The Brain

Agreed it is atough week to pick. I was thinking Washington over Miami. I don't think Miami has anything going offensively at this point and with all the issues with players (and players leaving) they won't have it together game by game one. It's at Washington, who has both RBs on the field and Campbell > Brune

I don't see him breaking 1000 yds but 10 tds is reasonable. The Eagles also spread the ball around alot and then got TO, BANG 14tds. It isn't a matter of locking in, but his ability to make a catch with defenders on him (or blowing by them). Stallworth will draw coverage also, Welker is a joke. In addition they need to worry about the run. It is a good situation all around for NE.

NOT a Skin homer, don't know if these are the renogiated numbers... 2011 8754000.00 2008 5048500.00 2009 6627000.00 2010 7690500.00 2005 455000.00 2006 585000.00 2007 595000.00 2002 225000.00 2003 300000.00 2004 380000.00

I'll throw out Grossman vs GB.

Randall was drafted in the 2nd round with .500 record If Young turns out as good as Cunningham he is no slouch. If he turns out to be Vick or worse then it was a wasted pick. We won't know for a few years which direction he goes.

What as opposed to Pinky and Thrash? Reid philosiphy is WR are easily replaced.

Couldn't have said it better myself. And the more I hear McNabb talk the more I think whiny b*tch. But again that could just be the media hype.

It doesn't matter really, it is a preference. Draft accordingly. I am in 3 different leagues and have different rankings for each one.

Wonderful, he signed on with that headache DR

I think it is more FF related but with the examples posted it is also more realisitic (plug in 1 for 7 and 8 OR the 5 for a late first and a early third). what ever math equation was used seems more realisitc to to what teams really do.

http://www.footballguys.com/pickvalue.htm Football guys already made a program to do it. And it doesn't match up with your calcualtions (no offense intended).

OH YEAH!!!! I set 4 records, WO WO WO WO!!!

Runyan commented on 610 that he didn't want to move his family again and wanted to stay in teh Philly area. (prior to even talking to NYJ)

Work ethic, physical abilities and motivation on the field he is the best WR in the game. One of the best players on the field on Sunday (or Thursday or Monday). The problem is there are 6 other days in the week. Eagle fan here and I don't think he should have been suspended.

whose there

Don't I have BigPhatty's 1rst rnd pick?

You have expressed the same things going through my mind discussing the trade. I gave up future picks and possible more RB depth (I believe Bennett will be elsewhere next year and Gore will eventually beat out Barlow). The 2 firsts were going to most likely be second half of the draft, so what I see as defensive heavy draft are not as valuable. I like Leftwich but he isn't doing enough this year and I hope this gives me the push my team needs to make the playoffs. The QB carosel was killing me, with all three about the same level I never seemed to start the right one. Now it isn't a decision. I originally went for Palmer, figuring he would want to keep Manning, I wasn't complaining he rather wanted to dump Manning.

That was a tough loss, I feel your pain. But I wouldn't want to change the end result

Sorry also cut the Saints D/ST

I tried to do it online, but I couldn't find the option to cut these players... QB Bouman RB Forsey RB Wells RB Alstott

It would essentially freeze trading from the team acquiring the player. In your example the GM could not trade again involving the 1 or 2 pick b/c he would not know which one was not going to be avialable. But really there is no stipulation in our rules that disallow it (correct me if I am wrong), so if you want to offer that sort of trade I don't see a problem with it other than finding some one to agree to it. Not that I am a trading mad man or anything (like Moz) but I would not limit myself like that.

We are voting on a the two as a pair right now - an all or none type thing. How would you vote then? Then it is yes, it is only 1 additional player, but I don't see the need

yes for roster change no for expanded roster

I am going to vote no at this point. People drafted and traded in accordance to the line-up we have now it would not be fair to change it during the season (following our draft). If anything, I would consider it for next year but while reading the thread I have seen numerous proposals as to what the 'new' line-up could/should be, until a concrete proposal for next year is made I will hold my vote for 2006. Just some thoughts with our scroing system the top 20 players break down to 3QBs, 7RBs, 9WRs and 1TE, seems pretty balanced, add the next 4 you get another QB, RB, WR and a Defense. Although the point difference from 1-20 is 100pts. In my keeper league we have very flexible line-ups to maximize your strengths and for bye-weeks, I don't know if it is possible but we run 6 positional players, TE maniditory, essentially it is a flex position. RB WR TE 2 3 1 1 4 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 If there is a concrete proposal for 2006 I will look at it and make my decision. Please post it in another post to vote on or notify me when a vote is needed so I don't have to scan through an entire post looking for the official proposal.

welcome and thank you