Ian Allan answers your fantasy football questions. In this edition. Should Denard Robinson be eligible as both a running back and as a wide receiver? Is there any point in saving a roster spot for Nick Foles? And which defenses should be targeted for late-season success?

Question 1

With Foles gone 6-8 weeks, would you drop him? He conceivably could be available in Week 16 for the fantasy championship. More importantly, Dalton is now my QB1, and that doesn't really excite me. Please rate these QBs in order based on the rest of the season: Orton, Sanchez, Glennon, Bridgewater, Davis, Carr, Mettenberger.

Richard Weber (Fort Myers, FL)

Dalton certainly was terrible last night. When you factor in what he’s being paid (he signed that $115 extension, recall), the inflation of passing numbers in today’s game and the level of opposition (he wasn’t playing on the road against the Legion of Boom) I believe that was the worst game by a quarterback in NFL history. He finished 10 of 33 for 86 yards, with 3 interceptions, and he just looked lost all night. He consistently missed wide-open targets, and he had the weird play where he lost sense of where he was and attempted a pass 5 yards past the line of scrimmage. Clearly, you will need other quarterbacking options going forward. I suppose it makes sense that in a 12-team league, some team should be stashing Foles to cover the possibility that he returns in Week 16 and puts up good numbers at Washington. He carved up that defense pretty well back in Week 3. But I’m not particularly interested in being the guy who’s holding him. As far as the guys you list, Sanchez and Orton are the two who interest me. I think Sanchez probably will be a top-10 quarterback. Maybe even in the top half dozen. We’ll know more after Monday’s game, but right now my expectation is that he’ll be pretty similar to Foles. That’s a good offense, and they’re scoring their touchdowns through the air. Orton is the other one I like. Since he moved into the starting lineup, he’s averaged 282 passing yards, with 9 TDs in four games. He’s definitely got some quality starts in him.

3 Comments | Add Comment

Question 2

Thanks for all you've done over the years with Fantasy Football. Our league is in it's 23rd year and you've always been a trusted reference. Please forgive me if you've dealt with this elsewhere but we're having a major dispute in our league about Denard Robinson and his position eligibility. You are likely aware Yahoo still has him as an RB/WR which allows owners to plug him in at a position he has never played in his life. Some think if it's Yahoo's mistake it's fair game – live with it. Others think we should overrule yahoo and fix it. I want to do what is right and fair and was just hoping for an opinion from a trusted source. Help us please before we hurt each other.

JEFF LITTLE (Mississauga, ON)

I don’t think Yahoo! is out in left field. The two most common ways to determine positional eligibility, I think, are either to go with how the team has designated the player, or how he is listed at NFL.com. Most of these websites (like Yahoo!) defer to the teams or NFL.com when it comes to positions. In this case, Robinson is listed as a running back at NFL.com, but he’s a WR/RB on the team’s official website. So it’s reasonable, I think, for him to also be eligible as both a wide receiver and a running back in fantasy circles, even though he’s not really playing as a wide receiver. An attorney might argue that this really isn’t any different than Jimmy Graham being eligible as a tight end, when far more often he’s lining up as a wide receiver. I would guess that if you reviewed the game films, there will be a few plays where Robinson initially lines up as a tailback, then motions out and lines up as a wide receiver. But whatever. The key is equal access. All of the owners in your league were aware that Robinson was eligible as a WR and a RB. So everyone had an equal opportunity to exploit this loophole. That’s fair, isn’t it? If somebody wanted him tightened to being only a running back, the time to raise that point is before Robinson has been placed on a fantasy roster. That didn’t occur here, so I think he’s locked into being a double-position player. The slippery slope, I think, occurs when positions start changing during the season. When I draft Robinson as a WR/RB in August, I think it’s fair that I should be able to use him as a WR/RB all through the season. If a team changes a player’s position in October (which isn’t the case here) I don’t think the player’s position should change in fantasy leagues. The problem with relying on teams is that it creates the potential that they’ll try something funny. Last year, recall, Jacksonville listed Robinson as an OW – “Offensive Weapon” – saying he’d contribute as a running back, wide receiver, kick returner and change-of-pace quarterback. The Steelers had Kordell Stewart listed as a QB-WR in the mid-‘90s. The most controversial positional dispute, I think, occurred in 2006. The Saints announced Marques Colston as a tight end when they drafted him, and he snuck into some fantasy leagues as a tight end; that became controversial when Colston started putting up huge numbers as a wide receiver. Late in the 2011, Joe Webb was listed as a wide receiver for the Vikings and they decided to make him their starting quarterback. Anyway, my vote is that these kind of guys should be considered fair game; the credit should go to franchise in each league with the vision to tap into that added potential.

1 Comment | Add Comment

Question 3

Looking ahead to weeks 14-17 (yes it goes through week 17) which D's look the most appealing?

JOHN RUPPE (Fort Myers, FL)

It makes sense to look some at scheduling. If you’re playing against an offense like the Broncos, you’re simply not going to get many sacks or interceptions. Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Aaron Rodgers, Alex Smith and Colin Kaepernick aren’t throwing interceptions. We want to avoid those offenses, in general. Anyway, if you take the sack and interception numbers from every offense and plug them into the NFL schedule, it works out this way. The following teams project to see the most sacks and interceptions in the final four weeks of the season. (I’m leaving fumbles and touchdowns out of it, since I think they involve more luck). Using 2 points for interceptions and 1 for sacks, it looks like Houston, Tennessee and Detroit project to play the most favorable schedules, while the Bengals, Bills and 49ers will play the worst schedules.

Of course, that’s only half of the equation. Buffalo and Kansas City might appear down near the bottom, but those are really good defenses. Similarly, if a defense is really crappy, I don’t care what schedule it’s playing. So we must then weight the schedule against the actual unit itself. Following that process, the half-dozen best defenses in Weeks 14-17 should be: Houston, Minnesota, Tennessee, Detroit, Miami, New England, Buffalo, Cleveland and Green Bay. That would be my first rough-draft list. Based on this combination of how they’ve played and who they’re playing there are three defenses in the bottom 10 that everybody thought was going to be good: Seattle, San Francisco and Cincinnati.

Anyway, that’s a start for you. Rankings don’t include kick returners. Nor do they factor in allowing points or yards. But it’s a start.

1 Comment | Add Comment

Question 4

Because of bye week issues, I need to drop either Branden Oliver or Alfred Blue in a 12-team PPR league. I have plenty of good RBs and WRs, so the only issue is which one would help one of the other teams if they picked up either of these. I've looked at the team who has Arian Foster, and he has no player that I'm interested in trading for (whom he would realistically be willing to trade), so that's not an option. Help!

Dave (MOJO) Smith (Walls, MS)

I think Oliver will be a Danny Woodhead type guy going forward, so he has some nominal value in PPR formats. He’s a warm-body type guy who can start if necessary. That may sound weird, since he’s not even starting for his NFL team. But there will be many weeks that he catches 4-5 passes (I think), and he’ll be a top-20 running back in the PPR format in those weeks. Like Woodhead, though, Oliver isn’t a special player. He’s a depth-type guy rather than a player who’s going to win any championships. With Alfred Blue, there’s the potential he’ll start a game or two while Arian Foster comes back from his groin injury. As luck would have it, Houston’s next two games are against Cleveland and Cincinnati, which both have bottom-3 run defenses right now. I would definitely check your fantasy schedule to see if you’re playing the Foster franchise in Week 11 or 12. If so, it would make sense, I think, to hang onto Blue.

Add Comment

Question 5

A lot can change in two weeks. Thanks for the recent dynasty league WR rankings, but would you still rank these young receivers the same way. Justin Hunter, Jarvis Landry, Donte Moncrief, John Brown, Martavis Bryant, Cody Latimer?

JOHN BENNETT (Chino, CA)

In today’s NFL, every team is averaging 1-2 TD passes per game. A third of the league is going to finish with 30-plus touchdowns this year. It’s about latching onto those powerhouse quarterbacks who are going to throw 42, 45, even 50 touchdowns. With Andrew Luck, the Colts are going to be one of those teams for years. So I will go with Donte Moncrief as the top guy in that group. He hasn’t played much as a rookie, but I like what I’ve seen. Hakeem Nicks can’t play anymore, and Reggie Wayne is awfully long in the tooth. Hilton and Moncrief are going to pile up a lot of catches, yards and touchdowns in the next half dozen years. Bryant looks strong; he’s fast and they’ll use that size in the red zone. I’ve seen enough from him that I think it’s safe to call him a keeper. So let’s call him No. 2. John Brown is similar in value; they’ve got the deal where they’ll be rolling over quarterbacks, though. Jarvis Landry keeps making plays (did you see his touchdown on Sunday), so I’ll go with him next, even though Justin Hunter has that freaky size-speed skill set. While I’m ranking Hunter next-to-last, I don’t see him as too far behind all of those other guys. Cody Latimer, I think, is the worst of the group. He’s a big talented guy, and I suppose it will eventually happen for him, but he’s stuck behind two great receivers, so is Peyton Manning going to be gone by the time Latimer is a starter-type guy?

1 Comment | Add Comment

Question 6

Its getting to be crunch-time and I have the good dilemma of having 5 good WR and 3 good RBs. I have a hard time identifying who to bench. We start 2 RB 3 WR and a flex. Forte, Cobb, and L. Miller are the must starts. Then I have Forsett, Fitzgerald, White, Edelman, and Smith Sr.. Who would you trust more down the stretch? Steve Smith seems to have a lot less intensity and has tailed off. Edelman disappeared for a month and White has the issue of his offensive line. I guess I would lean toward having Forsett in flex and starting White and Fitzgerald most weeks. Are Edelman and Steve the odd men out here?

David Kennedy (Steamburg, NY)

It’s matchup driven, and you put out a different five every week. To me, Forte and Cobb are the only two who have played well enough to earn the right to be in the lineup regardless of matchup. Miller’s finished with fewer than 65 rushing yards in all but two of his games; he’s not quite there for me. Fitzgerald has been picking up recently; he’ll be starting a lot of game.

Add Comment

Question 7

Who do you think has more value going forward Roddy White or Martavis Bryant? Larry Donnell or Owen Daniels?

JOHN RUPPE (Fort Myers, FL)

I think Bryant will catch more touchdowns that White, but if you’re in a league giving credit for catches or yards, then I think White makes more sense. With the tight ends, it’s Donnell easily. He’s catching more passes and touchdowns. With the Ravens, there’s that weird dynamic of looking for the secondary backup-type around the goal line. The Ravens have thrown 5 TD passes to tight ends, but all but one of those scores hasn’t gone to their starting tight end.

Add Comment

Question 8

I have very much enjoyed your work for 20 years or so now! Interesting note you had about Bills pass defense in yesterday's update. What you may not remember about the Pats game was that Aaron Williams was out. Bills did not stand a chance with those TEs without him. He is the QB of the secondary and is why the Bills aren't suffering from Byrd's loss as much as the national media thought they would. Don't be hyping the guy too much though. Losing one guy was enough. BTW he has made Leodis a much better player too. Along with Coach Henderson.

Michael Martin (West Seneca, NY)

Thanks for the heads up. Bills are playing on Thursday next week, so I will take a careful, full-game look at their secondary in that game.

Add Comment