The Marksman Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 Here's a link to WR rankings from another site I spend a lot of time on: http://www.bleacherreport.com/sys/content/view/265/42/ More of a general sports site but this fantasy writer does a good job. Anyway, thought I'd share that for anyone who is interested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballjoe Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 What do you mean another site!!!!!!!!!!!!! Heathen!! Blasphmer!!!!!!! You will rot in He_ _ for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marksman Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 Hey, don't get angry. I believe in free love when it comes to web sites. I'm just trying to spread the love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 each team has ONE starting running back and THREE starting receivers That's when I stopped reading. They must be a little behind the times, someone should clue them in on the new phenomonon called RBBC. Precisely why I only visit the huddle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marksman Posted July 20, 2006 Author Share Posted July 20, 2006 How many teams realistically use RBBC? Maybe 10% of NFL teams? Not exactly a "new phenomenon" if you ask me. Also, if you look at the phrasing, he said "one starting running back". Even if a team uses RBBC, they can only start one. Not to be a dick, but you started it. I love the huddle, but its always good to have multiple perspectives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 (edited) How many teams realistically use RBBC? Maybe 10% of NFL teams? Not exactly a "new phenomenon" if you ask me. Also, if you look at the phrasing, he said "one starting running back". Even if a team uses RBBC, they can only start one. Not to be a dick, but you started it. I love the huddle, but its always good to have multiple perspectives. Ahhh, you see, you missed the sarcasm in the "new phenomenon" comment. That's OK, I'll attribute it to the fact that you're a newbie. Now, before you start jumping up and down and yelling and screaming that you've been into fantasy football for 32 years and are by no means a newbie, I'll have you know that I'm kidding. Sort of. One more thing before I completely overwhelm you with my fantasy football acumen, personal brilliance, and astounding knowledge, posting links to other FF websites is frowned upon by the admins, so you can expect the flack like you received from me when you post them. Let me ask you a question, since you don't want to be a dick but decided to get cute by looking at the phrasing, how many teams start 3 WR's? Not many, unless they're in passing situation and go to a 3 WR set. But those are just semantics, right? Now, as far as 10% of teams using RBBC, that would mean that 3 teams use RBBC. Shall we have a looksie, being that you like looking at the phrasing? RBBC's in: ATL - Dunn and Duckett DAL - JJ and Barber MIN - Taylor and Moore BAL - Lewis and Anderson IND - Addai and Rhodes SF - Gore and Barlow CHI - Jones and Benson NO - Bush and McAllister CAR - Williams and Foster NYJ - CuMar and Blaylock and Houston GB - Green and Gado and Davenport TEN - White and Henry and Brown DEN - Bell and Dayne I'd be willing to bet that we have a little more than 10%, would you agree? Not to be a dick, but I just figured I'd make a few points, being that I started it and all. Edited July 20, 2006 by Hugh 0ne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip_Side Posted July 20, 2006 Share Posted July 20, 2006 (edited) Wow, they have Chambers at #8?! Don't get me wrong, Chambers is one of my favorite players, playing for my favorite team, but no way should he be at 8. And what's up with Moss at #9? He's deffinitely top 5 this year. Edited July 20, 2006 by Flip_Side Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 In his RB preview he has Barlow ahead of the Vikings choices and Portis #7. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marksman Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Ok, point taken on the RBBC...sort of. For the most part on the teams you mentioned, one of the RBs is the clear feature back and one is more of a change of pace, 3rd down, goal line type back. Which I agree sucks for fantasy football but is not really a "committee", more of an understudy approach. Also, a few that you mentioned were merely teams without a defined starter at this point, but that could change subject to camp position battles and performance. But really the point is that there are more quality WRs out there whereas RBs are a scarce commodity, and hence one should always draft RB first. Which I think we can all agree on. And why, why can't we just all get along? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jzicc Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Ahhh, you see, you missed the sarcasm in the "new phenomenon" comment. That's OK, I'll attribute it to the fact that you're a newbie. Now, before you start jumping up and down and yelling and screaming that you've been into fantasy football for 32 years and are by no means a newbie, I'll have you know that I'm kidding. Sort of. One more thing before I completely overwhelm you with my fantasy football acumen, personal brilliance, and astounding knowledge, posting links to other FF websites is frowned upon by the admins, so you can expect the flack like you received from me when you post them. Let me ask you a question, since you don't want to be a dick but decided to get cute by looking at the phrasing, how many teams start 3 WR's? Not many, unless they're in passing situation and go to a 3 WR set. But those are just semantics, right? Now, as far as 10% of teams using RBBC, that would mean that 3 teams use RBBC. Shall we have a looksie, being that you like looking at the phrasing? RBBC's in: ATL - Dunn and Duckett DAL - JJ and Barber MIN - Taylor and Moore BAL - Lewis and Anderson IND - Addai and Rhodes SF - Gore and Barlow CHI - Jones and Benson NO - Bush and McAllister CAR - Williams and Foster NYJ - CuMar and Blaylock and Houston GB - Green and Gado and Davenport TEN - White and Henry and Brown DEN - Bell and Dayne I'd be willing to bet that we have a little more than 10%, would you agree? Not to be a dick, but I just figured I'd make a few points, being that I started it and all. there has never been more RBBC than now -- of course what do I know -- I don't have enough posts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted July 21, 2006 Share Posted July 21, 2006 Ok, point taken on the RBBC...sort of. For the most part on the teams you mentioned, one of the RBs is the clear feature back and one is more of a change of pace, 3rd down, goal line type back. Which I agree sucks for fantasy football but is not really a "committee", more of an understudy approach. Also, a few that you mentioned were merely teams without a defined starter at this point, but that could change subject to camp position battles and performance. But really the point is that there are more quality WRs out there whereas RBs are a scarce commodity, and hence one should always draft RB first. Which I think we can all agree on. And why, why can't we just all get along? There are also some teams that currently have a feature back, that will merge into a RBBC when that feature back flounders or gets hurt. But anywho, I think we all get the point. And I don't disagree about drafting RB's. I'm a hugh RB fan, and usually draft 2 RB's before any WR's, almost regardless of my draft slot. I just found his phrasing kind of dumb, almost like he was talking FF for dummies. Nothing personal, but I've checked out a lot of FF websites over the years, and none of them can hold the Huddle's jock imo. And BTW, this is getting along, just wait until we really disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Marksman Posted July 21, 2006 Author Share Posted July 21, 2006 Well I'm glad we kissed and made up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecerwin Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 (edited) Well I'm glad we kissed and made up. Faqs. NTTAWWT Edited July 22, 2006 by thecerwin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomfin2000 Posted July 22, 2006 Share Posted July 22, 2006 In his RB preview he has Barlow ahead of the Vikings choices and Portis #7. Dillon at No. 11 raised my eyebrows a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.