Rabid Wookie

Ravens (and I'm a Houston fan). Houston just inserted a 4th string QB, who was on the Ram's practice squad a week before last. Granted, Case Keenum started the season with the Texans and is somewhat familiar with their offense, but I think miscues are inevitable. I'd expect some turnovers and plenty of sacks.

Watt might make some big plays, but I seriously doubt Houston's D will be able to shut down Luck (and I'm a Texans fan). Houston's pass D is 27th in the league in yards allowed and tied for 21st for TDs allowed. Furthermore, Houston has never beaten the Colts in Indy. You have to go with Luck at home.

Next time I reach for my Magic 8 Ball, I think I'll go interview Marshawn instead.

I don't particularly like Miller against the Buffalo D. I'd go with Mathews. He'll be fresh, and SD should put up some points against Oakland. Also, given that SD doesn't have a ton of options at RB, I see Mathews getting plenty of touches his first game back. http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=440544

The professional FF gurus seem to be split on whether Hill or Gore is the better play. Personally, while I think Cincy will bounce back and have a decent game against NO, I think Gore has the better match-up. Sit Hill. http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=440544

This is a high risk/reward gamble pick, but I think I'd actually go with Rudolph. Chicago gives up the most fantasy points of any team to TEs. And truthfully, I consider all of your options a bit of a crapshoot. If you go Rudolph, though, you'll need to follow his status pretty closely to ensure he starts. http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=440544

In a close call, I'd go with Boldin. Boldin averages more targets than Cooks and is the more consistent scorer at this point in time. Brees likes to spread the ball around quite a bit, which makes Cooks more of a higher risk/reward play.

I'm not particularly happy with my QB situation. Currently, I have 3 options (see sig.) and plan to choose my starter based on match-up/hot hand. I'm considering trying to trade for a QB at the trade deadline. In particular, I'm thinking of offering a trade for T.Romo, who's on another team's bench behind A.Rodgers. The manager has M.Ball and a weak RB group, so perhaps offering R.Hillman and C.J.Anderson for Romo makes sense. He'd then be guaranteed to have the starting Denver RB. Analysis: I think Romo is an upgrade over my QBs, though *if* I do a good job of picking the QB each week, some of that benefit might be mitigated. Regarding the other positions, even without a Denver RB, I should be solid with Ingram and Forte as my starting RBs and Beckham Jr. as my flex. Furthermore, the Denver RB situation is unclear currently. One back could eventually distinguish himself, or the situation could revert to RBBC/hot hand. So there's a risk that neither Hillman nor Anderson will perform consistently down the stretch. However, we've seen that if Denver sticks primarily with only one RB, that player can put up some big point totals. If that happens, Hillman and Anderson give me a good shot of being the beneficiary. And if I trade my Denver RBs, then the inconsistent C.Ivory becomes my only real back-up RB/Flex. Thus, if any of my starters get injured or their utilization changes, my replacement options will be limited. So should I shore-up my QB position by trying to nab Romo (and thus deplete my bench depth, which may or may not be needed), or should I take my chances with keeping the Denver RBs and my 3, current QB options?

Houston fan here. I've never heard Bill O'Brien state that Fitz is on the hot seat. However, from what I've gathered, Mallet will likely get a shot at some point, but it may not be until the end of the season. It all depends on how the team performs. Now here are my personal thoughts. If Houston loses the next couple of games to extend their current losing streak, I could see Mallet starting sooner, rather than later. For instance, if Houston loses to both the Titans and Eagles in weeks 8 & 9, I could see them inserting Mallet as the starting QB over the bye week, where he'd have 2 weeks to practice with the 1st team offense.

I would keep Foles for now and pick-up a second QB. That will allow you to evaluate both for a couple of weeks, in order to better determine which one is the best long-term solution. Besides, even the best QBs occasionally have two, back-to-back subpar games.

I used to have Sankey and dropped him. I still have Asiata. So that's how I lean. Alternatively, if there aren't any good TE options on the waiver wire, you might consider just getting a zero for that spot this week and keeping both. Often times a mediocre tight end will only net you 2-3 points.

I'd suggest taking that trade, if you can get it. A.Brown + one of your other backs should consistently score more than F.Jackson + V.Jackson.

Depending on your scoring system, Richardson is a top 5 back this year. And he's the focus of the Cleveland offense. I really don't think you can afford to bench him. I'd go Richardson and Moreno as your RB/Flex combo.

I'd go with Martin and Ridley. St. Louis has given up 17 rushing TDs and Jacksonville has given up 18 rushing TDs. I'm not sold on Williams, despite the favorable situation. And Lynch has a tough match-up against a SF defense that has only given up 6 rushing TDs.

I'd go with Austin. I think he's the best risk/reward play this week, only because Dallas has such a favorable passing match-up. Austin hasn't had big numbers recently, but he's still getting a decent number of looks. Given that Sunday's game will likely be a high-scoring affair, Austin is in a good position to possibly hit pay dirt with 75+ yds. receiving. Beanie, on the other hand, has a horrible match-up. The Bears have only given up 6 rushing TDs all year (3rd lowest in the league), and Arizona has a horrible offense to boot. The Battle option is intriguing, but given that we don't know exactly how he'll share the load with Brinkley, I think there's a lot of risk in the play. Speaking of Brinkley, is he available in your league? I think I like his upside better than Battle's right now.