Fantasy Football Strategy: Don't Be a Fool, Play Your Studs
You would think after eight years of playing solid fantasy football, I would have it all figured out. Week 6 was upon me and I had my lineup all set except for QB. I have always prided myself in my research before game time. I look at individual match ups, history, current stats, and even game-time weather. However, I learned an important lesson after week 6 this Fantasy Football season. Don't be an idiot, play your studs!
Two weeks earlier, I had picked up Matt Hasselbeck off the waiver wire to back up my stud QB Matt Schaub. Hass exploded for 240 yards and four touchdowns against the Jacksonville Jaguars that week. I thought, "Wow, I just grabbed another Stud QB!". Before this I had Mark Sanchez (San-chize) of the New York Jets and obviously dropped him for his INTs.
Week 6 Matt Hasselbeck was facing the 32nd Ranked Pass Defense of the Arizona Cardinals while Matt Schaub was facing a tough Cincinnati Defense that had a good secondary. Every Fantasy Football expert I read that week was predicting a huge week for Hass and a low week for Schaub. Seattle weather was great and Cincinnati was a little wet. T. J. Houshmandzadeh would overpower the corners, while Andre Johnson would face double coverage from the Bengals. The Bengals had allowed just five catches for 45 yards and NO TDs to No. 1 WRs.
Everything in my gut said to go with the proven, healthy, and consistent QB on my roster, but I fell into one of the worst traps that great Fantasy Footballers dive into sometimes...OVER-ANALYSIS. It was 10 minutes to Kickoff and I went with the match up pick, Matt Hasselbeck.
- Matt Hasselbeck 10 of 29 for 112 yards, zero touchdowns (0 points)
- Matt Schaub 28 of 40 for 392 yards, four touchdowns ( 38 points )
I lost Week Six by 11 points. Morale of the story...play your Stud players that you thought were worthy of high draft picks. The great ones find a way to have a great game no matter what. Don't always go for the Hail Mary picks, consistency will win 9 out of 10 times.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?