wendellrott

Jaylen Samuels 2018 Outlook

Recommended Posts

Just now, JDE said:

 

My original argument stands as is. I simply supplemented it to include the fact that anybody not benefiting from the clear and obvious advantage of starting a RB1/2 at TE and actually believes that this situation is rational is an idiot.

 

I don’t care what yahoo “explicitly and clearly states”, like really what are they gonna say “hey sorry I know we kinda screwed up here but we can’t remove the designation without creating some massive technical IT glitch”

 

 

See the “Luckily I don’t have any yahoo leagues” part

 

 

See the “Luckily I don’t have any yahoo leagues” part.

 

Ryan Tannehill played as a WR in college. I don’t see him getting a QB/WR dual designation.

 

So 'supplemented' means 'removed part of it'? Hold on, lemme check. 

 

Nope, doesn't mean that. When you drop part of your claim, that's not supplementing. Unless you mean that you aren't changing your original claim by removing part of it. In which case, you are still claiming that everyone defending the tag is STARTING HIM AT TE. In which case you're back to being wrong. 

 

Hmm. Appealing to the judges...yep, they're gonna count that as another attempt. Strike...seven, I think. What's next? For someone of your remarkable intelligence and analytical ability, I'm guessing...more name calling? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Samuels was not only a TE in college, he racked up the most yards after the catch of any TE in 2017 - which amazingly accounted for over 87% of his receiving yardage.  He tested at the Combine as a TE.  Yahoo! explicitly admitted they took all of this into account.  Don’t like it?  Tough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, JDE said:

 

 

 

Ryan Tannehill played as a WR in college. I don’t see him getting a QB/WR dual designation.

 

Wow, you're a special one.

Completely different situation.. He didn't play WR in his final year of college. If you can't see the difference, I'm done trying to explain this to you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BMcP said:

Samuels was not only a TE in college, he racked up the most yards after the catch of any TE in 2017 - which amazingly accounted for over 87% of his receiving yardage.  He tested at the Combine as a TE.  Yahoo! explicitly admitted they took all of this into account.  Don’t like it?  Tough.

 

Oh COME ON! Now you're expecting JDE to actually BELIEVE some crazy made up stats from this so called 'college football' you suddenly bring up?! Football? In a college setting? Good lord, what won't Yahoo lie about to cover up their mistake. 

 

You're saying this guy outran a COMBINE?! I'm no farmer, but those things are FAST! 

 

Ludicrous! 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't need to be a yahoo league, you suck if you didn't have him on your roster weeks ago.......he's a top 3 handcuff at rb, with a top 3 oline, late in the season when your looking for players than can actually crack your starting roster....like i said, us Samuel owners play for real money, Get good bro 

 

Stop Crying, He had the te/rb eligibility all year, he was a te in college, if players on yahoo too dumb to pick him up that is their problem, Connar has been tearing up the league all year, you atleast pick up samuels to undercut the top team that lucked into him.....you can whin about it as much as you want, wont change anything, and your pea brain opinion is wrong, it would be wrong for yahoo to take the eligibility away after the season starts, just like it would be wrong for a commissioner to change the rules mid season, that is why i will never play in any other league outside of yahoo, only common sense platform...btw its not guaranteed samuels is this other worldy te, I started joe webb a qb in my wr position one year, and i lost in the playoffs by 2 points because he sucked even in the wr position, they still have to play the game...

Edited by All Knowing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, JDE said:

 

Supplement - noun - something that completes or enhances something else when added to it

 

So yes Mr. Semantics, adding an additional amendment to an argument is what we generally refer to as “supplementing” the argument.

 

You are either *retracting* your claim that I like all defenders of the tag am starting him at TE, or you are not. If you are retracting it, that is not 'supplementing'. If you are not retracting it, you are wrong. 

 

Take your pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, wideopen21 said:

 

Wow, you're a special one.

Completely different situation.. He didn't play WR in his final year of college. If you can't see the difference, I'm done trying to explain this to you. 

 

My point was just many players deviate from their positions once they hit the pros. Obviously I used Tannehill as an example since it was the most sensationalized example. I didn’t think Terrelle Pryor or LeGarrete Blount would have quite the same effect. 

 

1 minute ago, All Knowing said:

Doesn't need to be a yahoo league, you suck if you didn't have him on your roster weeks ago.......he's a top 3 handcuff at rb, with a top 3 oline, late in the season when your looking for players than can actually crack your starting roster....like i said, us Samuel owners play for real money, Get good bro 

 

Stop Crying, He had the te/rb eligibility all year, he was a te in college, if players on yahoo too dumb to pick him up that is their problem, Connar has been tearing up the league all year, you atleast pick up samuels to undercut the top team that lucked into him.....you can whin about it as much as you want, wont change anything, and your pea brain opinion is wrong, it would be wrong for yahoo to take the eligibility away after the season starts, just like it would be wrong for a commissioner to change the rules mid season, that is why i will never play in any other league outside of yahoo, only common sense platform...btw its not guaranteed samuels is this other worldy te, I started joe webb a qb in my wr position one year, and i lost in the playoffs by 2 points because he sucked even in the wr position, they still have to play the game...

 

I do own him. In two leagues. My argument is simply referring to the yahoo TE designation situation which for whatever reason you seem keen on defending to the grave.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh, Conner has not been getting shytte for carries the last few games anyway.  Pass-happy Big Ben is going full 2016 Aaron Rodgers.  With one difference--the Steelers still like to run it in from the 1, instead of having Rodgers scramble around for the 12 seconds it would take for Jordy to get open.

 

It seems likely that Samuels will be the running back (TE??) in the game when the Steelers reach point-blank-range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JDE said:

 

My point was just many players deviate from their positions once they hit the pros. Obviously I used Tannehill as an example since it was the most sensationalized example. I didn’t think Terrelle Pryor or LeGarrete Blount would have quite the same effect. 

 

 

I do own him. In two leagues. My argument is simply referring to the yahoo TE designation situation which for whatever reason you seem keen on defending to the grave.

 

 

You don’t own him in a Y! league, so it’s the principle that matters to you - one quick question: have you written to them demanding they change the designation of all players in the pool who have not played a snap this season at positions for which they are eligible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JDE said:

 

My point was just many players deviate from their positions once they hit the pros. Obviously I used Tannehill as an example since it was the most sensationalized example. I didn’t think Terrelle Pryor or LeGarrete Blount would have quite the same effect. 

 

 

I do own him. In two leagues. My argument is simply referring to the yahoo TE designation situation which for whatever reason you seem keen on defending to the grave.

 

Because your argument is stupid, I doubt you own Samuels....

Edited by All Knowing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yawn.. besides yahoo

 

it’ll be interesting to see how he fairs over some valuables in rb position.  This a guy worth starting over some regs in Peterson, Cohen, Ingram, Carson, cook etc.? he will likely split the back field.  I think I like Jackson over him with ekeler likely back to catch role being beat up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, JDE said:

 

If you read my earlier post, you’d see that I’m not in any yahoo leagues, so this entire situation has zero effect on me.

 

Therefore, my analysis is actually completely unbiased, and the reality is this situation vastly throws off the equity of the fantasy season that many of us have put a lot of time and effort into. 

 

The guy never played as a TE in the NFL. I believe they switched him over back in training camp. This is yahoo screwing up plain and simple.

I will agree that Yahoo didn’t handle it correctly.

 

However, the argument that it’s unfair is a bad one. Everyone had a chance to pick him up but they didn’t. That’s on them. If someone managed their budget well or saw the TE designation and picked him or a while ago then they made a good move and everyone else didn’t. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Tghetty said:

Yawn.. besides yahoo

 

it’ll be interesting to see how he fairs over some valuables in rb position.  This a guy worth starting over some regs in Peterson, Cohen, Ingram, Carson, cook etc.? he will likely split the back field.  I think I like Jackson over him with ekeler likely back to catch role being beat up

I would start him over every single one of the guys on your list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, BMcP said:

 

 

You don’t own him in a Y! league, so it’s the principle that matters to you - one quick question: have you written to them demanding they change the designation of all players in the pool who have not played a snap this season at positions for which they are eligible?

 

I have not. Although I’m aware they’ve received numerous complaints to the effect of my argument.

 

Although they probably should remove the designation of all players who have not played a snap at their eligible position, why wouldn’t that make sense?

 

8 minutes ago, All Knowing said:

 

Becuase you're argument is stupid, I doubt you own Samuels....

 

How is that hard to believe? He was the obvious waiver add of the week... and in one of the two I actually handcuffed him to Conner several weeks ago after he had the concussion if you really must know.

 

But then again the real question is why the hell do I care what you think?

 

Edited by JDE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I will agree that Yahoo didn’t handle it correctly.

 

However, the argument that it’s unfair is a bad one. Everyone had a chance to pick him up but they didn’t. That’s on them. If someone managed their budget well or saw the TE designation and picked him or a while ago then they made a good move and everyone else didn’t. 

 

I’ll give you that, any yahoo owners who were aware of the dual designation should definitely have jumped at this potential opportunity weeks ago.

 

Still screws up the balance and equity in those leagues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JDE said:

 

I’ll give you that, any yahoo owners who were aware of the dual designation should definitely have jumped at this potential opportunity weeks ago.

 

Still screws up the balance and equity in those leagues.

By that logic so does Gurley and in most leagues (snake drafts) not everyone had a chance at him. No ones complaining about that though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JDE said:

 

I have not. Although I’m aware they’ve received numerous complaints to the effect of my argument.

 

Although they probably should remove the designation of all players who have not played a snap at their eligible position, why wouldn’t that make sense?

 

 

How is that hard to believe? He was the obvious waiver add of the week... and in one of the two I actually handcuffed him to Conner if you really must know.

 

But then again the real question is why the hell do I care what you think?

 

It wouldn’t make sense for this reason: Yahoo! made a choice to assign position eligibility to players pre-draft and pre-season.  Managers have trusted their long-standing guarantee not to remove eligibility in-season no matter how their franchises choose to use them.  And that extra eligibility is part of the calculus for evaluating those players from a fantasy perspective.

 

Here’s a follow-up question: if it were proven that Samuels had lined up at TE for one snap this season, would you still object to his designation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mahommes  screws up the equity for my opponents. Also starting the rb2 Greg the leg in my kicker position messes up the balance... :(

Edited by All Knowing
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JDE said:

 

My point was just many players deviate from their positions once they hit the pros. Obviously I used Tannehill as an example since it was the most sensationalized example. I didn’t think Terrelle Pryor or LeGarrete Blount would have quite the same effect. 

 

 

I do own him. In two leagues. My argument is simply referring to the yahoo TE designation situation which for whatever reason you seem keen on defending to the grave.

 

Blount played RB in college. Was an RB at the Combine. Has been an RB at Yahoo all along. Pryor didn't attend the Combine, but came into the league as a QB after playing QB in college, and switched to WR intentionally after a few years. Tannehill was a QB at the Combine. 

 

Samuels played TE in college. Was a TE at the Combine. 

 

You're right, there's a theme there. Guys playing a position in college, maybe going to the Combine at that position, and then entering the league at that *same position*. 

 

Just like Samuels. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Brotherbock said:
20 minutes ago, Brotherbock said:

 

Blount played RB in college. Was an RB at the Combine. Has been an RB at Yahoo all along. Pryor didn't attend the Combine, but came into the league as a QB after playing QB in college, and switched to WR intentionally after a few years. Tannehill was a QB at the Combine. 

 

Samuels played TE in college. Was a TE at the Combine. 

 

You're right, there's a theme there. Guys playing a position in college, maybe going to the Combine at that position, and then entering the league at that *same position*. 

 

Just like Samuels. 

 

 

Yeah not sure why I lumped Blount in there, I think I confused him with Denard Robinson of all people... feel free to disregard that point.

 

Quote

Samuels played TE in college. Was a TE at the Combine. 

 

And then converted to RB in training camp and played all of preseason as a RB.

 

 

Honestly, there’s really no point going back and forth like this. Clearly we have opposite opinions on this matter. But that’s just how fantasy is.

Edited by JDE
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I would start him over every single one of the guys on your list.

 

👍 We will see how you do then.  I have Jackson, Peterson, Cohen, Ingram over Samuel.  Split new backfield won’t cut me for a sure fire.  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least they didn’t split him into two players like they did with Shohei Ohtani in baseball...now that was a real screw up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SharkSwimmer said:

Eh, Conner has not been getting shytte for carries the last few games anyway.  Pass-happy Big Ben is going full 2016 Aaron Rodgers.  With one difference--the Steelers still like to run it in from the 1, instead of having Rodgers scramble around for the 12 seconds it would take for Jordy to get open.

 

It seems likely that Samuels will be the running back (TE??) in the game when the Steelers reach point-blank-range.

Is the goal line optimism based on anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Tghetty said:

 

👍 We will see how you do then.  I have Jackson, Peterson, Cohen, Ingram over Samuel.  Split new backfield won’t cut me for a sure fire.  

 

please tell me your joking?!....Samuels is a start over that poor bunch. only one you might be able to make a case for is Cohen, easy start over the rest. Also every single one of those rbs are in a split backfield bahahaha 

Edited by All Knowing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.