Here's something not often discussed--FA Kickers!

[hammertoes]

I was just wondering what you consider when trying to decide if a kicker will have a good week. It's really just not as easy to predict as say, running backs. I understand watching the weather (or dome) and accuracy, but what else plays into it?

Obviously you want someone that plays for a good offense, but not TOO good or your field goals will turn into TDs (and all you'll get is an XP).

And what about the opposing defense? Do you just want to go against a crap D, or one that is decent and will stop the offensive momentum in field goal range?

I know none of us really worry too much about our kickers (at least I don't), but every little bit helps right? Those 5-10 points could be the difference between a win and a loss (like it was for me last week).

[bobbing_headz]

I usually just grab 1 guy and stick with him unless there's someone significantly better on waivers or he's sucking real bad. I guess I look for good offense but it's really a crapshoot. First week as an example I grabbed Rackers and he did pretty well so I'll probably keep him. I usually like the teams that have decent offenses but maybe aren't such machines in the red zone. Seems like a guy like Bironas last year on the Titans was a good example. I guess guys like Gostkowski last year are also beasts with a bajillion XPs but they don't kick as many FGs it seems.

[Dan Lambskin]

it's just not worth putting a lot of time into because they're such a crapshoot week to week

[deacon]

All other things considered I usually look for a team that has a descent passing game but less than stellar run game. Those are usually the teams that get to the red zone but then bog down and have to kick fgs.

Carolina Panthers is a great example and look what John Casey did last week. Arizona would be another team that fits that mold and Seattle. To a lesser extent N.O. but I just can bring myself to have Olindo Mare on my roster.

[mikus]

To a lesser extent N.O. but I just can bring myself to have Olindo Mare on my roster.

Well good thing then, b/c Olindo Mare is not the Saints' kicker!

[bobbing_headz]

All other things considered I usually look for a team that has a descent passing game but less than stellar run game. Those are usually the teams that get to the red zone but then bog down and have to kick fgs.

Carolina Panthers is a great example and look what John Casey did last week. Arizona would be another team that fits that mold and Seattle. To a lesser extent N.O. but I just can bring myself to have Olindo Mare on my roster.

I beg to differ. Carolina is a team built on the run and they have 2 awesome RBs. I think they are a top 10 running team by the end of the season. You saw so many FGs because SD has a good defense.

[knapplc]

it's just not worth putting a lot of time into because they're such a crapshoot week to week

This guy's wise.


In theory the best kicker will be on a team that is effective between the 20s, but doesn't punch it in the endzone very well. I would put Chicago in that category, Week One notwithstanding. I don't expect Orton to engineer all that many TD drives, and their O-Line is still suspect in my opinion.

Maybe - MAYBE - you put St. Louis in that category as well. They've got Holt and SJax, but Bulger is a walking contusion and their O-Line has more holes than RiffRaff's underwear.

San Francisco doesn't terribly impress me on offense. Neither does Seattle with Burleson out and not much of a running game. Houston doesn't have much of a running game either, although Schaub & his wide receivers should be good, it stands to reason that they could bog down in the red zone, too.

Those are just some guesses off the top of my head. Like Dan said - it's just such a crapshoot.

[LS2throwed]

I look for easy matchups, and I also try to look for offenses that typically stall at the goal line, or teams that have redzone troubles...Its really like they said a crap shoot, but I will be playing FA kickers every week in most leagues unless I have a guy I really like.

[mattUTD20]

Good offense and plays in a dome. Jason Elam is my boy this year.

[2ksports]

it's just not worth putting a lot of time into because they're such a crapshoot week to week

This guy's wise.


In theory the best kicker will be on a team that is effective between the 20s, but doesn't punch it in the endzone very well. I would put Chicago in that category, Week One notwithstanding. I don't expect Orton to engineer all that many TD drives, and their O-Line is still suspect in my opinion.

Maybe - MAYBE - you put St. Louis in that category as well. They've got Holt and SJax, but Bulger is a walking contusion and their O-Line has more holes than RiffRaff's underwear.

San Francisco doesn't terribly impress me on offense. Neither does Seattle with Burleson out and not much of a running game. Houston doesn't have much of a running game either, although Schaub & his wide receivers should be good, it stands to reason that they could bog down in the red zone, too.

Those are just some guesses off the top of my head. Like Dan said - it's just such a crapshoot.

Regarding Orton, he is the one QB in CHI that throws great routes inside the 20. There was a preview showcasing why he became the starter, mainly because of his ability to forsee the play before it unfolds. It might not mean anything, but I think it'll be much better than Rex Grossman.