|
||||
|
Title: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Jul 4th, 2003, 2:06pm I know it really ends up being rather inconsequential and a waste of money with all the FF information available on the internet, especially via "the Gridiron" and "the Gridiron Newsstand", [smiley=awwgee.gif] but, in all honestly, today is (going to be) one of my favorite days of the year right up there with Draft day, and for a reason much more personal. No, not (just) because it is the 4th of July [smiley=patriot.gif] [smiley=proudAmerican.gif] , though that is a bonus, I suppose! Today is the day I will go out to my local Barnes & Noble book store and sift through all the NFL and fantasy football magazines on the rack and blow like $20 to $30 on a few. Will it be money "well" spent? Naaaa! But, though I like researching on the internet (hell, I have my very own site), nothing will ever quite replace that feeling of flipping through the pages of an FF magazine, reading the, albeit fairly outdated, commentary and, most of all, LOOKING AT, or should I say DROOLING OVER, PICTURES OF MY PLAYERS. It makes me feel like I am 12 years old finding some friend's father's old stash of [smiley=rabbit.gif] [smiley=hooters.gif] Playboys [smiley=titflash.gif] [smiley=rabbit.gif] all over again. [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] ... Uhhhh, okay, uhhhh, I gotta' run! [smiley=wave.gif] [smiley=onit.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by bgsgfan on Jul 4th, 2003, 2:13pm With all the heat those magazines take, they do serve a purpose. I like to read their team reports before i do my projections to get a good idea of the comings and goings of players, new staff, etc.. Its also nice to read the printed word (without using the computer printer). |
||||
|
Title: I just got back from tRe: What I am doing today... Post by Walker Boh on Jul 4th, 2003, 3:00pm I just got back from the pool 8) and I plan on spending the rest of the day eating and relaxing. My wife has to work tonight so I'll be home with our boy. [smiley=newbie.gif] We live about 1/4 mile from 6 Flags Great America and I'm sure we're going to see an awesome display of fireworks tonight! We have a perfect view from our family room... just turn out the lights, open the blinds and enjoy! Of course I'll have my computer on all day and I'll be checking out the site hoping to see a couple draft picks made... I did some hardcore reasearch this morning and I can't wait to make my next few picks! Hope you all enjoy your day. |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by DirkDiggler on Jul 4th, 2003, 3:27pm My wife, my child, and I are having a low key day. RELAXING!! Tonight the neighbors who have a little child about the same age are gonna get together just to chill and grill some good old fashion American burgers and dogs. (and sausages for all those Poles out there.) I am doing some research for our keeper league up coming draft today too. (which helps for CBFL) . I love Football, I love America!! |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 4th, 2003, 8:41pm Well, the FF internet industry must be taking its toll on the FF print industry. I was VERY disappointed in the selection of NFL and FF magazines this year. There weren't many, only about six or so, and what there was wasn't very good. I usually walk out with like four to six of ten or so selections (and blowing A LOT of cash) and I never have to go looking in another store. This year I walked out of Barnes & Noble with just ONE and I was NOT able to find good ole' Street & Smith's until FOUR stops later. :o I thought I was going to go into my first FF season (in 15 years) without my good ole' steady. [smiley=nervous.gif] I know Street & Smith's has some pretty f'n WEAK rankings, BUT I love their stats layout, very simple, efficient and effective and their, albeit outdated, well-written team reports. I also REALLY like their pictures. The other one I bought, which I was just :-/ about, was The Sporting News Fantasy Football magazine. But, overall, the selection was terrible. :( :'( [smiley=bawling.gif] ... [smiley=flipoffangrily.gif] But, not to worry,... When we break out with our "the Gridiron Report" in a couple years, we'll disabuse the FF print industry... TOO ;) ! [smiley=swollenhead.gif] [smiley=awwgee.gif] [smiley=yes.gif] ... [smiley=flipa.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by bgsgfan on Jul 5th, 2003, 3:15am S & S is the one mag I got this year. I am kind of interested in the print product footballguys is promoting and may buy that when/if it comes out later. Gridiron Report sounds awesome! |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 22nd, 2003, 7:48pm on 07/05/03 at 03:15:17, bgsgfan wrote:
I have been meaning to ask you, bg, which poster did you get inside your Street and Smith's? I got Jerry Rice! Quote:
Yes, it does! [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by bgsgfan on Jul 23rd, 2003, 2:04pm It was something to do with Tampa Bay... I didn't even look at the poster yet. It used to be that I only bought magazines for the centerfold - but those were different mags. ;D |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jun 13th, 2004, 12:39pm Well, I am ready to roll now... Got my magazines yesterday! [smiley=RIF.gif] Only two this year... Street & Smith's (I still think their stats layout in the back is the best for quick reference purposes/most reader-friendly) [smiley=nerd.gif] and the pro football annual by Pro Football Weekly. There really wasn't much more out there (I guess the internet is really taking over [smiley=steg.gif] ... ;) ) and of the more "fantasy-specific" ones that there were they were REALLY spendy, like $8.95 (when the aforementioned two were like $6.99). [smiley=ohshit.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 10th, 2004, 11:05pm While I was out in Denver, I found the ONE magazine AND PREDICTION CHART worth its weight in gold: Pro Football Weekly's Annual Fantasy Guide and their Yardage-League Draft Board! Year in and year out I find that rankings board to be the BEST basic, bottom-line list anywhere! I went into last year without it and felt absolutely naked (which is not a pretty site ;) ). After checking here locally (as per my last post above) and not finding it again this year, I was feeling terrible. But, now I'm [smiley=pumped.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by Philly on Jul 11th, 2004, 9:37am Just out of curiosity... how does this mag predict the Raiders backfield, Raiders QB, and Denver backfield issues? |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 11th, 2004, 4:09pm In very short,... Tyrone Wheatley with Justin Fargas taking carries away and maybe the position by the end of the season, but they seem to think that Wheatley best suits Turner's offense; Kerry Collins to start sooner than later, perhaps by the start of the season; Tatum Bell as most likely to capitalize on the opportunity of the group of Denver backs. Side note, I generally agree with all three assessments. |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 18th, 2005, 11:45pm Fantasy Football mags (that come at a cost to the front-end user) are certainly becoming a dying breed of existence. 16 YEARS of doing this hobby, however, and old habits are hard to break. They become traditions, actually. So, yes, I must confess... :-[ this season I still purchased this year's annual of the first magazine I ever used, the only one there used to be at the bookstores back in the day, Street & Smith's, which, besides the quick-reference stat layout in the back which, mind you even with that, they are starting to get chinsy with, basically sucks anymore, and the one that I feel is the best quality, Pro Football Weekly's Annual "Fantasy Football" Preview, which is a solid fantasy resource, medium and somewhat noticable "untimeliness" (based on the print medium vis-a-vis the instantaneous nature of the internet) aside. ... I own an operate a site and I cannot tell a lie... There's nothing quite like having that magazine in hand, turning pages and looking at cool pictures. If only they made "scratch-and-sniff"... [smiley=laugh.gif] [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] [smiley=LMFAO.gif] [smiley=sinister.gif] [smiley=rollinwithlaughter.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by Philly on Jul 19th, 2005, 9:18am I bought a fantasy mag the first year I played fantasy football and used it as my sole resource (aside from the NFL columns in my local paper). Then I realized that all the best fantasy info was online. A couple years ago I bought another mag (don't remember which one), but was so disappointed (mainly with the timeliness, or lack thereof) that I haven't gone back. I've found that anything I want to know, I can find online much more quickly and with much more accuracy. I'm not one of those people that prefers paper to digital, so I don't need the feel of the pages between my fingers or the small of ink under my nose. |
||||
|
Title: Re: What I am doing today... Post by StegRock on Jul 19th, 2005, 9:41am on 07/19/05 at 09:18:07, Philly wrote:
... and for free, mind you. I would challenge the "more quickly" on one small front, however. I can probably look up last year's stats for any given player and juxtapose them with others both from his team and around the league faster by opening my Street & Smith's lying next to me than I could on the net. ... On a more philosophical note, I would add that sometimes too much information is NOT a good thing; it stifles/handcuffs you and prevents you from thinking it through for yourself and coming up with your own insights (which is all you can do to separate yourself from other (rabid) fantasy footballers). I like the somewhat unpretentious and professional "feel" of the magazines (like the one's mentioned above, especially Pro Football Weekly's) vis-a-vis wading through the deluge of on-line schmucks putting up sites and calling themselves experts "OUT LOUD". [smiley=hellyeafunny.gif] Of course, with the sites as with the mags, there are the cream of the crop and the garbage, and any seasoned fantasy footballer should be readily able to distinguish between the two. ... And, as to your lack of affinity with mags, I think that has all to do with the fact that you came into the hobby after the internet boom. 16 years ago, brother, magazines are all we fantasy footballers had. [smiley=wiseman.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Jul 6th, 2006, 12:44am Well, in the free moments I had here in my absence during the "holiday" and move, here's a little somethin'-somethin' I cooked up for yous... [smiley=spchef.gif] I bought four fantasy football season preview magazines for this year, two in a mindful, patient manner at the magazine rack of a nearby Border's, two, the only two they had, in a hasty, rushed-up whim at the local Safeway, fearing that I may not have much time to be browsing for fantasy mags given our move and (foolishly) that the stock may be limited in Hawaii (it isn't). Anyway,... none of them get two thumbs up. What's new, right? The former two are Pro Football Weekly and (now) CBSSportsline.com's "Fantasy Football Guide 2006", one thumb up [smiley=thumbsup.gif] (NOT two, mind you) and the most affordable of the lot at $6.99, and NFL.com's "Fantasy Football 2006 Preview", also one thumb up [smiley=thumbsup.gif] and an acceptable price-tag, relatively speaking, of $7.99. The latter two are "Fantasy League Football" published either eponymously or by I don't know whom, which gets one thumb up and one thumb down [smiley=thumbsup.gif][smiley=thumbsdown.gif] and is WAY over-priced at $8.95, and ESPN.com's "Fantasy Football 2006", one thumb down [smiley=thumbsdown.gif] and not worth the $7.99 they're asking. Conspicuously missing (as per my past posts),... '06 marks the first year in the 18 years I've been doing this that I didn't buy Street & Smith's. It just looked lame (and four, one of which I wish I didn't even purchase (ESPN.com's), was (four) more than enough). First off, my favorite, PFW & CBS removed what I have praised for years now as the single best, quick-hit at least, fantasy football tool out there, their "Yardage-based Draft Board". '06 is marking the first for a lot of things, it appears... This one sucks! What a bad move; must be the influence of CBS! [smiley=no.gif] All these magazines are too busy ranking WAY TOO many players. In doing so, they compromise quality for quantity, never a good trade-off. A "Top 32 to 40" at the big three positions is more than adequate for your average fantasy football league. For example, the GBRFL, a deep league by today's standards only goes 210 players deep, inclusive of QB's, RB's, RC's (inc. TE's), PK's and DU/ST's. When I see "400-plus Ranked", I want to puke. Gimme a break! [smiley=pullleeeeeeeze.gif] What unnecessary hubris, in any case. And, in any event, these rankings are done, what I would call, out-of-context. They're just lists. In VERY short, there is no really good "point, counter-point" going on (and when they try, it's cheese): team context is not emphasized, and "Steggie-style 'windows'" are not what's given... and the "Boom-Bust"/"Upside-Downside" tack some magazines take doesn't really cut it. It's just "ass-covering"! ... But, this is getting into what I want to do with "the Gridiron" mag someday, so I shan't delve into it any deeper here. [smiley=wiseguy.gif] Anyway,... what I'm going to do to give you all a short synopsis of (my take on) these four magazines is debrief you all on how they go about treating two particularly difficult situations right now at the key position for fantasy football, tailback, those of Cedric Benson versus Thomas Jones (and considering Adrian Peterson) and Ron Dayne versus Tatum Bell (and considering Cedric Cobbs). Analysis and commentary on these two position battles can be very revealing of the mindset behind/driving the magazine. Ultimately, (though many of you guys should know where I come down on these battles, it cannot be denied that) these are close-calls. The more dramatically you side one way or the other, the more developed, thorough and refined your argument has to be (to be convincing), which typically isn't the case with these mags. It's all "short-attention-span theater". Regarding Benson versus Jones, three of the four are within the realm of reason on this. I think NFL.com's ranking Benson 30 and Jones 33 is the safest and most accurate going into training camp. (Furthermore, they write something I want you all to take note of that is worth contrasting with something ESPN wrote that I will point out below. About Benson NFL.com writes, "...the potential reward for your fantasy team may make it worth taking him as your third back on draft day." Just tuck that away for now, fellas!) NFL.com's ranking is a bit too safe for my tastes, though. PFW, in more ballsy fashion, which is to my liking, ranks Benson 21 and Jones 34 and back those rankings up with fairly heady analysis. Now, the less good,... while ESPN's ranking of Benson and Jones, 29 and 22 respectively, is reasonable, they're commentary is want-it-both-ways wishy-washiness. They, in one breath, say that the Bears are "bullish" on Benson and put a rocket, indicating a player "on the rise", next to his name, but, then, in the same breath, say not to count on Benson's beating out Jones for the #1 gig, in which case, since the Bears allegedly want to avoid an RBBC, "he's facing another letdown of a season." WTF!?!? I didn't know I ordered a side of double-talk to go with my entree of BS! In the end, you're just back to where you began. Worse yet, the "FLF" magazine ranks Benson and Jones an unbelievable 27 spots apart at 44 and 17, respectively. YIKES! Yet, their "quantity-over-quality" undeveloped arguments are NOT in accord with such a disparity in ranking. As a matter of fact, the commentary is so general that the rankings could be REVERSED and the sidebar commentary still read the same! (Side note on the content of this mag,... it does NOT help when injuries are not even reported correctly. Case in point, they have Eric Shelton's rookie season last year ending due to a torn ACL. ... Holy crap, Batman! [smiley=batman.gif] How did this thing make it to print?) Bottom line, the recent contract extension of Adrian Peterson combined with Jones's mini-holdout and trade talks is good news for Benson owners and is not for Jones owners, and why the magazines, especially the BIG-name ones are so in a rush to hit the shelves first is beyond me and no excuse. They could wait another three to four weeks and provide a much better and more useful product. (Again, I'm treading on the toes of my ideas for "the Gridiron" magazine,... so I best shut up.) [smiley=wiseguy.gif] Now, as for Dayne versus Bell, PFW and that FLF magazine provide the best rankings, Dayne at 28 and 29 and Bell at 33 and 34, respectively. Both provide rather insightful analysis on both players: Dayne's being a good fit for Shanahan's system given his "patient", "one-cut" running style versus Bell's being the ideal change-of-pace back who tends to run too straight-up, which exposes him to injury, and who seems to wear down as opposed to becoming more effective as a game wears on, all of which makes him an ideal guy to come in fresh and pop big runs against tired defenses that have been worn down by the #1 back. NFL.com ranks Dayne and Bell at a reasonable 31 and 24, respectively. However, about Dayne they write, "...there could be enough carries near the goal-line to make him (Dayne) a bit like T.J. Duckett for your fantasy squad," when, the fact is, as the FLF gang points out, "The common misconception is that Dayne is a power back. He's not. He's a smart, patient runner - a perfect fit in the Broncos zone-stretch scheme, similar to what he ran in ... at Wisconsin," which PFW also states. NFL.com also makes the mistake of hearkening to Dayne's days in New York. I'll come back to that. At least, these guys only "hearken" and not "harp on" (as is done by others). Coming in last, we have ESPN who ranks them a ridiculous 26 spots apart. Again, in double-talk fashion, after stating that Bell is "a straight-line runner who lacks ideal elusiveness and slashing ability for Denver's scheme" and pointing out, like PFW and FLF, that Dayne "meshed well with Denver's zone-blocking scheme and reminded us that he won a Heisman for a reason," rank Bell 24 and Dayne... [smiley=drummer.gif] 50! Yuck! No rockets next to either guy's name, so I guess they're covered. They, the vaunted ESPN, also allude to Dayne's mainly seeing goal-line work, when it has been well-documented that that's not his strength; in fact, it's been shown to be a misnomer, and to Bell's "improved patience and underrated toughness." Are you kidding me? Holy hell! Truth is, they are probably BOTH going to lose serious goal-line carries to newcomer Cedric Cobbs, which is what is going to hold them both back from a fantasy perspective. (To top it off,... (Now is when I need you to recall that earlier parenthetical regarding NFL.com's ranking Benson 30...) after ESPN ranks Dayne 50, they label him an "iffy No. 2". Rank 50 - iffy #2!?!? A rank of 50 is like an iffy #4 or #5! The double-talk never ceases!) But, at least, ESPN "player-hates" Dayne in a reasonably profession manner with reasonable, though not well-reasoned, commentary. This is in stark contrast to a magazine I did NOT buy... Fanball's! What garbage! I rank it two thumbs down and one back up your ass, [smiley=thumbsdown.gif][smiley=thumbsdown.gif][smiley=lickmyass.gif] which translates to two middle fingers up (i.e. Jim O'Dells)... [smiley=flipoffangrily.gif][smiley=flipoffangrily.gif] I digress... At every turn of a page, it oozes trash-talk and hyperbole... It's Ron "freaking" Dayne or Mark "Brutal". With regards to Brunell, trying to be witty, I guess, they in no uncertain terms make the specific claim that it is a given, like America's losing wars in Asia (or something like that), that he (Brunell) is "horrible", a bias that if you bought into and blindly and unwaveringly followed last season, unnecessarily potentially cost you some fantastic fantasy stats for a number of weeks, stats, early on at least, that were likely freely available on your league's waiver wire. Anyway, back to Dayne versus Bell, Fanball bases their argument against Dayne, who they ranked around 38 with Bell around 16, on his past performance as a Giant, which ESPN, to their credit, doesn't. In ESPN non-committal double-talk fashion, however, they do include an indemnification clause of sorts with Dayne's profile. One of their writers stupidly sums things up by saying that if Dayne is good enough for Shanahan, who am I to argue? ... AS IF that in and of itself is an argument to hang your fantasy helmet on. [smiley=nono.gif] Okay... Really quick... A BONUS for you guys smart enough to be tooling around down here on "the Sidelines"... [smiley=hungry.gif] My take on Dayne versus Bell... [smiley=lickinmychops.gif] Look, I realize that there are two (what I consider to be) sound arguments regarding the Broncos RB sitch and neither of them is grounded upon Dayne's performance in New York. In fact, Bell's track-record with Shanahan in Denver and history of injuries, all of which is subpar, is more relevant than what Dayne did in a totally different context across the country in New York. I digress... Look no further than, one, Ed McCaffery - dud in New York, stud in Denver! Anyway, there is an argument: 1) for Bell (and as a matter of fact against Dayne) and 2) for Dayne (and de facto against Bell). The argument for Bell is founded on an extrapolation of the numbers he accumulated as a part-time back to those of a full-timer or, at least, Mike Anderson's of a year ago. This is where ESPN's prediction is coming from. I happen to think it is naive and, ultimately, wrong. The argument for Dayne, which is whence PFW, FLF and I are coming, is predicated on who will best fill the specific shoes of the departed Mike Anderson with the belief that the answer to that question is Dayne while Bell continues in the role he filled spectacularly last year. It just seems like Dayne for Anderson is the natural switch, the one that requires the least disruption of their offense. Dayne, more than Bell, is surely the more similar back to Anderson. He won't be nearly as good on the goal-line,... enter Cedric Cobbs,... but he should be an improvement everywhere else. Why mess with a good thing, which is exactly what replacing Anderson with Bell would be doing? ... And, honestly, how the numbers bear out, who knows? [smiley=shrug.gif] You might have two 1,000-yard backs in Denver in '06 and three (add Cobbs) with seven to 10 touchdowns each (and don't rule out Cecil Sapp getting into the mix, as well). BUT, barring injuries, I guarantee that Bell's numbers will NOT merely be a gaudy extrapolation from part-time to full-time and that it will be Dayne filling Anderson's shoes while Bell's role remains essentially the same, perhaps slightly increased. ... I hope that went down well, boyz! Wash it down with a good chug... [smiley=alcoholic.gif] ... ;) P.S. (As per my post (to Tony) on the "Interested in becoming a Junior Correspondent" thread, this only took another two or so hours just to input... :P ... ;)) |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by Philly on Jul 6th, 2006, 10:12am I'll try to keep my inputting to a bit less than two hours. ;) I don't buy any fantasy magazines. Like I mentioned last year, I have a nice set of bookmarks in my Internet Explorer that give me all the stats I need. I can read up on player battles on a whole host of sites. As for projections and rankings, I do all of those myself (anyone who has seen my spreadsheets can vouch for this). I did, however, receive a fantasy magazine in the mail from Scout.com as part of a promotion that I received when I signed up for their service. When I first opened it to look through, I happened to be sitting on the throne. [smiley=caughtonthecan.gif] I soon learned the best use for the magazine: [smiley=tp.gif]. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Jul 26th, 2006, 6:28am Because it was cheap relatively speaking, I picked up the latest edition of Sports Illustrated, which serves as their 2006 Fantasy Football guide. I never knew SI, the magazine, did a fantasy preview. Mind you, it's just a usual edition, but it includes 14 pages on fantasy-specific content. Bottom line, the hardcore FFBaller isn't going to get too much out of it (except perhaps just another set of rankings to consider). But, for the newbie [smiley=newbie.gif] to fantasy football it's a nice quick-hit. The newbie isn't going to find himself or herself swamped and, well, feeling in too deep. [smiley=drown.gif] It's not thorough or in-depth by any stretch, and I do NOT agree with their rankings,... notably, as per my post above, the disparity in the rankings, respectively, of Cedric Benson (22) and Thomas Jones (37), and Tatum Bell (25) and Ron Dayne (39), explanations for which really requires more than they're willing to dedicate, in which case, I think, they should have gone with a less bold and more "realistic" ranking. That said, their, albeit not teased-out, take isn't the hackneyed, inane one that hearkens back to and harps on Dayne, the Giant (in BOTH senses, I suppose, the team[smiley=swollenhead.gif] and literally [smiley=spchef.gif]), but instead is a forward-looking one with which I do not agree but can appreciate, namely that Dayne may very well end up the starter, BUT that Bell will still be the better fantasy option. Again, I don't agree with that, BUT I can't say that it's absolutely not a possibility. In my analyses both hereabove and in my Broncos FF-specific team reports, I suggest that something like this is possible, namely when I write that two 1,000-yard rushers in Denver in '07 is not out of the realm of possibility (but that doesn't justify ranking them 14 apart,... but even that's not that bad compared to some of the gross disparities above, which are VERY poorly argued). Anyway, if you have $3.99 or 20 minutes at your local magazine rack to burn, take a look-see. I would give it one thumb up and one thumb down [smiley=thumbsup.gif][smiley=thumbsdown.gif], but this one comes to you for $6 less than the other one I gave that one up, one down ranking to above. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 6th, 2006, 2:16am on 07/06/06 at 00:44:41, StegRock wrote:
"WRONG," I am HAPPY to say... [smiley=dancin.gif] Gino wanted to go to Barnes & Noble yesterday, and, while she went to do her thing, on my way to the Philosophy section for some perusal of academic material, somehow I "found my way" over to the area on the magazine racks where the fantasy football mags are... [smiley=whistle.gif] (Gee, I wonder how that happened... ;)), and, lo and behold, what do I see before me but a Street and Smith's FANTASY Football magazine!!! :o I never knew they made a fantasy mag. Does anybody know... is this their first year to do so? In any event, as I explain above, while I found their standard football annual poor, I was floored by this fantasy production of theirs. With all due respect to Pro Football Weekly, which has produced a solid fantasy annual for the last number of year, this is the best single fantasy preview magazine I've seen in a while. The presentation is fantastic, as has always been the case with Street & Smith's. It's thorough and yet not overly loaded with BS. And, outside of the extraneous "fantasy rating" number they assign to each player, for which I cannot find any explanation as to how it's formulated, their rankings are solid. Frankly speaking, I just have to subjectively say that, in recent years at least, there are no rankings I have found myself more in agreement with, including those PFW "Yardage-based" ones, I've referred to in "'biblical' proportions", than these. At a reasonable price of $7.99, I give this mag... [smiley=drummer.gif] ... [smiley=twothumbsup.gif] TWO THUMBS UP!!! Great job, "Street and Smith"! I am so happy to have you back in my library! ... Actually, I am so happy you never left... :D |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by Philly on Aug 8th, 2006, 12:28pm Against my instincts, I went ahead and purchased a copy of Street and Smith's FF guide. Boy was that a mistake. I flipped right through to the Eagles preview page. Let's see... Reggie Brown and Greg Lewis are my team's starting WRs? When was this thing produced, November 2005? Since I hadn't seen the S&S preview earlier, I figured it was a later release -- meaning more timely information. Guess not. Greg Lewis is going to be hard-pressed to be anything better than a #4 receiver for the Eagles and might not even make the team in the end. Like Steg said... an explanation of the numbered rating would have been nice. Otherwise the numbers mean nothing at all. I'd comment on how skewed some of them seem (Cedric Benson, for example), but I can't because ratings without a rationale are meaningless. Interesting also, that there is nary a mention of the current #1 back in Denver. And, finally, with so many people playing IDP, even a cheatsheet with the top 50 at each position would have been nice. I think I've learned that I'll keep making my own cheatsheets and relying on the internet for more timely information. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 8th, 2006, 3:34pm on 08/08/06 at 12:28:17, Philly wrote:
(Okay,... Steg,... DEEP breaths... Jeff has been one of your right-hand men... He obviously expects something from magazines that you don't... Don't ruin today's launching of Steg's List defending a magazine... Steg, you know that these things are written months ago and that your analysis is only "relatively speaking"; you know how to read between the lines and "appreciate" dudes' insights from, perhaps, MONTHS AGO and bring them "up-to-date"... You've been doing this 18 years now, VERY successfully. Don't let this dude, who's, overall, been VERY good to you, but right now has a bit of an axe to grind, get you down... either about the day... or him... ... Okay...) Enough already! (Deep breaths, Steg!) While this isn't "shouting from the rooftops", Jeff, it has become a constant droning hummmmmmm, which, despite Tony's post from up in "the Red Zone", is "throwing it in my face", and, on this thread, it's kind of a double whammy. I'd rather you just [smiley=booya.gif] once and get it over with rather than this CONSTANT in my face. NOBODY, not even YOU, as you admitted, could have predicted Shanny's announcement yesteday, and, in all fairness to Street & Smith's, Mike Bell probably wasN'T even on the Broncos when the mag was rolling off the presses. None of the magazines say squat about MIKE f'n BELL!!! I'm sorry you bought the mag! :-[ I guess I'm an f'n idiot... because that IS the implication of your post. Thanks! I 'spose I won't be seeing you joining StegsList.com... :-/ (Deep breaths...) |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by Philly on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:15pm on 08/08/06 at 12:28:17, Philly wrote:
This was the assumption I made when I posted this. The commentary was more about the timeliness of the publication than anything else. Did you have a hand in the publication of Street & Smith's mag? I'm guessing not, so I wonder why you're so sensitive about my criticism of it (and of every other fantasy mag I've mentioned here). My comments about Mike Bell might be a bit self-congratulatory (I'll be more than willing to concede that point), but you're taking every one of them to be some sort of slap in the face and as a personal affront to you... |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by Philly on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:19pm on 08/08/06 at 15:34:17, StegRock wrote:
Interesting use of "has been" rather than "is"... very revealing statement there. Quote:
|
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:31pm on 08/08/06 at 17:19:09, Philly wrote:
Oh, come on... [smiley=pullleeeeeeeze.gif] That's what you pulled out of the post. How about the implication of yours? The "simple present" would NOT have captured (as in did and continues to) the spirit of ALL you've done for me and the site heretofore and now the way the "perfect [smiley=letsmakeup.gif] present" does. I didn't use the "simple past" (that would have been offensive) or the "perfect past" (that would have been REALLY offensive). So, get that out of your craw! I'm stating right here in no uncertain terms what I meant. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:38pm on 08/08/06 at 17:15:36, Philly wrote:
Jeff, to some degree they are,... when you've been praised for not "throwing it in my face"... If Tony had not made that post and I had not agreed and you not openly commented on/accepted it, I might not have felt so offended by Bell's resurfacing here again... But, if you are going to be praised for not throwing it up in my face and, furthermore, openly accept that gratitude, and then turn around and force him into a post like this, where a) it's a stretch and b) you are criticizing my perception, it just seems to fly in the face of that praise that was given. [smiley=zenmaster.gif] |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by Tony_O on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:45pm Once again............maybe I shouldn't have said anything. ;D |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 8th, 2006, 5:53pm It's all good, Toner... Jeff and I needed a little... [smiley=duel.gif] It was looooong overdue... ;) |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by sexydexy on Aug 8th, 2006, 7:39pm It almost seems like you wanted to get offended by something he said, Steg. It didn't look that inflammatory at all. |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 8th, 2006, 9:00pm on 08/08/06 at 19:39:35, sexydexy wrote:
I don't think you're totally understanding the context here... This, the Mike Bell thing, Tony's post, all the other posts by Jeff and me,... the timing,... what I've been working on and trying to do here (which isn't always apparent even to people who hang out here a lot), etc., etc. But, hey, thanks for posting. ;) |
||||
|
Title: Re: Fantasy Football Magazines Post by StegRock on Aug 10th, 2006, 8:45pm [smiley=soapboxer.gif] Back to the topic here,... let me just get this out there... What I find in (good) magazines (that I like) is good insights that are just dated, whereas, on the net it's a mixed bag. There is some good stuff, but, by and large, personally speaking, and it's one of the reasons I started this site back in '02, I see A TON of garbage. Frankly speaking, I think the draft for JYJ's league that I just participated in is (a piece of) evidence of that. I mean... That trade offer from FFX! Donovan McNabb and Mike Bell for Peyton Manning and Sebastian Janikowski (when he has no kicker)! [smiley=pullleeeeeeeze.gif] Yikes! As if... I mentioned something in the thread "between the 20's" for JYJ's league about "what level of competition FFX is used to based on what he was calling 'steals'." Hmmmm... [smiley=hmmmm.gif] I mean... Have yous looked at some of these sites??? On a few of them, the ENGLISH is SO BAD... On one of them, it's almost UNreadable,... and that dude performed last year and drafted again this year "commensurately"!!! [smiley=gimmeabreak.gif] Anyway, I just find that the analysis of (good) magazines, though not incredible fonts of (timely) information, give me a springboard from which to apply my own thoughts and thought process as opposed to looking for web sites to tell me what to think, and trying to "average it all out" in my head. I and this web site, especially StegsList.com (http://www.stegslist.com), ;) are about exercising and training the "fantasy football" mind, not, contrary to the perception of some, telling you what to think, period and per se. It's about learning how to think it through (for yourself). That's why I don't like sites and forums filled with one-line or, in any case, VERY short "analyses" (VERY loose usage of the term). That's telling me (what they think is) the case, not giving me enough to really think it through. Only when you talk things out both with others and in your own head, can you get to the heart of the matter. And, I find that a "rough sketch", like that of a (good) magazine, is just that, and nothing else. Follow...??? [smiley=zenmaster.gif] |
||||
|
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1! YaBB © 2000-2002, Xnull. All Rights Reserved. |