Fantasy Football Projections Week 9: Chris Johnson Will Get Back on Track
It is tough when one of your top players gets off to an underwhelming start like Chris Johnson this season.
There are a few players that were projected high or thought to be great prospects for the fantasy season, and they have just flat out not worked out yet.
Here are three players that will get back on track this week.
Chris Johnson, RB, Tennessee Titans
Johnson has only one 100-yard rushing game this season, yet the Titans are doing well.
This is something that will make most scratch their heads and think about for a second, but Matt Hasselbeck has taken control of the Titans and done well on his new team.
Johnson needs to start carrying more of his weight, especially since he just signed a four-year extension.
His 2012 salary will drop by $300,000 if he does not run for 1,000 yards this season. That is a whole lot of incentive to get back on track this week against the Cincinnati Bengals.
Kevin Kolb, QB, Arizona Cardinals
The Arizona Cardinals had high hopes for Kevin Kolb when they traded for him during this offseason.
They felt that he would be the perfect Band-Aid for their quarterback issues last season.
Kolb has been doing better and appears to be better understanding the offense, and this means that he will have a breakout game against the St. Louis Rams, who will still be in a daze after pulling off one of the most shocking upsets of the season last Sunday against the New Orleans Saints.
Ryan Grant, RB, Green Bay Packers
Ryan Grant is a power runner who has not been a player to start so far this season because he has done nothing to grant him a good-faith start.
James Starks is the No. 1 running back for Green Bay, but the San Diego Chargers will force Grant to take more carries than he has been because the Packers will need to implement a bit of a power-running game.
Look for Grant to get on a bit of a roll and get on track this Sunday against the Chargers.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?