
  • Content count

    20,809
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    17

Everything posted by Gopher

  1. Fantasy this year

    I'm actually the opposite. If there is one thing that this pandemic has taught me, regarding sports, it's that I don't really miss them all that much. I did at first (probably because everything shut down at such an exciting time... NCAA tourney in hoops, Players Championship in golf), but as the past 4+ months have progressed, I have missed it less and less. Haven't watched a single minute of NBA or MLB (although I would certainly watch the Twins if it were on local TV), and I'm finding myself more and more indifferent about whether or not the NFL happens. Which is funny, because I'm still (reluctantly) committed to more than a half-dozen leagues. I know that I'll get more into it if and when the season gets underway, but right now, I don't really find myself caring whether they play or not. I have played more golf in the past 4 months than any period of time in the past 20+ years, though. Even more cool than that is that my 8YO son has gotten the bug.... he's gone from having very little interest to asking me almost daily if we can go play. I've also been binge-watching a butt-load of TV, through Hulu, Netflix, and Prime.
  2. Antonio Brown re-announces retirement

    Yeah, it's not like Brown's career started to derail with him being cut by NE. It started well before that... while he was still in PIT, actually. Think about it... he was BY FAR the best at his position in the entire league, and PIT wanted nothing to do with him. That tells me all I need to know. He then signs with OAK (a team who DESPERATELY need WR help at the time), and they quickly come to the same conclusion. He's a cancer. Then, NE says what the heck, we need a WR, let's give him a shot, and all is well in the world. For about two weeks. Strike three. Brown is lucky he's not in jail for almost killing people in that furniture off the balcony episode. He needs professional help.
  3. Sure, if he hadn't lost his mind, he'd probably still be #1. That's a big IF, though. It wasn't just one event. He destroyed his relationship with PIT, refused to play in OAK, and has since had numerous situations pop up that involve criminal charges. Luke Keuchly might still be one of the best LB's in the league. But, if somebody asks me to make a list of my top 5 currently, I'm not putting him on it.
  4. Another way of looking at it... the designation of "NFL's best WR" implies that the player is going to play again (active/current). I give him a less than 50% chance of ever taking another NFL snap, personally. In fact, I'd say it's far more likely that he spends significant time behind bars than plays in the NFL again.
  5. If your argument is that he's the best WR of the past decade, I'm right there with you. But, I think the topic is CURRENT best WR. Hard to argue that a guy who is a year removed from playing competitive football, not to mention has apparently completely lost his mind/is a complete headcase, still holds that status, regardless of what he did before. I suppose anybody could argue that he has a spot in the top 10, top 5, or whatever. But, as long as he's away (and not likely to play any time soon, given all of the factors involved), I almost think a better designation for him in this conversation is simply "not applicable."
  6. Maybe Allen is better than I’m giving him credit for. The rest? Meh.
  7. I guess I don’t really see having much success, fantasy-wise, if you have multiple Bills in your lineup to begin with. They’re a defensive team, and their defense would probably be about the only piece I’d want to rely on regularly. Allen? Good QB2, but wouldn’t want to have him as my #1. Singletary? Same story. Good RB2, great flex. But, if he’s your top dog, you’re in trouble. Diggs will be drafted higher than he’s worth, almost certainly. Brown and/or Beasley will regress, and good luck guessing which one doesn’t. Do they even have a TE worth drafting, outside of Knox as a dynasty flier? I’m just not seeing much I’d want to rely on weekly, regardless of the schedule.
  8. RIP Don Shula

    Yeah, I think that's the most likely. But, if I had to put numbers on it, I would put even that one at less than a 50/50 chance of happening. That's at least four, and probably more like 5-6 solid seasons.... I don't think BB has that left in him, all factors considered.
  9. RIP Don Shula

    Some incredible stats I heard about him yesterday..... 31 winning seasons out of 33 total. Still 55 wins ahead of Belicheck. Went to the SB with FIVE different QB's. Not sure if any of those will ever be matched.
  10. Gronk to the Bucs

    Agreed.
  11. Mock draft, anyone?

    If you need my help, I’d prefer to do MIN, and if needed, throw another team my way.
  12. Brandin Cooks to the Texans

    Seems like he’s the guy nobody wants. Four teams in five years. And, as much as it seems like he’s had concussion issues or whatever, he’s only missed two games in the past five seasons (both this year).
  13. Mock draft, anyone?

    Just saw this. I'm in for whatever.
  14. The right way to do Social Distancing

    My understanding is that is now happening here. One in, one out. I was there last week (Thurs and Fri) and it was like nothing I've ever seen. Black Friday times ten.
  15. Bump... Three spots filled. Need one more, then we will set up the 4-team draft of open players/picks/cash. Let me know if you want in on a great league!
  16. Four open teams (all notated with an * on the rosters page). We will conduct a dispersal draft between the four new owners, which will involve players, rookie draft picks, and cash. Cost is $50 per team. Between the four teams, there are five first round picks (including 1.02 and 1.03), as well as several picks in each of the additional rounds (8 round draft total). Send me a PM or post here if interested. DW2 Rosters
  17. Playoff Expansion

    This. Trying to watch four games in two days is hard enough these days.
  18. Playoff Expansion

    I went back a little further (through 2003), just to see if I could find a team with a losing record who would have made it. I did not. From 2003-2009, there were another three instances of 8-8. Everybody else was 9-7, 10-6, or in one case, 11-5 (2008 Patriots). Altogether, 17 years, 34 teams, eight of which were 8-8. Everybody else had a winning record, ranging between 8-7-1 and 11-5 (with by far the most common record being 9-7). Conclusion? There will be a few exceptions, but in most cases, the change will add another team to the mix that is SLIGHTLY better than average, while taking the bye away from the 2nd best team in each conference. Meh... I don't think the former is worth it, at the expense of the latter. In other words, which adds more meaningful drama to the NFL regular season and playoffs? Playing games in Weeks 16/17 (or 18?) that decide who gets the #2 seed and a bye (which significantly increases their chances of making the SB)? Or playing those same games in Weeks 16/17 to see who gets in with the 7-seed at 9-7 (and has almost zero chance of making the SB)? You can argue one way or the other, but in the overall scheme of winning a title, one is much more impactful. More isn't always better, and in this case, adding more teams looks a lot more like the NBA, where the latter half of the regular season and first round of the playoffs are a snooze-fest, than March Madness, where parity runs rampant and anybody can seemingly make a run. All of that said, would this change ruin the NFL playoffs? I doubt it. I'm a traditionalist, and don't see the benefit in adding teams. But, the first couple of weeks of the NFL playoffs are (and will likely remain as) some of my favorite sports weekends of the year. I'm a college hoops nut, and they're better than March Madness. I'm a golf nut, and they're better than any major. I just think four games during wild card weekend is plenty. Six feels like watering it down.
  19. Playoff Expansion

    I'm against adding another team from each conference, but the part in bold is not likely to happen.. This rule change, in all likelihood, is not going to increase the chances that a team gets in with a losing record. In other words, the two times that happened in the past, it was a division winner. There are always (or at least usually) teams left out of the playoffs with winning records (non-division winners), or at least .500 records, and those are the teams affected by this potential change. A team at 6-10 is very unlikely to get in, under the current format OR the proposed one. It's not mathetmatically impossible, but pretty close. Going back the last ten years, here is a breakdown of the record of the teams who WOULD have been affected by this rule.... 10-6 - 5 times 9-6-1 - 1 time 9-7 - 8 times 8-7-1 - 1 time 8-8 - 5 times So, basically, 50% of the time, the teams impacted have between 8.5 and 9.5 wins, with 9-7 being the most likely scenario. And, 8-8 is the worst record affected. Nobody, in 10 years, would have gotten in with less than 8-8. Furthermore, of the 20 teams impacted, only FIVE had a better record than one of the other playoff teams to have gotten in.... Four of the 10-6 teams, plus TEN at 9-7 in 2011 (DEN won the West at 8-8 that year). I guess my thing is this. Does it really help the teams that got screwed because they were simply in a better division than other teams (who won their division with a lesser record)? Well, it did five times. Out of 20 possibilities, that's only 25%. There is a much greater chance that the teams being added are going to be winners of 8-9 games, and probably not as strong as the teams already in the playoffs. And, some of those 8-win scenarios were between 3-4 teams. Does that really add a lot of value to the NFL playoffs? A team who has to win a tie-breaker between 2-3 other teams, all of which were mediocre (.500 or MAYBE slightly above)? Again, it's all about $$, so if it's in the best interest of the owners, they're probably going to figure out a way to make it happen. I just don't think it's very likely that this will add excitement to the playoffs. Sure, a team like TEN is going to come along every once in a while, and make a run for a couple of games. But, what happened this year was rare. Like once in a decade rare. If anything, the change just solidifies the #1 seed's chances of making the SB that much more, as they are now the sole holder of a bye week.
  20. Playoff Expansion

    Hate it. The con's really outweigh the pro's, particularly with the adding of extra playoff teams. One step closer to becoming the NBA, where the regular season is in large part irrelevant, and the first round of playoffs are mostly a formality. The NFL already has teams with losing records making the playoffs. If not losing records, there are teams that really don't feel like they can do much damage in the post-season. Adding more of those average to slightly-above-average teams to the mix doesn't do anything for me. But, let's be real... If there is more $$ to be made by the owners, it will likely happen. If not for that, I'm not sure why you try to fix something that is far from broken. But, money trumps common sense, what the fans want, and certainly the interests of those who play fantasy football. For the common fan, players resting isn't a problem, and the more teams in the playoffs, the merrier.
  21. Jaguars to London?

    This. I'd say it's 50/50 at best that we see a full-time London team in the next 20 years.
  22. What defines a dynasty

    👍
  23. 1st in SPIT. 2nd in Irish's. 4th in mine. Usually I'm pretty happy to be in contention in ONE of the three. Not sure how the stars aligned this year in all three, but I'll take it. Like DMD alluded to in the SPIT thread, picking certain guys (Lamar Jackson, Mostert, etc.) on the right weeks certainly made a big difference. On top of all of that, I think I finished top-ten in the Smackbowl. No idea how that happened, as I thought I took mostly Chiefs and Saints.
  24. Fastest payout in history! Thanks, Scott!
  25. All-Decade Teams

    I follow the Vikings on FB, which prompted me to vote on the 2010-2019 all decade team. A few observations (# of votes per position in parentheses).... QB - I guess it's Cousins by default? Other options were Keenum, Ponder, Bradford, and Teddy. Yikes. On the other hand, it could be worse, I suppose. RB (2) - Hard to beat Peterson and Cook. That said, the rest of the list leaves something to be desired.... Gerhart, Asiata, Murray, McKinnon. Then again, compared to some of the other positions, this might be one of the "deeper" ones. WR (3) - Boy, other than the guys we have now, it's been a pretty rough decade. Thielen, Diggs, Harvin, Jarius Wright, Greg Jennings, and Patterson. Harvin was my third choice, but it honestly feels like he hasn't played for the Vikes in about 15 years. TE (1) - Other than Rudolph, they've had nothing of note. Next best option is probably Visanthe Shiancoe. DE 2) - Hard to believe that either Griffin or Hunter gets left off the list. I went with Jared Allen and Griffin, only because Hunter is just now reaching his prime. LB (3) - Kendricks, Barr, Greenway. Only other guys worth considering would be EJ Henderson or Jasper Brinkley, I guess? DB (4) - Can I just vote for Harrison Smith and Antoine Winfield twice each?? The rest of the list is pretty rough. KR (1) - I actually considered Patterson as my #3 WR until I realized I could vote for him here. I'm not even going to list the O-Line, or the rest of the special teams. Put it this way, our best PK of the decade is a guy who is known for being a Packer (Longwell).