Blatantly obvious FF articles

[Albatross]

It gets me that a lot of these writers can put out such obvious things and then call it a column. 80% of the start/sit columns I have read feature such gems as "start Cutler" and "start Fitzgerald". As if anyone is not starting those players. On MSN there is an article "10 moves you MUST make for week 4" http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/pgStory?co ... to=8611468. The writer Rotter's #1 point is to start Romo and Owens. Anyway, done with my rant. I just think it is funny that writers can make money on this stuff. I'm sure Andy Rooney from 60 minutes would have a ball with these columns.

[Kareighuis]

Wow- it's not a joke. Romo, Owens, LT, Rivers, Gore, Reggie, Santana, Fitzgerald, Lynch, MJD, Cutler, Marshall... the deepest this guy goes is Slaton, Perry, Trent Edwards and Antonio Bryant.

[smackthefirst]

Yeah most FF articles are annoying in one way the other. My biggest issue is that people actually get paid for these things and it never fails that all the free lance articles (like the ones on the Cafe) are 10x better in my opinion.

What bothers me about the start/sit articles is that they seem to either take the most obvious guys IE: Cutler is our pick of the week and bench Manning (duh), or they reach for players that would only start in rare occasions.

But I will admit that I have found a few paid writers who seem to know their stuff. I don't like to promote other sites often on the Cafe, but the guys at footballguys are a good example of quality articles IMO.

[treat24]

I don't like to promote other sites often on the Cafe, but the guys at footballguys are a good example of quality articles IMO.

Anything that helps other fantasy football owners is fine with me. So go right ahead, giving useful links and spamming for another site are pretty easy to discern. I like us being an all in one stop. Whatever info you can't find here, at least the cafe and it's members can direct you to a good site.

------------------------

Since this thread is out here... Does anyone have any suggestions to make our Start/Sit section better?

[smackthefirst]

Yeah I know treat. I just seem to find myself always referring people to FBG because between the Cafe and FBG, I pretty much get all of the info that I need. And the last thing I ever want if for anyone to think I'm trying to steal traffic away.

But at least I'm not promoting Fox Sports. Haha.

[TheMaizeAndBlue]

I don't like to promote other sites often on the Cafe, but the guys at footballguys are a good example of quality articles IMO.

Anything that helps other fantasy football owners is fine with me. So go right ahead, giving useful links and spamming for another site are pretty easy to discern. I like us being an all in one stop. Whatever info you can't find here, at least the cafe and it's members can direct you to a good site.

------------------------

Since this thread is out here... Does anyone have any suggestions to make our Start/Sit section better?

I don't know if this would be too much extra work, but something that I like to do is to assign a numerical value to defenses against the pass/run based on their rankings. I think that might be a cool addition to the start/sit column if it's not too much extra work.

[shagworth]

I think these Waiver Wire articles I read are hilarious...I don't know what kind of leagues these guys play in, but by the time the name someone as a hot pick off the WW, they've been picked up at least two weeks ago in my league.

[treat24]

I think these Waiver Wire articles I read are hilarious...I don't know what kind of leagues these guys play in, but by the time the name someone as a hot pick off the WW, they've been picked up at least two weeks ago in my league.

the hilarious part about this is that we used to have a writer at the cafe who only chose players owned by less than 3% or 5% of teams or something like that. She got ripped constantly for picking players that might do nothing. That's the risk of a sleeper. Pick guys that nobody knows, it's high risk, people hate that. Pick a guy that everyone knows, it's not a sleeper. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. She got criticized so much that she left and stopped writing them. After watching the way people talked to her it doesn't surprise me that other sites go safer routes. Even though some of her picks panned out HUGE, she got few compliments... the ones that didn't got tremendous amounts of criticism. The safe articles other sites put up are undoubtedly geared towards not being ripped on for being wrong.

[The Lung]

It gets me that a lot of these writers can put out such obvious things and then call it a column. 80% of the start/sit columns I have read feature such gems as "start Cutler" and "start Fitzgerald". As if anyone is not starting those players. On MSN there is an article "10 moves you MUST make for week 4" http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/pgStory?co ... to=8611468. The writer Rotter's #1 point is to start Romo and Owens. Anyway, done with my rant. I just think it is funny that writers can make money on this stuff. I'm sure Andy Rooney from 60 minutes would have a ball with these columns.

For the record, many many fantasy football articles are written for casual fantasy football fans, not hardcore and serious participants like most of us here at the Cafe.

Also, not all fantasy football writers stick to obvious cream puff predictions like Captain Obvious, aka Roger Rotter, who is known as one of the worst in the business. I wrote an article after last season with my opinion on many of the best fantasy sports writers if you want to check that out.

[shagworth]

I think these Waiver Wire articles I read are hilarious...I don't know what kind of leagues these guys play in, but by the time the name someone as a hot pick off the WW, they've been picked up at least two weeks ago in my league.

the hilarious part about this is that we used to have a writer at the cafe who only chose players owned by less than 3% or 5% of teams or something like that. She got ripped constantly for picking players that might do nothing. That's the risk of a sleeper. Pick guys that nobody knows, it's high risk, people hate that. Pick a guy that everyone knows, it's not a sleeper. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. She got criticized so much that she left and stopped writing them. After watching the way people talked to her it doesn't surprise me that other sites go safer routes. Even though some of her picks panned out HUGE, she got few compliments... the ones that didn't got tremendous amounts of criticism. The safe articles other sites put up are undoubtedly geared towards not being ripped on for being wrong.

Yeah, that makes sense...