wire-haired mangoblin Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Standard performance scoring, 6pts/td for WR, RB....4pts/td for QB. 2 scenarios: 1. Peyton Manning 2. Who would you take here? or 1. Ladainian Tomlinson 2. who here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynch Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Standard performance scoring, 6pts/td for WR, RB....4pts/td for QB. 2 scenarios: 1. Peyton Manning 2. Who would you take here? or 1. Ladainian Tomlinson 2. who here? 883989[/snapback] In scenario #1 I take LT2 In scenario #2 I take Shaun Alexander Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 In scenario #1 I take LT2In scenario #2 I take Shaun Alexander 884008[/snapback] I concur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haskel Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 In scenario #1 I take LT2In scenario #2 I take Shaun Alexander 884008[/snapback] Ditto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 Id be tempted to take manning at 2 and get 2 rbs at 2 and 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrenaline Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 1. Manning 2. LT 1. LT 2. Manning only because Alexander's contract situation, if he signs then him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 In scenario #1 I take LT2In scenario #2 I take Shaun Alexander 884008[/snapback] Agree with this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ateam1970 Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 If manning take Manning If no Manning then LT. If there ever was an impact player its Manning. He was ranked in the top 8 in Fantasy pts weekly for 14 out of the 17 weeks last year. Now 1 week was the bye, he did not play the last week and he was ranked 19th on one week. How could this guy not be the number one pick. He my not win you a superbowl but he could put you close enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted July 18, 2005 Share Posted July 18, 2005 If manning take ManningIf no Manning then LT. If there ever was an impact player its Manning. He was ranked in the top 8 in Fantasy pts weekly for 14 out of the 17 weeks last year. Now 1 week was the bye, he did not play the last week and he was ranked 19th on one week. How could this guy not be the number one pick. He my not win you a superbowl but he could put you close enough. 884172[/snapback] There have been a lot of threads debating this, with all of the aguments for and against Manning. Comes down to personal preference I suppose, but, as consitent as MAnning is, the drop off at RB is steeper iof you wait while you can still get a very good QB if you pass on Manning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Jack Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 I would take Manning number one...and try to pick up the best available backs at 2 and 3 at the turn...in a 10 team league there is more depth at running back and I think it makes Manning worth the risk...I would also try to pick up one of the rookie backs as upside insurance later in the draft...if you go w/ manning you will probably end up chasing a lot of positions...it will put your drafting skills to the test...good luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 In scenario #1 I take LT2In scenario #2 I take Shaun Alexander 884008[/snapback] Agree with this 884159[/snapback] I'm right there as well. Of course, as long as you keep that avi BC, I'll be agreeing with you alot. 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.