OT RipCityTwo Fantasy Football

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
@HAAK72 Looks like you need 17 points from Giovanni Bernard to win. Gonna be close.
 
HAAK72 said:
...luckily the Giants have suspect D vs RB's!
Click to expand...
Skip running the ball, they need to throw it to AJ Green every play! I need 14 points from him tonight! But I guess I would like to see Bones lose as well (for playoff seeding :) ). So how about Green has a huge first half and then they can run the ball the rest of the way.
 
...apparently a lot of W's are riding on the game tonight!
 
I voted to allow the Gronk trade, but don't really get it. I understand Gronk hasn't done too much this season and there is injury concern, but...it's Gronk. I feel like you could have gotten a little more for him.
 
trailblazer18 said:
I voted to allow the Gronk trade, but don't really get it. I understand Gronk hasn't done too much this season and there is injury concern, but...it's Gronk. I feel like you could have gotten a little more for him.
Click to expand...
I want you guys to vote to veto. There's no way that trade is even close to fair.
 
In the past 5 games:
Matthews has gone over 8 points ONCE.
Fleener has gone over 7 points ONCE.
Gronk has gone over 16 points 4 TIMES.

Vote on it so that I don't have to do it upright and piss off this guy myself.
 
Last edited:
BonesJones said:
I want you guys to vote to veto. There's no way that trade is even close to fair.
Click to expand...
I understand that sentiment, but Gronk is possibly battling injury now and hasn't done normal Gronk stuff this season yet, so I voted to allow it. Even though it is an unfair trade in my mind.

Also, as the commissioner of the league, not sure if it is appropriate to lobby to veto a trade...haha. Are you David Stern? :)
 
trailblazer18 said:
I understand that sentiment, but Gronk is possibly battling injury now and hasn't done normal Gronk stuff this season yet, so I voted to allow it. Even though it is an unfair trade in my mind.

Also, as the commissioner of the league, not sure if it is appropriate to lobby to veto a trade...haha. Are you David Stern? :)
Click to expand...
I take that back, Gronk has done quite of bit of Gronk things this season.
 
trailblazer18 said:
I understand that sentiment, but Gronk is possibly battling injury now and hasn't done normal Gronk stuff this season yet, so I voted to allow it. Even though it is an unfair trade in my mind.

Also, as the commissioner of the league, not sure if it is appropriate to lobby to veto a trade...haha. Are you David Stern? :)
Click to expand...
Most commissioners would straight up veto it so in my mind I'm being righteous lmao. And what do you mean he hasn't done normal Gronk stuff? Over the 4 weeks before last he averaged 22.5 points per game. His injury also isn't serious and he might miss a week, maximum.
 
BonesJones said:
Most commissioners would straight up veto it so in my mind I'm be righteous lmao. And what do you mean he hasn't done normal Gronk stuff? Over the 4 weeks before last he averaged 22.5 points per game. His injury also isn't serious and he might miss a week, maximum.
Click to expand...
Updated my vote...but I blame you if there is any fallout over it..haha
 
trailblazer18 said:
Updated my vote...but I blame you if there is any fallout over it..haha
Click to expand...
Lol the dude doesn't post on here. We were struggling to get 10 so I added him then we got 11 so I added my cousin (Gear) who doesn't post on here either.

Problem is this is the dude I watch football with at Buffalo. If I vetod it myself there would probably be no buffalo on Sunday lmao.
 
I agreed to it because Mathews has been the best RB I've been offered for him (my biggest need)!and he also added a serviceable TE to get me by for a week or so if needed. Yes Gronk is dynamic but he also gets hurt a lot. I get it though if you all veto the deal though
 
RipCityWarrior said:
I agreed to it because Mathews has been the best RB I've been offered for him (my biggest need)!and he also added a serviceable TE to get me by for a week or so if needed. Yes Gronk is dynamic but he also gets hurt a lot. I get it though if you all veto the deal though
Click to expand...
You could get a lot better RB if you tried. That's the problem. And Fleener isn't serviceable, 4 out of the past 5 weeks he's had 7 points or less. Its like you're trading C.J. McCollum for Willie Cauley-Stein and Anthony Tolliver.
 
BonesJones said:
You could get a lot better RB if you tried. That's the problem. And Fleener isn't serviceable, 4 out of the past 5 weeks he's had 7 points or less. Its like you're trading C.J. McCollum for Willie Cauley-Stein and Anthony Tolliver.
Click to expand...
Well when you put it like that.... veto away! My basketball knowledge is definitely better than my football.
 
RipCityWarrior said:
Well when you put it like that.... veto away! My basketball knowledge is definitely better than my football.
Click to expand...
The logic makes sense if you were getting better players, you're just getting crappy players for the best TE in the league.

You can go vote to veto it. It needs two more veto votes. I don't want to do it myself.
 
Anybody interested in Newton or Brady? I'm not actually completely sure which one I want to keep..
 
BonesJones said:
The logic makes sense if you were getting better players, you're just getting crappy players for the best TE in the league.

You can go vote to veto it. It needs two more veto votes. I don't want to do it myself.
Click to expand...
Can we work a three way trade? I would take Gronk, give you Reed, and I can throw in Gates and you can throw in a solid RB to Rip City?
 
trailblazer18 said:
Can we work a three way trade? I would take Gronk, give you Reed, and I can throw in Gates and you can throw in a solid RB to Rip City?
Click to expand...
Yeah we could do something like that. I want a solid 3rd RB though. I have an abundance of WRs to trade.
 
BonesJones said:
Yeah we could do something like that. I want a solid 3rd RB though. I have an abundance of WRs to trade.
Click to expand...
I meant I would give rip city Gates. It would look like this:

Bones receives: Reed
Trailblazer receives: Gronk
Rip City receives: Gates + a RB from Bones or another piece rip city is interested in.

Just an idea since you were interested in Reed previously.
 
Need one more vote to veto. Anyone, please?
 
Anyone here? Lol. Just need one more veto vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top