Fantasy Football Today - Week 7 NFL DFS Main Slate - How to navigate a 10-game DFS slate in Week 7 | Daily Fantasy Advice

Episode Date: October 21, 2023

Join our Weekly DFS Contest Sia Nejad and Mike McClure dive into the best plays for week 7 in your DFS slate. (02:52) - Lions (+3) at Ravens (42) (09:23) - Bills (-9) at Patriots (41) (14:29) -Browns (-3) at Colts (40) (17:30) - Commanders (-2.5) at Giants (39) (21:34) - Falcons (+2.5) at Buccaneers (38) (26:09) - Raiders (-3) at Bears (37.5) (30:51) - Cardinals (+7.5) at Seahawks (45) (34:20) - Steelers (+3) at Rams (43.5) (37:05) - Chargers (+5.5) at Chiefs (48) (44:20) - Packers (-1) at Broncos (45) (48:02) - Mike's Top 3 (50:35) - Sia's Cheat Sheet (52:15) - Mike's Cheat Sheet 'Fantasy Football Today DFS' is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, Castbox, and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Follow our FFT DFS team on Twitter: @FFToday, @Mike5754 @SiaNejad Watch FFT DFS on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/fantasyfootballtoday Join our Facebook group https://www.facebook.com/groups/FantasyFootballToday/ Sign up for the FFT newsletter https://www.cbssports.com/newsletter You can listen to Fantasy Football Today DFS on your smart speakers! Simply say "Alexa, play the latest episode of the Fantasy Football Today podcast" or "Hey Google, play the latest episode of the Fantasy Football Today podcast." To hear more from the CBS Sports Podcast Network, visit https://www.cbssports.com/podcasts/ To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

What's up everybody and welcome to fantasy football today DFS you've got an exciting 10 game slate of course it's our game by game preview i am joined by mike mcclure mike how's it going doing well see i fired up for this week uh i like when we get these 10 game slates versus the 12 13 14 uh just condenses the player pool a little bit uh makes some of those stances that you take a little more important as well so i i like slates like this a few matchups i really like yeah and what's interesting too and we touched on this on Tuesday with Megan Schaub is that you know a lot of these totals are really low other than really the the main game that everybody wants at least some pieces in which of course is Chargers

Kansas City Chiefs there's a lot of like lower totals but but you know one thing I stress and I want your comment here before we actually dive into the slate just because a total is low it doesn't mean it's not a good DFS total is low, it doesn't mean it's not a good DFS game. It doesn't mean it's not a stackable game. What I like to concentrate a lot on is concentration of targets. And if the target share is going to be among one or two or three guys, then it's a great game to stack, even if it's a 42-point total. Any comment there? Am I sort of misrepresenting it or do people kind of look at totals and that that's what they go with. They go with the three games that have the high

totals on a regular slate and they're kind of ignoring maybe some of the lower totals with a concentrated target share or concentrated attempted distribution. Yeah, no, I mean, I think people definitely gravitate towards those totals. And, you know, it's something that used to work, frankly, you know, you look back five, six, seven, eight, 10 years ago, at this point, you could basically stack the three highest totals and ensure that you're at least not going to lose money. However, everyone knows that those are great plays. So it does create a ton of value. When you look at some of the other lower totals out there, As you mentioned, volume is definitely king. And just understanding ownership percentages in general and just understanding probabilities. You could give

me a game with a total of 25 and there would still be a price point on certain players where it'd be worth playing them based on ownership and everything else. So it's really about understanding that more so than having to play a game because of where the total sits. Absolutely. I love that. So let me, so we're going to go to Lions Ravens,

but let me just remind everybody and Nada who's, who's producing this show so very well, he's already put our DFS contest in the chat. So if you're in the chat right now, like Richie Smalls is Reed Thompson, Rob Gallegos, go ahead and sign up for that contest. It's only $5.

Tell your friends about the contest. We usually have it pretty full by Saturday, Saturday night, but we definitely have at least 100 spots left. So go ahead and register for that contest. If you're listening to the podcast, obviously it's always going to be in the podcast description, always in the YouTube description as well. So, Mike, let's dive in.

10-game slate. I think we have – what's the distribution i think it might be six four um early to afternoon um maybe seven no i think it's six four so we'll find out as we go but lions plus three at the ravens a 42 point total this is one of those games and there's going to be a lot of games where i think we sort of have to check the weather and make sure we know what we're getting into right What I'm seeing right now, Mike, is winds like in that 20 mile per hour range in this game. I see it in the Giants game, Giants hosting the Commanders. I see it in maybe one other game where the winds are somewhat high.

I guess that New England game, it's in that 15 to 20 range. Let me ask you, before we get into Lions-Ravens, do you have a hard and fast rule when it comes to the wind and playing a game or coming off of a game? Not a ton. I mean, I guess the hard, fast rule would be north of 20 miles per hour sustained. That's a big deal. If you see gusts close to 30, that can impact deep passing game can impact uh kicking but i think the most important thing if you really are going to deep dive into the weather when it comes to wind i think you really need to understand the orientation of the wind in the stadium uh that that's what's going to matter you know if it's a dead headwind or tailwind it could take distance or add distance on certain things but what you really want to avoid is the strong i would say you know 18 to 25 mile per hour

winds that are truly a cross wind at any time that's what's going to add the most unpredictability but again like we talk about it's really player specific game script specific um you know looking at tendencies what kind of average depth of target does a quarterback have in general? I think that that you still have to apply the context. I think that it would be a mistake to just see 25 mile per hour wins and say, okay, I can't play as many quarterbacks or wide receivers in this game. Obviously I think it's most important on a showdown slate. I know we're covering a main slate here, but when the kickers come into play, what this does is, you know, it does impact deep throws.

But really what it kind of has the most impact on is just overall decision making from a team standpoint when it comes to those third down plays and fourth down plays at certain portions of the field. So it's more relevant in sports betting. It's more relevant in showdown slates. But definitely something to pay attention to here on a main slate. So I think this game is really interesting because on first blush, when you look at this slate, I mean, I think a lot of people might want to get pieces of this game. I mean, there's certainly a lot of dynamic pieces. Like for example, when I first looked at this, I was thinking, okay, Lamar stack with Zay Flowers or maybe Mark Andrews. But for me, you know, Zay Flowers in that mid 5k range makes a lot of sense with Lamar. On the other side,

I mean, Goff has been really good, not just at home, but he's been a good, he's been good away from home. And even if you don't want to play Goff, Amon Ross St. Brown is always in play. If you played him last week, you got him at low percentage and he absolutely smashed for you. He's just getting so many targets. He's so efficient. And then, of course, Laporta, 5,300. By the way, Amon Ra is 8,000. I mentioned Zay Jones, 5,700. Jameer Gibbs, you know, David Montgomery is out. I'm just curious, is this a game where you're getting a lot of pieces?

I know, knowing you, you're probably getting some pieces in that Chiefs-Chargers game, just like most people are. I just wonder, is this a game to sneaky stack or to get a lot of pieces of? I think it could be sneaky. Yes. Laporta is someone that's always interesting. His ownership would be fascinating.

Pretend this Chargers-Chiefs game was the Sunday night game and things were flipped. Laporta's ownership would be insanely high on the slate. But Travis Kelsey is going to eat into a little bit of that. I like Zay Flowers, $5,700. I think it's a really nice price point for him. Again, watch the weather. But I do think that it is a game that he can have a ton of success. So I like him.

The price point is starting to creep up, though. He's somewhat similar to a guy like Tyler Lockett, in my opinion. You know, the offense, they've got a ton of options. And they don't always find themselves in some of the high-scoring games. So I'm not getting to as much as I thought I would in this game. I've got a little tiny pieces of Zay, a little bit of Amandra. The price point on Amandra, I think that he's going to be a great contrarian option this week.

I think people are going to pay up for a few other wide receivers. And then Jameer Gibbs is the guy that, like, there will be a breakout at some point i'm not sure if it's this matchup on the road uh but at 6300 i i don't mind it i think there's a number of guys in that range like i think isaiah pacheco is going to be popular right if you wanted to make that pivot to gibbs and pay 200 more uh not a lot of people are going to do it. It could work, but mostly it's not a stack for me. I'll have a little bit of Zay Flowers and a little bit of La Porta, and that's probably it. Yeah, and I see a question here, Michael Pittman or Zay Flowers. Hannibal, I don't know if that's

a DFS question or not. I mean, I think in season long, I would probably go with Flowers there considering the matchup against Cleveland. I think in DFS, I'd probably do the same as well. I think I might, you know, if I'm going to rate three stacks and I'm going to play three stacks, I think Lamar, a Lamar stack is probably on the outside looking in for me because there's just other stacks that I like. Like, you know, I don't play more than three stacks typically. It's usually actually just two. So yeah, I think I'm going to be off of this game. I do think I'm going to get pieces. It's not going to be Jameer Gibbs. I might play Laporta because here's what I think is going to happen. People are going to play Kelsey or they're going to drop way down and play a guy like Michael Mayer, who makes a lot of sense at 2,700. So I think Laporta, to your point

about ownership, I think he gets phased out a little bit at 5,300. I think that's pretty good value, especially when you consider, Mike, that just people don't, they either want to pay up for tight end or they want to pay down, right? They're not going in that sort of middle range, in that 5K-ish range, right? Yeah. Definitely. I think Laporte is a great call out. I do think he'll take a little ownership, but not as much as he should,

especially when you've seen the upside. What I mean by that is not necessarily the upside in scoring 27 fantasy points like he has. Eleven targets last week, only caught four of them. You've got to expect a little better efficiency on that combination. And I think it will come, but just it's very encouraging to see a guy like that getting 11 targets. Yeah, I'm definitely going to pull some pieces from this game. I might pepper him in a Monro, but it's going to be really hard to fit him into lineups. And I said the same thing last week to everybody's detriment, right?

Because Amon Ra, if you played him, he was really good. So know that the ownership is probably going to be a little lower than it should be. So if you want to pepper him in, that's fine. Again, check the weather

on these games as well. Speaking of weather, Bills minus nine at the Patriots. It's a 41 point total. We do have to monitor the weather here because it does look like winds might be up a little bit. Maybe a chance of rain, but I don't think so there.

Listen, if you want to play an Allen stack to Diggs and just get away from the expensive stacks, let's say in that Chargers game. I mean, more power to you. It's 8,200 for Josh Allen. It's 8,900 for Stefan Diggs. That's tough to muster. But Mike, I got to imagine nobody's really doing that. So I'm just curious, if you were rating a top three stacks, would Allen and Diggs be anywhere near that, or they're just too expensive points per dollar? It doesn't make sense. I think it's too expensive overall, just considering some of the opportunity costs this week.

However, I do love Diggs individually. The price point is high at $8,900900 but the guy has been absolutely incredible they were vocal in the offseason about how frustrated he was you've seen the frustration with Josh Allen Josh Allen has rewarded him he is very clearly the number one option and it's been in any kind of game script if it's a game where the wind is actually bothering you've got a little bit of an injury he goes to what's comfortable you're going to see a ton of targets some of them around the line of scrimmage when you look at at this performance from Stephon Diggs, they played six games this year. He has 100 plus receiving yards in five of six. The game that he didn't,

he was seven for seven, seven targets, seven catches, 66 yards. They were blowing out the Raiders 38 to 10 in that game. Diggs has been absolutely incredible. I think it'll continue. I think this is one where they could dominate this game against New England. It could be even a low-scoring game where they only score 20-21 points win the game 21-10, low-scoring affair, where Diggs still has 10 catches, 100 yards, and a touchdown. Yeah, I like that.

And by the way, if you want to play this game, one thing I'm looking at right now because I'm looking at the 4 o'clock games, 100 yards and touchdown yeah i like that and by the way if you want to play this game you know one thing i'm looking at right now because i'm looking at the four o'clock games and they start with uh pittsburgh uh against the ramps or i should say arizona seattle is a four o'clock game we've got uh pittsburgh versus the rams we've got the chargers chiefs and we've got green bay denver so there's obviously like three games there that people are going to want to play if you just don't want to in those three games by the way, are the Seattle game, the Rams game, and the Chiefs game.

If you don't want to get involved in deciding with those games, this might be a good time to play the early slate and just make a call on Josh Allen and Stephon Diggs or just Stephon Diggs and make a call on Lamar Jackson. It really is. I think this is the perfect week where if you were going to experiment in a tournament specifically, I think this might be the week to just kind of make a play and just kind of stamp out those games that are the high profile games that are on the four o'clock slate. Maybe do one or two tournaments like that. And by the way, Scott da Wisconsin, Florida project guy, longest name ever.

He says, what's the difference between a money game in quotes and a tournament. So it's actually called a cash game. And what, what that is, and I'll just do this real quick. Cash games are double ups, essentially. You can do head to head, but most people are referring to double ups where you're in a field of, let's say, a thousand people, 1600 people, and basically the top half get paid. Those lineups are kind of orchestrated a little bit differently because you can go with the chalky lineups, the higher owned guys. That's a really good way to maintain your bankroll because in tournaments, really only the top 20-ish percent are getting paid. Whereas in a double-up, the top 50 percent, it's really about like 47 percent, are getting paid. Again, in terms of maintaining bankroll, you don't have to have

that really good lineup to cash in double-ups. You just have to have a good lineup. So play some double-ups, play some tournaments, and try to sort of maintain that bankroll. Even when you don't hit the tournaments, maybe you're hitting the cash games and you're seeing some green at the end of the slate. I'll say this before we get off this Bill's Patriots game. I love Kendrick Bourne at 4,400. I mean, I just think the value on Kendrick, he's just such an underappreciated receiver. He gets a ton of targets, a ton of volume. He's a guy that if you were going to run a stack, I'd run it back with Kendrick Bourne. But I think Kendrick Bourne's a guy you can play independently. Any thoughts on him before we move to Browns

Colts? Yeah, I don't mind it. I definitely think that you're going to need some of that as well. I think that's one thing we have to talk about. If we want to play some of these more expensive players, some of these really great games, you're going to have to make decisions. And I personally think looking for those target guys in undervalued spots when it comes to low totals, I think that's going to be what separates who ends up winning and doesn't this week. Yeah, absolutely. One more thing on this Bills game. So Josh Allen

did have like a bit of a shoulder, I don't want to call it a stinger, but he had a bit of a shoulder issue when he landed on it last week. And what I've seen in terms of him commenting on it, because the reporters have asked him about it, he says, I believe the words he used were it's just a pain management thing. But when I saw him go down and try to shake out his shoulders towards the end of the game last week, I mean, it didn't look great to me. So, I mean, it wouldn't shock me if they, like maybe down the stretch of that game, sort of protect Josh Allen by getting James Cook a little bit more involved. We know Damian Harris isn't going to play.

Hopefully he's doing okay. But Latavius Murray, I'm not saying to play those guys necessarily. I'm just saying I wouldn't be shocked if it's more of a conservative game plan that doesn't mean I'm not going to take a chance on Josh on I just don't want people to be surprised if they're like oh shoulder injury I didn't know there was a shoulder injury like he definitely he definitely had something at the end of the game there uh unfortunately so um look out for that uh Browns versus Colts not much to look out for here in my opinion I mean this Browns defense is ferocious. I don't know that I want to play any Colts, especially with

Gardner Minshew at the helm. I mean, obviously there's always guys like Josh Downs who you could take a chance on. But again, it's the Browns defense. Looks like Deshaun Watson is trending towards playing. There are guys, Mike, like Jerome Ford or Kareem Hunt. I mean, specifically Jerome Ford, 5,100 on DraftKings, who I

think is at least playable at the colts the browns defense certainly playable at 3300 are you going anywhere in this game not really um you know the only thing i could say if you want to play this in a contrarian sense in terms of tournament play it's jonathan taylor uh and reason for that, no one wants to play him, right? The usage isn't quite back to where we thought it would be. There's obviously been turmoil with the team, working himself back into shape, ready to play, all that. Now you have a tough defensive matchup against Cleveland.

However, when you look at the quarterback move, I think that they're going to dump the ball to running backs because I think they're not going to have a choice, right? So I think that Jonathan Taylor is actually a very good back out of the backfield catching passes. I just don't think they've utilized him that way as much. If you remember, this is a team that always kind of used Naeem Hines in that role. Jonathan Taylor is more than capable of doing it. We saw it last week.

The yardage is a little inflated. He did have a 40-yard reception to really kind of salvage things, but that's just simply the upside that he has. He had six targets in that game. I expect a very similar thing. I do not expect his usage to go down at any point the rest of the season. I only expect it to go up. And the reason why I mentioned him 6,500, again, no one's going to play him. We're talking single-digit ownership here. We know people want to play Pacheco. We mentioned Gibbs as a potential pivot.

I think Taylor, all the way up at 6,500, 400 more than Pacheco, is the better pivot because if this Colts offense is able to get in the red zone, it's still going to be the Jonathan Taylor show in the red zone. But I think he's got enough upside in the passing game. So I'm going to play Jonathan Taylor in one of my five lineups. Yeah. I don't mind that at all. I don't think I'm going to get to Jonathan Taylor,

but certainly from an ownership standpoint, leverage standpoint, that makes a ton of sense. Greg, who says, says Gardner will be running for his life. That's not super far from the truth. If you take that literally,

that's not super far from the truth. Let you take that literally, that's not super far from the truth. Let's see. We've got Commanders Giants next, which I think is a really intriguing game, by the way. Hopefully weather doesn't get in the way, but before we hit that, we're going to hit a break and hear a message from our partners. That's over 4,222 incidents a year. Don't let your next dig be one that causes costly delays or safety risks. Before you break ground, make it a point to request a locate. It's not just the law.

It's a step to keep your team and community safe. Visit OntarioOneCall.ca and avoid unnecessary damages to get the job done right. Data sourced from the ORCGA 2023 Dirt Report. So I'm looking at the weather, seeing if the total has gone down in this Washington Commanders game. You know, I have it listed at 39, but it looks like it's 37 and a half in a lot of places. So, I mean, I do think that might be a wind thing. Although, you know, listen, totals have been coming down. The totals, I believe, to the under were 212 and one last week. So a lot of unders are hitting again. Commanders minus two and a half. The total is now 37. When you know,

on the Tuesday show, Mike, I was really interested kind of in both quarterbacks, Tyrod Taylor and Sam Howell. They're very cheap. Obviously, both of these defenses can get exposed through the run through the pass. It just it makes a lot of sense to have interest in this game. I was thinking a Tyrod Slayton stack. I love Wandale Robinson. I just think Slayton might have a little bit more upside downfield. That's 5,100, I believe to like 3,700 or whatever Tyrod Taylor is. He's 50. I think he's 5,100. And then, and then Slayton's 3,700. You can run it back if you want with like Curtis Samuel or, you know, whatever, take a chance on a Logan Thomas, a McLaurin. Any interest in this game?

It looks like Windsor in that 20-mile-per-hour range. It's a little dangerous. But, again, both these defenses can really get exposed. I even like Saquon Barkley here. Yeah, I think there's a lot of sneaky individual pieces. I don't know that I'm going to like full on stack, maybe just a quarterback on one pass catcher. That's it.

Not multiple pass catchers. Not bring backs. Just focus on that connection. I think that's it. Not multiple pass catchers, not bring backs. Just focus on that connection. I think it's a smart way to go. I'm more interested in the Washington side personally. I think Sam Howell has some upside here. You know, we'll obviously track the weather, watch it, but he's flashed his upside already at $5,500.

I think he should be $6,000 personally. The thing with Sam Howell that I think we'll see throughout the rest of the season, he actually has a little upside with his legs. He doesn't always bring it out to play. To me, this kind of projects as a competitive game where he can do that. But you mentioned the guy that I want. The guy that I want is Curtis Samuel. I think that he is on the edge of breaking out again.

Touchdowns and back-to-back games, only $4,000, getting targeted from Sam Howell, but he's also someone who's just a playmaker in general. When you have some of the more ugly games, we've seen him consistently get a rushing attempt in a lot of games throughout his career. They find creative ways to put the football in his hands because that is where he's the most dangerous. I think they continue to do it. And, you know, based on what I'm seeing here from him, I think he should be a little more expensive. And then really what a lot of it is about, I'm prioritizing a lot of some of the bigger spends this week. So you have to have some of the salary savings. And to me, Curtis Samuel, this is a game where I think he's got a ton of upside. I think he's got multiple touchdown upside in this game. Yeah, and I should point out that, and it's funny about Curtis Samuel

because when Washington acquired him a few years ago, first of all, he started off like really injured. He had a lot of soft tissue injuries, couldn't get him on the field. But I don't know if you remember Ron Rivera. He said something to the effect of, I'm going to use him in that Christian McCaffrey role, which I know sounded kind of ridiculous because then, you know, suddenly you start comparing the two. But I don't know that

that's what he meant. But I think we're seeing this year they're utilizing, to your point, Mike, Curtis Samuel in a lot of like just it's just a very versatile role. So, I mean, I think the floor might be a little low for Curtis Samuel, in my opinion, but I think the ceiling is really high, especially against the Giants. I will say this. I kept mentioning Tyrod Taylor. I don't know that Daniel Jones has been ruled out yet. If he's not, I mean, it doesn't really change our analysis as it relates to Washington. I'm not going to be playing Daniel Jones at his neck injury

if he's actually being rolled out against Washington. But if you want to do that and take that chance, more power to you is 5,600. It's certainly a good value. Mike, are you expecting Daniel Jones to play this week? I think it's possible that he does look I I wouldn't if I was the Giants honestly I think Tyra gives him the same chance to win the football game personally but yeah I think it's a situation Jones is definitely pushing to play

which would be something I would avoid so considering the injury I would still expect him to be a little hesitant running. And that's frankly where a lot of his upside comes from. So I'm out on Jones. I'm probably out on Taylor as well. I'm really focused on that Washington side. Gotcha. All right.

Well, let's move on to a game that we're going to get to some games where there's a lot of involvement with our picks, but this isn't one of them. The Falcons, well, I don't think it is at least. The Falcons plus two and a half at the Bucs. It's a 38-point total. I'm not going to waste anybody's time here. Like, I'm not in on the Bijan experience right now because I don't know what Arthur Smith is doing. Even in, like, really important points of the game,

he's still deferring to Tyler Algier in a way that I just didn't anticipate. So while the upside is always there for Bijan Robinson, especially on this slate, I'm not willing to play it. Maybe if you're playing the early slate, maybe that's when you want to speculate on B. John Robinson because not many people are going to play him. I'm not playing anybody on the Bucs,

although I wouldn't argue with, listen, people like Rashad White because he's always cheap and he gets volume. It's the same reason people like Joe Mixon. That's not really working out for anybody. But I got to admit, Rashad White is pretty cheap. I'm not playing anybody on either side, though, are you interested in anything in this game uh just bijan for me it's more of a tournament play i think everyone is going to jump off that train uh this week um i think the options are somewhat limited you know we again we have this condensed slate

right 10 games versus the some of the full games we got a full slate of teams on the buy and like three obvious situations um one of them we haven't talked about yet but it's josh jacobs is going to be someone who's targeted heavily 100 more than bijan i i like bijan in this particular spot just as an ownership play like i'm projecting him around six to seven percent ownership i think that his skill set with the price point and just the size of the slate, I think it should be closer to 15%. So I think there's a little edge there in doing it. I'll speculate on his talent while he's young, before he has his first injury, before he has all of these things. I'm going to continue to speculate there. So I will play a

little bit of Bijan, probably just like Jonathan Jonathan Taylor it'll probably be just one of my five lineups but I will have a piece so let me say this because we have shot in the chat who mentions the Ritter to London combo which he played last week and which you know was obviously pretty amazing I don't know that I want to play that combo although you know I don't hate it because Ritter is kind of throwing it downfield a little bit and he's looked better throwing it downfield i mean he's not a good quarterback he's throwing interceptions too but he is pushing it to drake london specifically drake london's only 5100 on draft kings uh that's not a bad play especially if you assume listen even if it's a negative game script we know arthur smith likes to run the ball regardless but

drake london is sucking up a ton of targets he's been very efficient with them uh i'm sorry i overlooked him at 5100 mike do you agree with shot here that that there's some value here and certainly some upside there's value and upside uh i would say though this is a prime example of i i would not recommend playing drake london solo right i would only have interest in playing him if you're going to stack with Ritter. I think that the scenario where he just has one deep catch for a touchdown, I think that's incredibly unlikely. I think the more likely scenario, the game is competitive and he's just peppered with targets again. And the correlation here on this stack is extremely strong. So if you're willing to play him at 5,100, play Ritter at 5,200.

And when you do that, you can go get Curtis. I mean, you can go get Keenan Allen and Cooper Cup if you want. You can get really whatever you want the rest of the lineup. So I like the callout, but it's one where if I'm going to make that decision on London, I'm going all in on that being what the Atlanta Falcons do this week. And in that case, would you have a run back on the buck side? We don't have to force a run back, but there's certainly some targets to consider. There are targets to consider, but I would not force a run back on it.

I think that, you know, there's a lot of emphasis on game stacking in general. I think that when you're going to make that kind of a play, I think you just go grab the best available players at that point and, and build the lineup out the rest of the way that way. So I'd focus on that correlation of it's honestly, it's a poor man's version of Josh Allen to Stefan Diggs. If Ritter is going to focus on London like that, you're just getting a massive discount. You want to speculate. They can win a low scoring game where just the volume and the passing game goes that direction uh and then build the rest of the lineup out with the best

players is what i would do personally yeah i like it and uh abelash prasad says marquise brown is setting all sorts of green lights setting off all sorts of green lights on my spreadsheets what do you guys think we'll get to that i like marquise brown a lot speaking of value in the low 5k range marquise brown really hasn't been priced up largely because he wasn't super efficient last week specifically. But yeah, I think he could go off. Love that game too. Raiders Bears don't love this game, but there's some pieces here. Let's talk about Raiders minus three at the Bears, 37 and a half point total. We have Tyson Badgent at 4,900. I can't imagine you want to take a shot there at that division two player, but I don't know. I got to ask. Aiden O'Connell looks like he's going to be the starter for the Raiders.

I don't know that that's been confirmed. I think Jimmy G's confirmed to be out, but I don't know if it's Aiden O'Connell or Brian Hoyer, but it seems to me like it's going to be Aiden O'Connell. He's 4,700. Josh Jacobs, you mentioned him, going to be very popular, 7,400. As inefficient as he is, he's getting the volume, and we know if it's Aiden O'Connell, he loves,

at least on the one-game sample size, to check it down to Josh Jacobs. So we're going to see a lot of work there for Josh Jacobs for sure. I mentioned Michael Mayer at the tight end position. The Bears running back situation, it's not flushed out yet. It doesn't look like Roshan Johnson has cleared concussion protocol yet, which to me means it's the Deontay Foreman experience. So again, Mike, there's some pieces here. Deontay Foreman, super cheap.

Michael Mayer, super cheap. Josh Jacobs, expensive, but you can offset it with something on the other side or just move on from this game and take Jacobs and go. What do you like in this game, if anything? I like the Bears running back, whoever it is, whether it's Roshon Johnson or Deontay Foreman. I think this is a fantastic spot for it. Looking at the price point, we need some salary savings this week, at least if you're going to play the slate the way I like to, pretty much every slate. So that's where my interest will be. I could see myself playing Mayer at $2,700 in a few lineups.

That would potentially be a double tight end lineup for me, where I would be paying up for Travis Kelsey, treating him as a wide receiver in the flex spot, using Mayer as the actual tight end. You know, I want to talk about Deontay Foreman quickly. He didn't quite get the passing work that we thought he would last week. I think that that could bounce back a little bit in this matchup if that's indeed what it is and Johnson doesn't play.

But he still had 15 carries in this game and a target in the passing game. I think that's pretty good overall when you consider where some of those attempts came. He was tackled at the one-yard line and tackled at the four-yard line, not on the same possession, multiple possessions. Deontay Foreman had a ton of upside last week. That 7.7 fantasy points you saw was essentially the floor that he could have offered considering the role that he had. So I like him again. I like Johnson.

I need salary savings at running back. I will play whoever the Bears are playing at running back. Yeah, I like that. I think this is at least somewhat of an interesting game from a pieces standpoint. Honestly, on the Tuesday show, I think I actually recommended a two tight end lineup with Michael Mayer and Travis Kelsey. So I'm patting myself on the back, literally patting myself on the back for that one. Listen, we have a lot of people watching, but we don't have a ton that have hit the like button. So we're going to hear a break from one of our partners. And while we're doing that, maybe everybody hit the like button. We'll

be right back. All right. And we had a question from Reed Thompson in the chat. He says, who is the guy on the slate that is super chalky but doesn't have top 10 upside there always seems to be one on every slate i mean we do have a fade section that we're going to get into when we do our cheat sheet so maybe we answer the question there mike anybody popping off the top of your head there though before we get to that who um at running back for me it's Rashad White. He's projecting to be pretty popular. I would not play him. Let's see. And then at the cheat sheet, for me, it'll be Jacobs. It's not that he doesn't have top 10 upside.

He has top overall player upside. It's just the level of ownership. I'm projecting Josh Jacobs to be 30-plus percent on. Wow. And certainly not going to be in from an optimal lineup standpoint, like he's got negative value, I assume. I mean, we would know that right off the bat, just knowing that ownership percentage number, right?

Yes. Yeah, definitely. I would say I haven't, I don't have as true optimal until we know who's playing everywhere. I would say his actual optimal percent is probably 15, 18%. So anytime you're basically double digits over the optimal percent, it's generally a hard stance for me the other way. Would Josh Jacobs be okay in cash lineups though, for those wondering?

Yeah, no, I think he's totally fine. And to be fair, like I said, he has top overall player on the entire slate upside. Like Josh Jacobs in this game, he's got 35 to 40 fantasy point upside if things shake out that way there's no doubt that's why he's popular it's just the percent of the time that that happens doesn't quite map to his ownership level love that perfect explanation short and sweet uh cardinals plus seven and a half at the seahawks i'm going to double check this total to see if it's moved uh but meanwhile we've got the Cardinals plus 7.5.

It's a 45-point total. There's a lot to like in this game, Mike. I mean, first of all, we've got Geno Smith at 6,000, which, you know, that's... By the way, the total's down to 44.5, so it's barely moved. Geno Smith at 6,000.

You can pair him with DK Metcalf. Of course, with DK, monitor the practice reports, make sure he's a full go. He's 6,800. Lockett gets a lot of looks, 6,000. Listen, this Arizona pass defense is very bad. So if this is a back-and-forth game, Mike, I mean, Geno could really –

this could be the game where Geno, like, really goes off. On the other side, though, we got Marquise Brown. We got Josh Dobbs. We've got Michael Wilson. I'm avoiding the running back situation there. And then, of course, I leave it left off Kenneth Walker. I feel like this is a game you kind of have to get some pieces of. I'm just curious where you're headed in this one. Yeah, I want to monitor the status of DK Metcalf. He did not actually practice. Lockett

did in a limited capacity. But I definitely think this game is sneaky in terms of it could shoot out. You know, Marquise Brown, as someone has called out in the chat, we talked about a little bit. The efficiency has been awful for the most part. However, the upside is clearly there. When you look, he's got a long reception in essentially every game, you know, 22 plus yards in each of the last five games on the longest reception. Ten targets plus in three straight. He has games of four receptions on 11 targets, four receptions on 10.

So not the efficiency that you want to see. Still going to play him though. He's definitely going to be in there. It's too early for me to tell. I need a little more practice data on DK Metcalf's side. If for some reason he were to miss, I think that opens things up a ton. But I do like the pass catchers on both sides.

For me, it's going to be a last minute decision on whether I play Geno Smith or Sam Howell, but I do like that Seattle side of it. Okay. What about a Dobbs stack with Marquise Brown? It's 5,300 for Dobbs or maybe 52 or 5,300 for Dobbs. I think it's 53 and Marquise Brown's 5,300. Any interest there? I mean, it's such a cheap stack. It allows you to do those things you were talking about earlier where you grab a Keenan Allen, you grab a Cooper Cup. Or maybe – like I think Nakua's actually in play. Obviously, Cup is better.

We can have that conversation when we get to that game. But a Dobbs stack in play at all? It could be, yeah. It could be. I'm more concerned about the efficiency there uh it hasn't been great i also like i think there are scenarios where if seattle has success we could see a heavy heavy dose of ken walker especially if guys like dk are really banged up so i it's one where i don't love the the dob stack i would rather take the shot on Marquise Brown,

actually catching one or two of those deep balls and not necessarily on Dobbs having the 40 rushing yards, being efficient enough to have three touchdowns. So it's more Marquise than the sack. Yeah. I mean, honestly, I think Marquise on one side, Kenneth Walker on the other side and move on from this game makes sense, too. Zona bad against the run. They're not horrific. They are allowing 4.5 yards per carry, and they also allow a lot of explosive runs.

So while we know Kenneth Walker sometimes has those runs where it's like one yard or zero yards, he does have a lot of explosive runs, too. So this is a pretty good combo for KW3 breaking one or two and really making your fantasy lineup. Steelers plus three at the Rams. This is obviously going to be in good condition so there's something to be said for that we've got zach evans who appears to be uh the running back for the rams with all the injuries to kyron williams and rivers of course um so we'll have to monitor that a little bit i mean obviously they signed daryl henderson they have a few of royce freeman's on the roster it does look like it's going to be Zach Evans.

He's a flat 4K. Like I said, Stafford 6,500, Cup 9,500, Nakua 7,600. This seems like a pretty decent game to have a stack with Stafford. What say you on that? Yeah, I don't mind stacking Stafford. I'm a little more on just isolating Cooper Cup personally, and then you can play a little bit of Evans, depending on how the Bears running back situation shakes out.

Cooper Cup, we used to say fade him at your own risk. That is back, and he's going to be the top wide receiver, in my opinion. You know, Stephon Diggs has been close and has been extremely good, keeping in mind that Cooper Cup missed all that time, came back and just instantly still had it with Stafford because he's just that good, right? I think it's going to continue. I think he's going to see 10 to 12 targets minimum. If the game stays more competitive, we could see even more than that.

I like Cooper Cup. The floor is insanely high. That's where my focus is going to be. I don't necessarily need the quarterback there. I think it's another one of those situations where all the work could be there, and it's not a situation where Rams are scoring 35 points and Cup happens to get one or two of the looks. I think he gets there pretty much in every way this game plays out.

And in your opinion, do we have to wait and see on Zach Evans? Like, it's not like we can necessarily trust Sean McVay in terms of what he says, but are you in a spot right now where you're like, well, I'm jamming Zach Evans in my, in my cash lineups, and I'm probably playing in some tournaments, or are you just avoiding the situation? Cause you think it could be some sort of split with him and a couple of other running backs.

I'm going to avoid it for the most part right now. Kind of depends on what happens with Chicago, though. You know, say Rochon doesn't clear protocol and it is Deontay Foreman again, I kind of want to go back there personally. I've seen a little bit bigger sample size with him. And the Rams, well, I think that this game with Pittsburgh could end up being,

you know, pretty competitive overall. And when that happens, I don't think we're leaning on a guy named Zach Evans here. I think we're leaning on Cooper cup and I think we're leaning on that passing game. So I'm not going to be all in on Evans. Will I have them very,

very possible. I need more info on the bears. So. Absolutely. All right. We've got the Chargers game next. This is the game that everybody's going to have their eyes on. I'm confirming the total. I know the total is 48, but I just want to confirm that the side is the same. Yeah,

it's five and a half still, and it's still 48. So this is interesting. I got to think that we're going to get to your cheat sheet and your top three at each position. I got to think that Patrick Mahomes and Justin Herbert are maybe among the top three. They're very expensive. And I think the question people have when it comes to these games are two. Are you going to stack it? And to the extent you don't stack it, let's say you stack it with some lineups. How are you stacking it?

And to the extent you don't stack it, what pieces are you pulling out? So let's start with the stacking. Are you stacking Justin Herbert? And are you stacking Patrick Mahomes, and who are the main people you're stacking it with? Yeah, definitely stacking. Love Travis Kelsey, love Keenan Allen. Surprise, surprise, right? The target monsters love both of them.

We've seen this matchup many times. Neither team can really stop one another between the 20s. It comes down to red zone efficiency. I think this Chargers team, they've got a ton of data on the way Kansas City plays. I think that they're going to be able to move the ball. I really do. I think this is going to be one where we see a ton of scoring back and forth. It's not surprising. Everyone knows it. Everyone's going to play them. But I don't think the Chargers could stop Patrick Mahomes, and I really think the Chiefs are going to struggle to stop the Chargers. So I like the game a ton, but it's really the expensive guys first.

Isaiah Pacheco I love as well in terms of a running back, which is, again, why you're going to need a lot of those cheaper guys. It's where the double tight end with Mayer comes into play. You've got to do some creative things to really make these lineups work. But I do think this is a slate where, full disclosure, I've been on a lot of unders this year in the NFL. I've already played the over in this game, 47.5 and 48. My computer number on this is up at 53.

I think this one is going to be the actual, the over between these two here. Wow, that's a pretty big difference. And by the way, the weather looks to be, and it can change. It's Friday morning right now, Friday early afternoon almost. It looks like it's going to be kind of warm in Kansas City. And of course, a slight chance of rain, but it doesn't look like there's going to be high winds or really even precipitation. So the conditions are not ideal.

It's not a dome, but it's, I think, maybe better than people might think this time of year starting to get cold and windy. It is in some other places, maybe not here. So you'll have to monitor that. Let's talk about some of the receivers. So obviously, Keenan Allen's in play. Travis Kelsey's in play.

But let's start with the Chiefs because I think a lot of people, and it makes sense, want to play Rasheed Rice, who is super cheap, by the way. He's in the mid 3K range and he's starting to get work. He's starting to be pretty efficient. We know Justin Watson is out for quite some time. Kedarious Tony's really not on the field a ton. Sky Moore, not getting a ton of looks. Now don't get me wrong, Rasheed Rice, not getting a ton of looks either? But to me, it seems like he's continuing to trend up. Is he a play that you put in the home stacks, even if you have Kelsey? You can. I would say it's not required, but you can.

I personally think this is going to be a Travis Kelsey and Isaiah Pacheco show. Rice is good. The price point is crept up just to that point for me personally, where I'm more likely if I want the exposure, I'm more likely to attack either his longest reception or his total receiving yards in the betting market and kind of not necessarily jam him in and DFS. tell you the guy that i want that i think is a better play is josh palmer on the other side 4800 100 more i think there's going to be it sounds crazy to say the correlation is better with an opposing player but i really do believe if mahomes is having the kind of day that warrants him being the optimal quarterback and needing him i think it opens up way more potential for josh palmer than it does for Rice personally. So we'll look at a Palmer. I think that he's going to see,

I wouldn't be shocked if he saw the 10 targets here. So I like Josh Palmer a lot all elect to go that way over Rice, but both are playable. So, okay. So before we leave this game, by the way, I made a mistake. Rasheed Rice, he's not mid three K. Thanks for correcting me. He's 4,700 Josh Palmer, 4,800 on DraftKings. So give me an ideal stack for you on each side. So give me a Mahomes stack that you think you're going to play and give me a Justin Herbert stack with whoever, two guys, one guy,

whatever it is. So for me, it'll be Mahomes, Pacheco, and Kelsey. And what I do, I've done this a lot, and we've talked about it a few times. That is more betting on the Kansas City Chiefs scoring 31 points in this game or more, right? And if we do that, we know a lot of it is going to have some success with Travis Kelsey to Mahomes.

Mahomes could move the ball between the 20s, giving it all the way to Pacheco and Kelsey and someone else, Noah Gray gets the touchdown, right? Someone else gets the touchdown. I think that the majority of the heavy lifting though is going to come from Isaiah Pacheco and someone else, Noah Gray, gets the touchdown, right? Someone else gets the touchdown. I think that the majority of the heavy lifting, though, is going to come from Isaiah Pacheco, and it's going to come from Travis Kelsey. So I want to bet on that team scoring 30-plus points.

That's how I would do it. In that scenario, I would potentially have Keenan Allen or Josh Palmer. Probably not both. Not full-on game stack at that point, but likely a Josh Palmer bring back with those four players. Okay, and on the Justin Herbert side, what would a Justin Herbert stack look like for you? Justin Herbert stack for me would be Justin Herbert, Keenan Allen, Josh Palmer, and then Travis Kelsey.

It would be Kelsey, you know, in that scenario is essentially the same way. The Chargers are doing really well. They're scoring 25, 30 points. Kansas City's got to keep up. It's a competitive game. The only way, in my opinion, that they let the Chargers score close to 30 points, it's got to be the Travis Kelsey show at that point, right? So that's how I would build these lineups.

And by the way, Pacheco at 6,100, knowing that he's getting the receiving work too, six catches last week, which might be a little bit of an outlier, but certainly getting receptions. Is he a cash game, like lock-ish type guy? He is for me, yes. And yeah, I'll be playing him a lot. And someone just commented,

Travis Kelsey is so expensive, but you get it. Travis Kelsey at this point, you cannot view him as a tight end. He, in this offense, he's as a tight end. He, in this offense, he's not a tight end. He is wide receiver one at 8K and he plays like a guy that's frankly more valuable than that. So I honestly, I like him a lot. You do have to put him in your tight end spot or the flex spot, but I would view him as a wide receiver and not a tight end. Yeah. And that's why it's

compelling sometimes to play those two tight ends because like with like offsetting with michael may or even laporta if you can make your lineup work that way because kelsey really is a receiver at the end of the day and a receiver that's 8k you know so that that's actually like that's not super expensive for a top flight receiver right yeah? Yeah, right. Exactly. You know, you go look at wide receiver this week, that would make him, that would make him the sixth or seventh most expensive wide receiver on the slate. Right. Yeah. He's got a good chance of outscoring at least three of the guys above him. Absolutely. Love the total, love the game environment, love the lack of defense often from the los angeles chargers

uh speaking of lack of defense we're gonna go before we go to our top three and before we go to our cheat sheets real quick we're gonna go to the packers at the broncos broncos don't like playing defense uh but then again you know i don't know how excited we are about this game because jordan love is the quarterback what i like like i said i don't like jordan love i don't think he's a very good quarterback never have didn't think he was a good quarterback at utah state but what i like about his position here i'm not stacking. But what I like about his position here, I'm not stacking him, but what I like about his position here is the Broncos don't really create a lot of pressure, and Jordan Love really crumbles under pressure.

So if they're not going to get a lot of pressure on him, I got to think guys like Christian Watson can really go off. He's only 5,600. I think he's an amazing tournament play against the Broncos. I think Aaron Jones is really interesting, too. If we have any confidence from the practice reports about his soft tissue injury and that he's going to be a full go and they've got full practices in, Watson and Aaron Jones make a lot of sense to me.

Musgrave makes some sense to me, especially considering that lack of a pass rush. Do you like anything in this game? I'm not playing anything on the Denver side, but I am intrigued on the Green Bay Packers side. Yeah, it's just the Green Bay Packers side. You mentioned it. It's Watson for me and Musgrave.

I'm not going to speculate on Aaron Jones. I think it's okay. I think they'll be cautious with him overall still at this point. And I've already got some pretty contrarian stances at running back that I'm interested in being Jonathan Taylor, Bijan Robinson. I think that it's just a little better fit. But I can see Watson. It's tough for me with Watson.

Like, I think the decision you got to make here is, are you playing Watson? Are you playing Tyler Lockett? Are you playing Marquise Brown? I think Watson could be the odd man out. I think the target volume is definitely lower. I will say this. If I don't play Christian Watson in DFS, I will have a ticket on his longest reception over, and I will have a ticket on his over in total receiving yards.

So I have some interest. It just remains to be seen where that falls on Sunday. It's just a little too early for me to commit to say, yeah, I think you got to get Christian Watson lineups. He's in the player pool. The computer wants it to happen. It's going to be a manual decision based on that Seahawks game for me. Yeah, absolutely. A quick question from J-Mets. I think we answered it. So, but Mike, I'll give it back to you real quick. What is the reasoning for two tight end lineups is the question yeah it's almost always going to be salary savings um and just the overall strength of position and value plays right so we'll get to a point in the season where there may not be a ton of injuries like we don't have honestly on

this slate most weeks we have like some obvious near min price wide receivers to jam in we don't exactly have that and there's a massive difference between a $3,300 receiver and a $4,500 receiver. That extra salary, it matters a ton in these lineups. So when you get tight ends, the minimum price drops down to $2,500. When you're betting on someone, some of those smaller receivers having three to four targets max, tight ends are typically used in the red zone those red zone targets are worth a lot more than three targets over the middle of the field so that is typically when it's used it's typically when you're playing someone like travis kelsey

used to be mark andrews uh as well but it's really just taking advantage of the the position overall so that's why um generally it's the combination of okay i get travis kelsey michael meyer and this allows me to play keenan allen if i'm playing a 5400 wide receiver in the flex i'm probably not able to get keenan allen with that travis kelsey lineup right so certainly not something we're going to do all the time but there are moments where it definitely makes sense all right mike let's do you before we get to our cheap sheet cheat sheets uh it's time to do your top three at each position let's start with quarterback hey we know which game it is this week uh it's patrick mahomes and justin herbert they're going to be the top two here for me

my third i've listed sam howell i i it's i'm tough to say if I'm going to actually play Sam Howell or if it's going to be – I might have talked myself into Desmond Ritter throughout the show, to be honest with you. It could be Geno Smith, but it's going to be someone in that range. I do like Sam Howell a bit. When I go to running back here, it's Isaiah Pacheco, B. John Robinson. I actually like him. I'm going to play him.

And then the Bears running back situation. It'll either be Roshon Johnson or it'll be dionte foreman uh i like that bears running back situation a ton at wide receiver cooper cup fade him at your own risk he he's the top overall play for a significant reason keenan allen number two and then curtis samuel for me going along with that sam howell stack uh curtis samuel is one of the cheapest receivers that is playable this week at just 4k. I love the way they're using him. I think that he's going to continue to break out at tight end. Travis Kelsey should come as absolutely no surprise to anyone here. Sam Laporta. I like his target volume.

I think that the 11 targets was extremely encouraging. I think he's going to be needed in this matchup against baltimore and then finally luke musgraves slash meyer mayor for the uh the raiders looking for salary savings there i like both of them all right and what's interesting you have a few uh defenses listed here uh giants chiefs patriots explain the chiefs though explaining the chiefs is it's going to be one of those situations where there could be turnovers on the Chargers side. The Chiefs run away with this football game. It's very, very possible, but it's really a price point play, right? No one's going to play them. Number one, facing one of the best offenses on the slate. It's a price point

play. They can put themselves in great positions here. So that is why I've listed them. It's more of a computer play than anything. And the scenario where I would play that is I'm playing Travis Kelsey. I'm playing whatever it may be. I'm playing Cooper Cup. I might play Stephon Diggs. Just really loading up that lineup and betting against what the field's doing. Yeah, and certainly anytime you're getting an offense that's likely in a position to be passing the ball around, you're creating opportunities for that defense.

So even if they get lit up on the scoreboard, they could also have a pick six or, you know, several turnovers or whatever the case may be. So it makes sense there on a cheaper defense. I'll do my cheat sheet real quick. Again, no surprise. I was going to have Geno Smith here to Tyler Lockett, actually, but I changed my mind because I don't, you know,

I want to play a lot of Kenneth Walker. I don't want to stack Kenneth Walker with Gino Smith. And I still need to know that DK Metcalf is okay. Because like what I want is DK Metcalf to, you know, be a full go and I'll play that Gino to Lockett stack. But again, I don't want Lockett to get more attention because DK is hobbled. So Gino almost made it, but I've got Justin Herbert at 8,000, Akina Allen, 8,600, certainly an expensive stack. You can throw Josh Palmer in there, run it back with Travis Kelsey, just like Mike suggested when we talked about that game, or you run it back with Travis Kelsey and Rishi Rice at 4,700. I think there's a lot of value in between that like 4K and 5,500, 5,600 range. So there's a lot of guys to choose from with

upside. Maybe Rishi Rice isn't the best guy, but I do like the price point. And I like how he's trending at 4,700, Isaiah Pacheco, 67, 6,100. I really liked that one. Listen, he's getting the volume in the passing game too. And could absolutely be a guy. If you didn't want to stack that game, get a couple of pieces from it. Isaiah Pacheco was certainly in cash games, but even in tournaments,

maybe you get that piece and move on, even though he's going to be a pretty chalky. My contrarian is Saquon Barkley because he's facing the Washington defense if anybody can succeed against the Washington defense it would not surprise me if Saquon Barkley has six seven catches and breaks a long run through the receiving game or through the rushing game my fade is going to be Terry McLaurin I just don't know what receiver to focus on when it comes to the Sam Howell experience McLaurin's's a great price, but he's getting a lot of ownership. I'd rather go with Curtis Samuel, maybe take a shot on Jahan Dotson, or just take no receivers in that game.

Because I'm personally probably not stacking Sam Howell. But again, Terry McLaurin, if he's going to get ownership, which it's looking like he is, I'm going to go ahead and fade that. Mike, your cheat sheet. Patrick Mahomes to Travis Kelsey is the stack. I don't see any chance that the Chargers stop Travis Kelsey here. So that's where I'm prioritizing lineups. You're going to have to have a lot of value plays.

We've talked about a number of them. The thing I will mention this week, it's a shorter slate, only 10 games. There are going to be positions in your lineup that feel very, very uncomfortable. It's going to be that way for everyone. For me, the value uncomfortable, it's going to be that way for everyone. For me, the value play, it's going to be Bears running back situation. I've listed Roshan Johnson here. Could be Deontay Foreman if Johnson is ultimately not cleared from his concussion protocol. Like that situation a lot. Keep in mind the quarterback situation for the

Bears. Why I prefer the Bears running back over the Rams situation, the Rams still have their quarterback. The Rams still have Cooper Cup, have those weapons out there. The quarterback for the Bears, absolutely brutal. They're going to hand the ball off and really dump off passes as much as they possibly can. So that is why I like the Bears running back situation way more. Chalk play Keenan Allen makes a ton of sense, the volume there. I don't think Kansas City is going to stop Keenan Allen. I think he's going to get his. Will the Chargers turn that

into touchdowns? Remains to be seen, but he's certainly going to have double-digit targets over the middle of the field. Love Keenan Allen. Contrarian play, Bijan Robinson. I'm not ready to give up just yet. The play calling is frustrating. The usage is frustrating. However, he's extremely talented. He is a live threat to make a house call anytime he touches the football. I think he's going to continue to see work in the passing game. I really do. So that's why I like him. And then I'm fading Jacobs. Again, Jacobs, he can score 40 points this week. He has top overall player upside. The simple fact is his projected ownership, which I'm projecting north of 30 significantly outweighs the

probability of him being in the optimal lineup that you need to win this week i'm going to make the fade there because i'm prioritizing guys like keenan allen patrick mahomes travis kelsey simply can't get there i love it uh one last question i want to answer from garrett he says any interest in pickett in a negative game script against the Ramsiders. Like the highest we've seen them hit is 18 fantasy points. A lot of these games end up being 11 to 13 fantasy points. There's no rushing upside and you know, a good outcome for them is two touchdowns and 220 yards. Like we're not seeing 300 yard games. We're not seeing anything like that where you're able to get the bonus on DraftKings and do some of those things. So I think it's extremely unlikely.

If you think Pickett's going to need to push the ball because the Rams put up a ton of points, then go ahead and just play that Ram stack. Play Stafford to cup because if you think they're going to put up 27, 30 points, then that's where the points are going. Greg Guse, he's going to end the show for us. He says, good show, guys. Thanks. We really appreciate everybody listening. Of course, definitely join our contest. Don't forget to join our contest, FFT DFS.

We do it every single week. It's only five bucks. And we do our game by game preview every single week as well. The next time we'll see, of course, is Tuesday. It'll be me and Megan Schaaf doing our early look at week eight of the NFL main slate. Everybody, good luck this week. Thanks for joining us and we'll see you on Tuesday.