Week 1 Thread

[revo]

My FF Week 1:

League 1: I lose by less than 1 pt

League 2: I lose by 20 pts because I start Robert Woods (3.6 pts) for Kareem Hunt (29.9 pts) at the last minute

Pay for Play: I lose by 6 pts because Javonte Williams fumbles away a TD on the goal line and Dak has the worst game of his life before leaving injured

No Kickers Allowed (14tm): I score 140 pts -- 4th most -- and lose to the 2nd highest scoring team. Meanwhile, a team won scoring SIXTY POINTS less than I did.

Did I mention how much I hate fantasy football?

[chancellor]

New Broncos HC Nathaniel Hackett decided on a 4th & 5 with a minute left to go to run down the clock and allow Brandon McManus to attempt a 64-yd FG instead of letting new $250m Russell Wilson try for a 1st down. Bizarre.

Truly bizarre. Sure, McManus has plenty of leg for a FG of that distance. But Denver had 46 seconds and two time outs left (assuming they call time out right away) - do you not have confidence in your QB to go get even six or seven more yards in a couple plays, and then run the clock down and give McManus a mid-50s yard FG attempt? Wow.

Nathaniel Hackett, you win the Mike McCarthy clock management award for the week!

[chancellor]

My FF Week 1:

League 1: I lose by less than 1 pt

League 2: I lose by 20 pts because I start Robert Woods (3.6 pts) for Kareem Hunt (29.9 pts) at the last minute

Pay for Play: I lose by 6 pts because Javonte Williams fumbles away a TD on the goal line and Dak has the worst game of his life before leaving injured

No Kickers Allowed (14tm): I score 140 pts -- 4th most -- and lose to the 2nd highest scoring team. Meanwhile, a team won scoring SIXTY POINTS less than I did.

Did I mention how much I hate fantasy football?

Ouch. I lost both my games, but none that painfully. I did lose Prescott in a superflex league, so that's gonna hurt.

[revo]

[revo]

Two Bronco HOFers literally had no idea what Hackett was doing

[chancellor]

Two Bronco HOFers literally had no idea what Hackett was doing

Nor did much of anyone else.

OTOH, I can't help but cheer for Geno Smith.

[Gregg]

Truly bizarre. Sure, McManus has plenty of leg for a FG of that distance. But Denver had 46 seconds and two time outs left (assuming they call time out right away) - do you not have confidence in your QB to go get even six or seven more yards in a couple plays, and then run the clock down and give McManus a mid-50s yard FG attempt? Wow.

Nathaniel Hackett, you win the Mike McCarthy clock management award for the week!

Wow. If I were ownership I might be looking for a new coach today.

[Ken]

Not really following the clock management issue.

I'm not a Broncos fan, but if the decision was that McManus was more likely to kick the field goal (and granted, he had the leg) than the sputtering offense was to get 5 yards, what does clock management have to do with it?

They ran the clock down so Seattle wouldn't have time to come back if McManus made the field goal. From a clock management perspective that's the right move.

[revo]

Not really following the clock management issue.

I'm not a Broncos fan, but if the decision was that McManus was more likely to kick the field goal (and granted, he had the leg) than the sputtering offense was to get 5 yards, what does clock management have to do with it?

They ran the clock down so Seattle wouldn't have time to come back if McManus made the field goal. From a clock management perspective that's the right move.

It's more the befuddling decision to place more confidence in a kicker to hit the second longest FG in NFL history than it was for their brand new, shiny future HOF QB (to go along with elite skill position players in Jeudy, Sutton & Javonte) to get 5 yards. Obviously from a risk management perspective, it goes without saying getting 5+ yds on a 4th and 5 stands a much better chance of occurring than hitting a 64-yd FG.

Once he made that decision, the clock management issue was no longer relevant. But per the video with Manning, they should've at least tried to get them to jump offsides.

Still, it was 100% the wrong decision. They had 3 TOs and if they got the 5 yards, they could've gotten into much better shape for McManus.

[Ken]

It's more the befuddling decision to place more confidence in a kicker to hit the second longest FG in NFL history than it was for their brand new, shiny future HOF QB (to go along with elite skill position players in Jeudy, Sutton & Javonte) to get 5 yards. Obviously from a risk management perspective, it goes without saying getting 5+ yds on a 4th and 5 stands a much better chance of occurring than hitting a 64-yd FG.

Once he made that decision, the clock management issue was no longer relevant. But per the video with Manning, they should've at least tried to get them to jump offsides.

Still, it was 100% the wrong decision. They had 3 TOs and if they got the 5 yards, they could've gotten into much better shape for McManus.

I can agree with that! If you think your offense is more likely to get 5 yards than your kicker is to kick it 64 yards, then you go for it.

Calling it clock management is the part that makes no sense.

[revo]

I can agree with that! If you think your offense is more likely to get 5 yards than your kicker is to kick it 64 yards, then you go for it.

Calling it clock management is the part that makes no sense.

Right, it showed an interesting lack of trust in the offense.