Jump to content
Rotoworld.com Forums

Recommended Posts

Honestly it was super stupid to give Taysom Hill a TE designation in the first place.  Great job ESPN.

Taysom Hill is not a TE.  He is a QB who, prior to Brees's injury, lined up in different spots for a few gadget plays per game.

He has the jersey number of a QB.  The Saints list him as a QB.  He plays QB in the games.  Taysom Hill is a QB.

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 535
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm the Commish in my ESPN league. This weekend, I had to face my opponent who owned Taysom Hill. He slotted him in his TE spot and had Mahomes in his QB spot. Some other members in my league talked a

Heres my thing: it was well established Taysom's position eligibility before the season.  If a commissioner wanted to make a rule PRIOR to the season I get that. But to try to pull rank during the sea

Posted Images

26 minutes ago, SharkSwimmer said:

Honestly it was super stupid to give Taysom Hill a TE designation in the first place.  Great job ESPN.

Taysom Hill is not a TE.  He is a QB who, prior to Brees's injury, lined up in different spots for a few gadget plays per game.

He has the jersey number of a QB.  The Saints list him as a QB.  He plays QB in the games.  Taysom Hill is a QB.


Very true. I feel like if the Saints have him listed as a QB on their depth chart, that's what ESPN should use. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, lolcopter said:

he had like 2 career completions heading into Sunday, heaven forbid ESPN try to make him playable and have a little fun leading into this season


It's a slippery slope though, where as if they went by the teams official depth chart, it would be much more logical. 

It's the fantasy league's job to make their league fun for them. It's ESPN's job to give them the tools to do so without intervening on a case by case basis.

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

he had like 2 career completions heading into Sunday, heaven forbid ESPN try to make him playable and have a little fun leading into this season

Yes, heaven forbid.  Heaven forbid ESPN wreck a bunch of leagues because they tried to get cute and listed a player at the highest scoring position as eligible at the lowest scoring one, basically for no reason.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SharkSwimmer said:

Honestly it was super stupid to give Taysom Hill a TE designation in the first place.  Great job ESPN.

Taysom Hill is not a TE.  He is a QB who, prior to Brees's injury, lined up in different spots for a few gadget plays per game.

He has the jersey number of a QB.  The Saints list him as a QB.  He plays QB in the games.  Taysom Hill is a QB.


 

27 minutes ago, afl5013 said:


It's a slippery slope though, where as if they went by the teams official depth chart, it would be much more logical. 

It's the fantasy league's job to make their league fun for them. It's ESPN's job to give them the tools to do so without intervening on a case by case basis.


They do now, but their preseason depth chart listed him as WR, believe it or not. Lol. That’s why FleaFlicker listed at WR. 

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

Honestly it was super stupid to give Taysom Hill a TE designation in the first place.  Great job ESPN.

Taysom Hill is not a TE.  He is a QB who, prior to Brees's injury, lined up in different spots for a few gadget plays per game.

He has the jersey number of a QB.  The Saints list him as a QB.  He plays QB in the games.  Taysom Hill is a QB.

2019-taysom-hill-snaps.png
2019 Taysom Hill snap totals. ...his highest is 85 at TE. 
 

a jersey number qualifies his position? 😆 LOL 😆 ... 

Edited by shakestreet
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Flyman75 said:


 


They do now, but their preseason depth chart listed him as WR, believe it or not. Lol. That’s why FleaFlicker listed at WR. 


Well then that makes more sense, but it still wasn't as a TE.

If it's based off of last year's snaps, that's just dumb. Players switch positions all the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shakestreet said:

2019-taysom-hill-snaps.png
2019 Taysom Hill snap totals. ...his highest is 85 at TE. 
 

a jersey number qualifies his position? 😆 LOL 😆 ... 


Actually, if you look, his highest snap total was at WR...44 out wide and 72 in the slot. I just noticed that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, afl5013 said:


Well then that makes more sense, but it still wasn't as a TE.

If it's based off of last year's snaps, that's just dumb. Players switch positions all the time.


Tbf, it was hard to pigeon-hole him. Players in the NFL don’t switch positions all the time, but he played TE and WR far more than he did QB. And the vast majority of those QB snaps were Wildcat plays that were designed runs for him. Going by the chart above, he only took 19 more snaps at QB than he did FB. 

I totally get the move to QB only now, but I honestly don’t get all the ire over him having TE or WR eligibility prior to week 12. Based on last year and where he was playing this year, it made sense...admittedly WR made more sense than TE. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Flyman75 said:


Tbf, it was hard to pigeon-hole him. Players in the NFL don’t switch positions all the time, but he played TE and WR far more than he did QB. And the vast majority of those QB snaps were Wildcat plays that were designed runs for him. Going by the chart above, he only took 19 more snaps at QB than he did FB. 

I totally get the move to QB only now, but I honestly don’t get all the ire over him having TE or WR eligibility prior to week 12. Based on last year and where he was playing this year, it made sense...admittedly WR made more sense than TE. 

But his uniform number says he is a QB ... 

and one other thing the guys whining about it’s all ESPN fault and yahooooooo is the best. That gets me more. Their  platform is the best crap ..is laughable. Fantasy baseball yahoo had Anthony Rizzo eligible for second base and Shohini Othani as two people. One Pitcher the other is an outfielder. 

Edited by shakestreet
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, shakestreet said:

But his uniform number says he is a QB ... 

and one other thing the guys whining about it’s all ESPN fault and yahooooooo is the best. That gets me more. Their  platform is the best crap ..is laughable. Fantasy baseball yahoo had Anthony Rizzo eligible for second base and Shohini Othani as two people. One Pitcher the other is an outfielder. 


Ohtani is a SP too. Is he not? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, SharkSwimmer said:

Yes, heaven forbid.  Heaven forbid ESPN wreck a bunch of leagues because they tried to get cute and listed a player at the highest scoring position as eligible at the lowest scoring one, basically for no reason.

Differs by league settings. Hill was still outscored by a lot of position players in PPR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, lolcopter said:

Differs by league settings. Hill was still outscored by a lot of position players in PPR.


One would hope so, since Hill didn’t catch a single pass and lined up at QB for almost the entire game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, lolcopter said:

Differs by league settings. Hill was still outscored by a lot of position players in PPR.


I actually went back and checked. In PPR, Hill was the #1 RB and #4 WR. So no, only 3 players. Which isn’t a “lot” 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, shakestreet said:

2019-taysom-hill-snaps.png
2019 Taysom Hill snap totals. ...his highest is 85 at TE. 
 

a jersey number qualifies his position? 😆 LOL 😆 ... 

So he should be TE eligible for the rest of the season? If not, then you're refuting your own argument (i.e. His position should be determined by last year's snaps). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

As a commissioner the designation is not something that we change, should change, or even want to change. The designation has been that way for some time. ESPN is probably in the same situation we are in where if they change it they will upset some of their clientele so imo they will probably just leave it and change it in the offseason. As a commissioner, if this is a deal breaker I would be looking to switch platform-- and that's it. If you are just complaining about this designation and are not looking into that-- then you're just yelling at the clouds. 

 

Edit: just saw they will change him to QB only. Guess most in here should be happy. 

Edited by Theoneupper
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, shakestreet said:

a jersey number qualifies his position? 😆 LOL 😆 ... 

Yes, jersey numbers do determine a player's position in the NFL. It has been that way for decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not in any ESPN leagues but they just screwed up from the start. He is listed as a QB in real life and never should have had TE eligibility in fantasy (although he does play over the field). Owners who recognized that there was a chance that he could end up being the starting QB and rostered him should have been rewarded. How can you take away his eligibility mid season and call that fair? 

 

Yahoo got it right, just had him at QB the entire time so no harm at all really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Gandalfthecat said:

Has anyone figured out what happens if they leave him plugged in to the TE spot? I've seen this question asked everywhere but never properly answered.

That's going to be an issue for a lot of leagues. 

I really don't want to call ESPN. That would be a low for me. 😹

It's been said by many that if you have him in the TE spot and choose not to move him out, his points will count.  But you won't be able to make any lineup changes or adds/pickups.  If you have a banging set and forget lineup for the rest of the season, then you're golden and probably on your way to hoisting a ship.  

I know in the one league ESPN league I'm in, I'm going to move him out.  I think it was completely fine to grab him and play him at TE because ESPN gave him the eligibility.  I don't agree with ESPN removing the TE eligibility - there are certainly some people in big leagues that have had him rostered the entire season for this possibility of playing a QB at the TE spot, there are some that spent boku FAAB to acquire him, there are likely trades that were made, etc.  For ESPN to remove him now is just weak.  Yahoo would never remove a designation.  It is what it is though.  So now that he no longer has TE eligibility, I don't feel right playing him there, even if I don't need to change my lineup for ROS.  

If I won a ship with a NOW illegal Taysom Hill in the TE spot, I wouldn't feel right.  My leaguemates would be pissed.  It's just fantasy football.  It's not worth losing friendships and creating animosity because of it.  My leaguemates however would have recognized I scored big time if ESPN kept the TE designation.  Jaylen Samuels won me a Yahoo ship two years ago when he was the starting RB but had RB/TE eligibility.  Nobody complained then.  Wonder why it's such a big deal now.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Flyman75 said:


Actually, if you look, his highest snap total was at WR...44 out wide and 72 in the slot. I just noticed that. 


Tight End’s also line up in the “slot” all the time. I think the TE designation was idiotic as well, but the snap breakdown can still lean toward TE as much as WR. They would be wrong putting either. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, oban14 said:

No, they dont.

Can you name 5?


In general? Tons of players switch positions to extend their career, get more opportunity, etc. Plenty of CB transition to S later in their careers, and Mark Barron was a pretty good linebacker for my Rams after starting his career at safety.  

Now if you're going to limit me to only fantasy relevant players (like Ty Montgomery or Terrell Pryor), that narrows down the list because it narrows down the field. That's a pointless parameter for my statement pointing out that NFL that players do switch positions a lot. 

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...

×
×
  • Create New...