True Studs this year.

[saintsthunder 3]

So the question of how long do 'studs' hold their status until they lose it was raised and i figured we could start a thread on who this years true studs are.

*copied from the other thread: i consider someone a stud when i think know, i can start them week in week out and get at their very least their average game. sure they're the occasional duds here and there (see my mendy, rice and austin last week ) but mostly you're getting top production.

without further adieu the people i consider studs this year (in MY particular order)* are:

*i'm quite biased towards my Saints so take that into consideration.

 

QB

Brees

Rodgers

Brady

Cam

Vick

Manning

 

RB

Forte

Foster (would list him first if he didn't miss time)

McCoy

Peterson

Rice

McFadden

Jackson (imo he won't last in cold weather)

Mathews

 

WR

Welker

Megatron

Andre

Wallace

Smith

Jennings

Austin

Colston

Nicks

Bowe

 

TE

JIMMY GRAHAM!

Gronkowski

Hernandez

Witten

 

K?

John Kasey (NO)

Dan Bailey (DAL)

 

DEF?

*not any TRUE studs but if you play the matchups (not playing them against the Patriots and such i'd pick;

49ers

Ravens

Jets

Bears

 

Removed: Roethlisberger

bold = added after initial list.

Edited October 26, 2011 by saintsthunder

[Laurence Maroney's Nuts 2]

Demarco Murray

[mahoney 9]

Eff Roethlisberger...

I drafted him to be my # 1 and he had something like 3 TDs the first 4-5 weeks. I trade his arse and now he finally comes through. Blah.

[drisser 0]

I would add McFadden, Bowe, and Nicks.

[DexterMorgan 5]

in addition to your list IMO these guys are every week starts:

 

Colston

Nicks

McFadden

[saintsthunder 3]

no idea how i forgot nicks (who i have) and colston (saints fan), but bowe i don't have and don't follow so didn't really consider him so thanks. forgetting mcfadden is another blunder i cannot explain.

 

roethlisberger had been removed for eli manning. i overlooked him because i don't quite like him, he looks like a retarded baby (and speaks like one), and plays for the oh-so-amazing giants (i live in NY).

[Gepetto 997]

Good list. Frank Gore and Dez Bryant and AJ Green maybe should make the list.

[Turf Nazi 0]

I would add MJD and Gore to the list. No matter who they play, I would always start them.

[IronCity Steel 0]

I would add Andre Johnson to that list when healthy, although he missed 3 games. He may return this week or next week. Swapping Eli Manning for Roethlisberber was a huge mistake. Look at the last 3 games for Ben, he has 9 TD passes to one pick.

 

I hope it's Fred Jackson you're refering to instead of S Jackson. Fred Jackson plays for a cold-weather team in Buffalo, so the cold and snow in Buffalo won't be a problem for him.

[polecatt 404]

I think you could add Matthew Stafford.

[The Hood 9]

 

I hope it's Fred Jackson you're refering to instead of S Jackson. Fred Jackson plays for a cold-weather team in Buffalo, so the cold and snow in Buffalo won't be a problem for him.

 

You know over the years I've heard the warnings and have seen the cold and wind late in the year hurt QBs because it makes it harder to throw. First time I ever saw anyone think it would slow down a RB. Especially one that's been in Buffalo for six years.

 

Maybe FJax slows down but I don't see any reason to think so. Let alone because of the cold. Really all he's doing this year is what he's been doing since he's been there. He's just finally getting all the touches he deserves.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,622]

QB

Tebow, Stafford

 

RB

PPR-Sproles

 

WR

Stevie Johnson

VJax

 

might have some down games, but both guys can be monsters

[Mike Nice 40]

Eli Manning is not a stud, i dont consider miles austin a stud either as he has missed two games and had a very poor game...

[Huh? 7]

Bradshaw has had an excellent year for me. I don't know if he is a true stud, but I wouldn't bench him. Of course I have no RB depth, so I don't know how somebody with a lot of RBs would feel.

[Matt Mueller 146]

Stafford, especially if he was drafted higher. Many people had say Vick/Stafford so he wasn't a must start for some.

 

Tebow? No chance...cmon.

 

I'd put AJ Green there . Dez Bryant. Nicks.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,622]

 

Tebow? No chance...cmon.

 

 

the dude who has never put up less then 25 pts a game? Hes a stud in fantasy

[Matt Mueller 146]

the dude who has never put up less then 25 pts a game? Hes a stud in fantasy

 

Cmon, how many points did he have through 57 minutes agains the winless fins team?

 

No one can be that confident starting him....at least I'm not. I've got Stafford, Tebow and Shaun Hill. I might roll Hill out there if Stafford sits.

[Nujet2002 0]

I think MJD needs to be on this list. His worse rushing game this year is 84 yards so that sure makes him pretty consistent. If only he can start finding the endzone instead of fumbling

 

Oh and I don't think anybody who has Fitz can really ever bench him either. Maybe I'm biased but he's always a very safe start.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,622]

Cmon, how many points did he have through 57 minutes agains the winless fins team?

 

No one can be that confident starting him....at least I'm not. I've got Stafford, Tebow and Shaun Hill. I might roll Hill out there if Stafford sits.

 

I am, I traded Romo to roll with him. Last I checked the game is 60 mins, there will be a ton of garbage points for Tebow, and against good teams that get up early, they will play a prevent which will allow him to run even more

[saintsthunder 3]

I am, I traded Romo to roll with him. Last I checked the game is 60 mins, there will be a ton of garbage points for Tebow, and against good teams that get up early, they will play a prevent which will allow him to run even more

 

this. the game isn't about 55mins. it's about the full 60+. and at the end of the game tebow had 25 points give or take depending on your league. that said i wouldn't say dude is a stud by any definition of the word. am i starting tim? yes. do i fully trust that i can do that week in week out? HELL NO. i (maybe like other people) have a pretty good squad so i can afford to gamble a bit with him. if he gives me a dud, i am confident that the rest of my team can make up for it. if he gives me an amazing performance, makes me that much closer to the #1 seed for the playoffs. which is what it's all about right now for me.

i guess if you look for him to give you 25 points every week then you can consider him a stud, i don't so i don't. if that make sense.

[Maroon Bells 18]

I think you're too generous with the "stud" label. There are quite a few on that list whom I would reconsider against a good opponent. IMO, the NBYS philosophy is reserved for real studs, like ADP, Rice, Rodgers, Brady, Andre, Calvin. According to that list, all but one of my starting lineup qualifies.

[Maroon Bells 18]

Tebow!!?? C'mon. I think he'll always give you a good 10 or 12 points because of his running, but there are going to be weeks where that's ALL he gives you.

[Filthy Fernadez 2,696]

Tebow is not a week in week out stud. He11, he might not be the starting QB by year's end. He's only starting to appease the mob mentality in Denver.

 

If Miami had a brain (or wasn't trying to tank that game) they would have defended the 2 point conversion run Tebow had and made him pass it. Denver SHOULD have lost that game further adding to the 'Miami is sucking for Luck' rumors.

[saintsthunder 3]

I think you're too generous with the "stud" label. There are quite a few on that list whom I would reconsider against a good opponent. IMO, the NBYS philosophy is reserved for real studs, like ADP, Rice, Rodgers, Brady, Andre, Calvin. According to that list, all but one of my starting lineup qualifies.

 

interesting. but if you had a great draft (like me ) then you very well could have multiple studs. i don't even look at my team anymore during the week wondering who to start, occasionally i'll debate whether finley is worth starting over nicks or austin. then i slap myself in front of my wife and kids and leave it as is. bye weeks aren't too much of a problem either, but what i'm trying to say is there's noone in my lineup that i'd consider benching for anyone on my bench, except tebow, 'I' see these guys as week-in week-out starters therefore 'I' see them as studs.

 

like i said it's probably more perception more than anything.

[Stewburtx8 67]

In my opinion, the "never bench YOUR studs" theory is very roster specific. I think it is pretty hard to make an all inclusive "STUDS" list. If I were to do this, it would be pretty exclusive and probably only include the top 3-5 QB's, top 6-8 RB's, top 6-8 WR's and top 2-3 TE's . On 99% of rosters, I can't see a good reason anyone would ever bench one of these guys on a weekly basis where they are healthy and active. Only in dynasty leagues where someone may have accumulated a "super" team could you own enough of these guys to bench any of them. The only place this may not be true this season is at QB where it is certainly possible that someone owns Rodgers, Brees, or Brady AND Cam Newton. On these rosters, you can no longer follow the NBYS theory since you have 2 studs at the same position and can only play 1 of them.

 

BUT there are many other players where on most individual rosters, they are STUDS that should never be benched. If your group of RB's is MJD, BJGE, S.Greene, J.Stewart; well then on this specific roster, I would consider MJD a stud who should never be benched. If your WR's are Dwayne Bowe, Santonio Holmes, Mike Williams, and Victor Cruz; well then on this specific roster I would consider Dwayne Bowe a "stud" that should never be benched. Just my opinion.