Vikings Message Board.Com

Got third in my $$ league (would'e lost the championship by a point so I'm glad I wasn't in it). However my other league concludes after week 17 (two-week playoff). I'm up by 10 but now I have to navigate guys that may sit and try and replace them. This is dumb. I dropped Finley and added Celek. I have Foster benched for Spiller.

Would you play McGahee vs. KC or Bell vs. Min?

Also, I'm starting Fitz (vs. Seattle), Nicks (vs. Dallas) and Harvin (vs. Chicago), though I do have Julio Jones (vs. TB) sitting on my bench. Would you start him instead? Over whom?

I hate this.

I think McGahee is nicked up isnt he??? If so Id start Bell, he looked pretty good last week I thought, but if McGahee is healthy, Id start him, if he can handle it, they'll need to lean on him to make the playoffs.

TB ihas been brutal, Id start Jones over Percy. Probably just a personal preference and tha fact Atlanta has a better QB situation, all 4 are solid, but I wouldnt sit Jones ve a terrible team, he is too good, IMO.

I would never play in a 17 week Fantasy League. You work all year to get to the end, and at the end you have to cut or sit all the guys who got you there, cause they arent playing. To me its just stupid and takes the fun out of the whole year.

Jones against Bucs is a good match up and Jones has become more involved. He did some nice things for my fantasy team this year

NextQuestion wrote:Jones against Bucs is a good match up and Jones has become more involved. He did some nice things for my fantasy team this year

Agreed. But here's the kicker...will he play a full complement of snaps? What does Atlanta gain by playing everyone the whole game? If you've heard that they plan on playing their starters the whole game, please link me. I'm considering starting him over either Nicks or Harvin (though Harvin has been a stud when AD was out of the lineup). Many professional rankers are split (Berry and Karabell rank him #30 and #26, while Harris and Cockroft rank him #19 and #17). I don't know if I can afford the risk.

dead_poet wrote:Agreed. But here's the kicker...will he play a full complement of snaps? What does Atlanta gain by playing everyone the whole game?

With a win and a DET loss (but Pack likely resting people), they'd move up to 5 and play the NFC East winner instead of the Saints or 49ers

glg wrote: With a win and a DET loss (but Pack likely resting people), they'd move up to 5 and play the NFC East winner instead of the Saints or 49ers

That's a late game. Though I did just read that Falcons coach Mike Smith said they wouldn't rest starters. My fear is: what if the Falcons get up by a nice margin by halftime and Julio hasn't done anything? I might monitor Nicks' hamstring and use that as a basis for swapping in Julio (or Bell). I just have a bad feeling. The guy I'm playing has a bunch of players that won't be sitting and have favorable matchups. Here's the setup (I'm up 109-99).


QB:

ME: Stafford (vs. GB)
HIM: Brady (vs. Buf)

RB1:

ME: Spiller (vs. NE) (don't think I can afford to play Foster)
HIM: MJD (vs. Indy)

RB2:

ME: McGahee (vs. BUF) (or Kahlil Bell vs. MIN)
HIM: Bush (vs. SD)

FLEX:

ME: Harvin (vs. CHI) (or Kahlil Bell vs. MIN) (or Julio Jones vs. TB)
HIM: Pierre Thomas (vs. Car)

WR1:

ME: Fitzgerald (vs. Sea)
HIM: Coleston (vs. Car)

WR2:

ME: Nicks (vs. Dal)
HIM: Burleson (vs. GB)

TE:

ME: Celek (vs. Wsh)
HIM: Lewis (vs. Indy)

DEF:

ME: Atlanta (vs. TB)
HIM: Bal (vs. Cincy)

K:

ME: Janikowski (vs. SD)
HIM: Crosby (vs. Det)

Just read that Nicks said his hamstring injury is a re-aggravation of the one sustained in week 8. I'm a little nervous, so I made a switch, replacing him with Kahlil Bell.

#### I hate this.

If it were me, Id play Foster. And Id probably play Jones in place of Percy.

purple guy wrote:If it were me, Id play Foster. And Id probably play Jones in place of Percy.

The Texans don't have anything to play for. Don't you think it'd be really risky to play Foster, who might only get a series or two?

I'm going back and forth on Jones. It all hinges on whether Detroit loses (they're favored to win with the Pack likely resting players). I don't think I can afford to wait around for the outcome of that game. Harvin has been a stud with AD out and should be the focal point of the offense for the whole game. I think Harvin has just as much upside and is guaranteed to play the whole game (provided he doesn't get injured). I'm probably overthinking at this point.

dead_poet wrote: The Texans don't have anything to play for. Don't you think it'd be really risky to play Foster, who might only get a series or two?

I'm going back and forth on Jones. It all hinges on whether Detroit loses (they're favored to win with the Pack likely resting players). I don't think I can afford to wait around for the outcome of that game. Harvin has been a stud with AD out and should be the focal point of the offense for the whole game. I think Harvin has just as much upside and is guaranteed to play the whole game (provided he doesn't get injured). I'm probably overthinking at this point.

With Yates in at QB, I think Foster and Tate will get a lot of work, maybe they'll limit them cuz its a meaningless game, but I think Kubiack will want to head into their first ever playoffs hitting on all cylinders.

I would play Percy IF we werent playing the Bears AND Jones wasnt playing the Bucs. IF the Falcons sit some players, that MIGHT actually help Jones. They'd sit Roddy, and maybe Jones would be #1?? The Bucs D has been poor, and the Bears D will play Percy tough, IMO. Tough call man, good luck!

I won, but I really tried to lose. When I read that GB was resting all their starters I thought I was being sneaky and started Detroit's defense (2 points) instead of Atlanta (15). Ended up benching Julio because I was nervous he wouldn't play a full game. Of course he ended up with 2 TDs. Meanwhile the Vikings held Bell in check. But with Stafford going nuts (400+ yards, 5 TDs) and Janikowski (4 FG, 2XP) doing well with Spiller and McGahee I won convincingly. Yey!