Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

General talk about Dynasty Leagues.
User avatar
dlf_mikeh
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5231
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby dlf_mikeh » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:07 pm

Cult of Dionysus wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:48 pm
I'd also really really like to hear from Mike why he thought Montgomery can't sink his hips. He said it on three separate occasions in his 3 reports (on two occasions in the 1st report and on one occasion in the 3rd report). And I'd also like to know when and why he added the edit in the 3rd report that Montgomery "DOES sink his hips".
He didn't do it frequently enough to show me that he can do it at all, much like JT's pass blocking which I couldn't find and then someone pointed it out. Only 2 instances, but still, there it is.

The reason I changed it, if I remember correctly, is because of you man. You found what I couldn't find and I adjusted accordingly. I even gave you credit for it.

EDIT: That doesn't mean I like him. :P
Make Your Own Customizable Draft Pick Value Chart Here
"This is awesome" --- dlf_jaronf
"I've made a few draft pick charts. This is better than any of them." --- dlf_jules
"Whatever rookie draft pick chart you're using isn't as good as this one from MEuRaH" --- dlf_jules
"Excellent work on this!" --- dlf_zachb

User avatar
spotxc
Captain
Captain
Posts: 978
Joined: Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:52 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby spotxc » Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:18 pm

Obviously he is a bold taker with some inflated views of his success. Id happen to say most are but they do it with cover. A lot will do it in with a group backing, because they're scared of the heat by themselves. People are much quicker to criticize lone opinions than be able to support one themselves publicly. Ive gone against many here who have bashed bold takers(myself included) for defending their view. Prime example was all the fan boys for Mixon who swung at anybody claiming mccaffrey was better. Look at how that turned out. Next was Calvin Ridley and how his athletic and blah blah were not gonna cut it. Cover guys are worse at handling criticism than bold takers imo.

OhCruelestRanter
All Pro
All Pro
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:11 pm

There’s a really big difference between “inflated views of his success” and “lies about his success to sell subscriptions.”

The worst part is that if this guy didn’t care so deeply about what everybody thinks about him, we would have just let it go. His repeated attempts to defend his own honor and garner out respect have turned the whole website into a goddamn side show.
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

cantguardjake
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue May 15, 2018 4:53 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby cantguardjake » Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:16 pm

Cult of Dionysus wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:48 pm
cantguardjake wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:40 am
Cult of Dionysus harped on the Hollyfield ranking multiple times last year, it’s pretty obvious he doesn’t understand the process that Mike was trying to outline with his original report.
dlf_mikeh wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:33 pm
FAIR criticism doesn't bother me. That 3 piece series had a final report and that's the one I should be judged by, along with every other post on this forum I've ever written, but not parts 1 and 2. If I put out more of those series, that information will keep resurfacing and recycling.
Honestly, the 3-step thing is a deflection, a red herring. I read his three reports VERY closely. And I urge you to pay attention to what Mike said in the first report's cover message:
FROM MIKE'S 1st REPORT IN 2019:What I usually do is research RBs in late February. I judge them based on a series of criteria, each category weighted based on the importance level that I believe they deserve based on what it takes to succeed in the NFL. Then I ignore those rankings and do it again sometime in early April. I compare my values and see if I moved anyone up or down a lot in any 1 category (I rarely do) and then do one final analysis the week of the NFL draft when players start getting drafted. For example, it's incredibly important that a zone runner get drafted to a zone team. If they don't (*cough* Rashaad Penny *cough*) then I knock them down some points.
Now maybe I'm crazy, but I read that to say that he'd refine his values, not throw the values out entirely. Though I guess you don't have to take my word for it, just Mike's (see bold above).
cantguardjake wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:40 am
Mike also clarified multiple times with Montgomery what he meant about not making anyone miss, he outright said that he could make someone miss in the open field, but couldn’t at the line of scrimmage with a defender right beside him like Sanders could. This was a great take, Montgomery sucked last year and his “elite juke / jumpcut” cost him holes on multiple occasions (there is YouTube videos on this).
I've never seen any clarification by Mike on Montgomery. I may have missed it, but I'm on here a lot and I follow Montgomery closely as I'm a fan of his.

As for your assertion that Montgomery can't beat a guy at the line:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxvdyJkEniY

FYI, SPOILER ALERT, you won't have to wait long in the video above to be proven wrong. :lol:
cantguardjake wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 9:40 am
It’s like the people criticising see a singular ranking in stage 1 of a 3 stage report and define the entire report based on it and don’t even bother to read follow up discussion. No wonder there’s no original content on here, it’s crap like this that saw us lose part 1 of the report this year, which was a great read and much better than all of the other “this is my precombine rookie rankings - here’s a list of players” that will now all be updated post combine but no one bats an eye, but lets crucify Mikes take on Montgomery because it developed over time when he actually made some great points about him.
Cuz you can't be a RB guru if you miss that badly on a basic element of RB analysis.

And I'm not defining the entire report on this one issue. I think the reports, in their totality, are excellent and I think Mike had some big hits (Devin Singletary and Miles Sanders in particular, before either guy was well-known or, in the case of Sanders, much touted). My issue is that he say's:
FROM MIKE's 1st REPORT: For those that don't know me, I am a former RB coach. I coached the position at the HS level for 5 years, and travelled all over New England to coaching clinics and conferences to learn from the top coaches at the college level, as well as a few former NFL scouts. I know what to look for and what makes a RB a possible top talent in the NFL. I've been nailing RB rankings over the last 3 years (literally, almost 100% percent accurate) and figured that I'd up the ante by creating my own thread, instead of replying to other posts like I used to do. FWIW, I suck at QB, TE, & WR rankings. Help a brother out.
I have no issues with anyone having confidence/hubris. But if you make fantastical claims and can't back it up, be prepared to have others pointing it out.

I'd also really really like to hear from Mike why he thought Montgomery can't sink his hips. He said it on three separate occasions in his 3 reports (on two occasions in the 1st report and on one occasion in the 3rd report). And I'd also like to know when and why he added the edit in the 3rd report that Montgomery "DOES sink his hips".
Funnily enough, it was in response to you:
dlf_mikeh wrote:
Mon May 27, 2019 7:00 am
I don't think I really switched anything here. I was low on him before and I stayed low. He doesn't create space aka make room at the LOS. Being able to avoid LBs or Safeties isn't creating space, it's using the space that's already there. David Montgomery is basically Jordan Howard 2.0. To say I have him as the 3rd best overlooks the fact that this is a poor draft class. In most draft classes, he'd be a low-end 1 or a high end 2. Desperate owners are taking him too soon.
Once again this is a perfectly reasonable take. Desperate owners were taking him too high - his ADP was 2 at one stage which is ridiculous. Calling him a high end running back 2 would be generous at this stage, he looks like a plodder. Nice cut in open space though, I’ll give him that.

I bet everyone that reached for him wishes they had Brown x 2 or Metcalf right about now.

User avatar
Cult of Dionysus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2788
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 2:02 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby Cult of Dionysus » Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:53 pm

dlf_mikeh wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:07 pm
Cult of Dionysus wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:48 pm
I'd also really really like to hear from Mike why he thought Montgomery can't sink his hips. He said it on three separate occasions in his 3 reports (on two occasions in the 1st report and on one occasion in the 3rd report). And I'd also like to know when and why he added the edit in the 3rd report that Montgomery "DOES sink his hips".
He didn't do it frequently enough to show me that he can do it at all, much like JT's pass blocking which I couldn't find and then someone pointed it out. Only 2 instances, but still, there it is.

The reason I changed it, if I remember correctly, is because of you man. You found what I couldn't find and I adjusted accordingly. I even gave you credit for it.

EDIT: That doesn't mean I like him. :P
So does that make me RB Guru in Training?

Lol

For the record, I'm still rostering Holyfield. And the Eagles did pick him up as a free agent. Sanders owners be very afraid.

cantguardjake
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue May 15, 2018 4:53 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby cantguardjake » Mon Mar 30, 2020 10:26 pm

Cult of Dionysus wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 8:53 pm
dlf_mikeh wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 6:07 pm
Cult of Dionysus wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:48 pm
I'd also really really like to hear from Mike why he thought Montgomery can't sink his hips. He said it on three separate occasions in his 3 reports (on two occasions in the 1st report and on one occasion in the 3rd report). And I'd also like to know when and why he added the edit in the 3rd report that Montgomery "DOES sink his hips".
He didn't do it frequently enough to show me that he can do it at all, much like JT's pass blocking which I couldn't find and then someone pointed it out. Only 2 instances, but still, there it is.

The reason I changed it, if I remember correctly, is because of you man. You found what I couldn't find and I adjusted accordingly. I even gave you credit for it.

EDIT: That doesn't mean I like him. :P
So does that make me RB Guru in Training?

Lol

For the record, I'm still rostering Holyfield. And the Eagles did pick him up as a free agent. Sanders owners be very afraid.
Only if it’s self anointed :wink:

ItsHandsomeDave
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2015 1:11 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby ItsHandsomeDave » Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:26 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:59 am
Man, this is an awful lot of typing from somebody who doesn’t care what people think about him and his process.
What a colossal dick you are. You just know that this guy is a sniveling nerd with few social skills.

There are always guys like Mike who contribute tons to forums like this one and even the articles of the websites we visit. Often they do it for nothing but the enjoyment of this hobby, few people pay the bills doing this. The vast majority of people lurk and then most of those who do participate tend to throw out a few one liners or badly put together thoughts without any substantial detail to justify their thinking at all.

Its easy to go after guys who take the time to lay out there thoughts in detail like Mike does. No one is holding a gun to your heads and forcing you to read what he puts out. I, and I am sure many others appreciate the time he takes to put his views out on things. For those of us that dont have the time to watch tape or know what to really look for, his insight helps. Same goes for other writers on the fantasy sites I visit. I dont have hours to put aside watching tape and I sure as hell cant watch every college game.

Lastly you just need to see the bust rate of the real draft to know that even the highly paid scouts are whiffing on things 50% of the time. Why is someone like Mike held to a higher standard?

What a thankless job with ingrates like this hanging about

OhCruelestRanter
All Pro
All Pro
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Tue Mar 31, 2020 4:38 am

ItsHandsomeDave wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 11:26 pm
OhCruelestRanter wrote:
Mon Mar 30, 2020 5:59 am
Man, this is an awful lot of typing from somebody who doesn’t care what people think about him and his process.
What a colossal dick you are. You just know that this guy is a sniveling nerd with few social skills.

There are always guys like Mike who contribute tons to forums like this one and even the articles of the websites we visit. Often they do it for nothing but the enjoyment of this hobby, few people pay the bills doing this. The vast majority of people lurk and then most of those who do participate tend to throw out a few one liners or badly put together thoughts without any substantial detail to justify their thinking at all.

Its easy to go after guys who take the time to lay out there thoughts in detail like Mike does. No one is holding a gun to your heads and forcing you to read what he puts out. I, and I am sure many others appreciate the time he takes to put his views out on things. For those of us that dont have the time to watch tape or know what to really look for, his insight helps. Same goes for other writers on the fantasy sites I visit. I dont have hours to put aside watching tape and I sure as hell cant watch every college game.

Lastly you just need to see the bust rate of the real draft to know that even the highly paid scouts are whiffing on things 50% of the time. Why is someone like Mike held to a higher standard?

What a thankless job with ingrates like this hanging about
Mike’s held to a higher standard because he claimed he was the best and nearly 100% accurate while trying to sell DLF Premium subscriptions.

Nice to meet you too man!
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

User avatar
FiremanEd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5999
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby FiremanEd » Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:16 am

Yeah, pretty sure nobody cares about someone putting in work and giving their honest opinion for discussion. Anyone arguing as if that is the issue for people is seriously missing the point. The objection is to the self proclaimed 100% accuracy rate (untrue and unrealistic for anyone who is logical on the draft process and scouting, knowing there are variables outside of anyone’s control, such as work ethic post payday, etc.) and the self admitted lies that were posted (I.e. Ballage) which are either dishonest and removing of credibility or outright wrong (removing the self proclaimed 100% accuracy). If you are Joe Nobody, then who cares. When you’re a guy boasting this stuff on a paid side, ‘trying to make a name for yourself’, and wanting to be known as the RB Guru, then you open yourself to criticism.

People can continue to read and support Mike’s work. I still will. However, I will call out lies and untrue claims and ensure it is known that he’s not everything he claims to be and that his word shouldn’t be trusted to the degree he would want you to believe (and make no mistake, that’s what he wants with the 100% claim). Hits and misses are part of the game.

People get places in the industry with time and effort. Mike does those things. He puts out his opinion (sometimes honest, sometimes not apparently) and includes game clips to keep readers interested and support his claims. It is all good entertainment and pieces to consider. Not everyone has the time to do these things. No issue. However, it can be made without false claims to mislead readers in the name of ‘making a name for oneself’. Not the right approach IMO. But hey, he’s with DLF now so it worked for him. Congrats to him. Hopefully it forces him to change his approach, but given the statement being in his article, that doesn’t seem to be the case (yes, he said it was an error, but we’ve already learned that he’s not trustworthy in the case of Ballage, but sure, we can trust him...).
Last edited by FiremanEd on Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

Online
Zacsby
Pro Bowler
Pro Bowler
Posts: 1002
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:46 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby Zacsby » Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:20 am

I'm sorry but to me it's no different than Brian Williams. That famous news anchor who lied about being in a helicopter that was shot down over Iraq. He was called out on his lie by people who knew better (the people who were actually there). Obviously as a result, people really started to question his credibility. Credibility is kind of important when the line of work you're in is reporting information people rely on.

Now obviously this is on a much smaller scale. However the same principles apply. I'm not calling for Mike's head. I'm not going to make excuses for him either. How much he gets paid is irrelevant to me. I prefer that people who write for a website I give my money to refrain from outright lying to me. The content would be just as good and less insulting. Just my humble opinion!
12 Tm SF PPR - QB, RB (2), WR (2), TE, FLX (2) SF
QB - Lamar, Brees, Daniel Jones, Taysom, Stidham
RB - CMC, AJ, Drake, Cohen, AP
WR - Golladay, Boyd, Landry, Sanders, Mecole
TE - Kelce, Hurst, Rudolph, Oliver

12 Tm SF, Tiered PPR (.5RB, 1WR, 1.5TE) Start 9
QB - Watson, Daniel Jones, Tannehill, Stidham
RB - Kamara, Carson, Penny, Michel, Scott
WR - Nuk, Evans, Ridley, M-Will, P-Will, Washington
TE - Kittle, Rudolph

24 Tm 2 Copy PPR - QB, RB (2), WR (2), TE, FLX (3)
QB - Stafford, Jimmy G, Cousins
RB - CEH, Taylor, Hunt, Singletary, Moss, Breida, Gibson, Darwin
WR - Godwin, Golladay, AJB, M-Will, Ruggs, Higgins, Duvernay
TE - Andrews, Hurst, Herndon
21 Picks - 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th

grooner
All Pro
All Pro
Posts: 1954
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2012 10:01 am

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby grooner » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:03 am

Zacsby wrote:
Tue Mar 31, 2020 6:20 am
I'm sorry but to me it's no different than Brian Williams. That famous news anchor who lied about being in a helicopter that was shot down over Iraq. He was called out on his lie by people who knew better (the people who were actually there). Obviously as a result, people really started to question his credibility. Credibility is kind of important when the line of work you're in is reporting information people rely on.

Now obviously this is on a much smaller scale. However the same principles apply. I'm not calling for Mike's head. I'm not going to make excuses for him either. How much he gets paid is irrelevant to me. I prefer that people who write for a website I give my money to refrain from outright lying to me. The content would be just as good and less insulting. Just my humble opinion!
This for me. If he lied about Ballage to inflate his trade value, or lied about being 100%, you lose trust in what he says about future fringe players as you aren't sure what he is trying to do.

I still find his work very good and useful, but you can't take it as gospel as he is claiming (maybe jokingly!)

User avatar
YouMightDieTryin
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby YouMightDieTryin » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:06 am

But that was when he didn't work for DLF so it doesn't count! It's ok to stretch the truth then. Like Trump can have sex with hookers before he was President and it's ok. Everyone needs love.

Sorry I went political. I thought it was a fun analogy.
Last edited by YouMightDieTryin on Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:26 am, edited 1 time in total.
10-Team Dynasty League QB/RB/RB/WR/WR/WR/FLEX (23 man rosters + 2 IR + 2 Taxi, non-PPR scoring)
QB: Brady, Mayfield
RB: Saquon, Elliott, CEH, K.Hunt, Antonio Gibson, Malcolm Brown, Justin Jackson
WR: OBJ, Kupp, B.Cooks, D.Parker, Jeudy, Pittman, Shenault, Tyler Johnson, ESB, Scotty Miller, Jakobi Meyers
TE: H.Henry, C.Herndon, I Smith Jr
Taxi: Edwards, Herbert
2021: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th
:dance:

User avatar
dlf_mikeh
Legend
Legend
Posts: 5231
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby dlf_mikeh » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:20 am

I used to make claims all the time on the forums. I'd put hours upon hours of work into one player and post it up. Some people thanked me for the work and then it would disappear within a day and it'd maybe get 1-2 pages long at best. I even had one write up that got 0 replies. I really hated that. I wanted to generate discussion but instead it felt like wasted effort. I see this happen to other users today and it bothers me.

Meanwhile threads made by another user (name withdrawn) stayed active for days on end. His takes were not only controversial but he was full of bravado. I was jealous that I was trying to be nice and accurate and this guy was coming off as obnoxious and bold and HIS thread was getting all the attention. I figured that was something I needed to do if I wanted to get the same results.

I tried it out with my CJ Anderson thread, my first bold take which was on an undrafted rookie, and I went in guns blaring. Instant success. The thread lasted for what seemed like several weeks. I found a formula that worked and so I rolled with it.

I kept raising the stakes because I love to gamble and it was getting my threads attention. I didn't feel like anybody was really calling me out either. Maybe a few but the noise was minimal. Then DLF took notice of my posts and bold takes, citing specific good calls I made, along with my mathematical work in my draft pick trade chart (in sig). The fact that my threads kept getting replies and views was a huge bonus. They offered me a position in the staff.

After accepting the position, I was unclear if the bravado facade was good or bad, and if it was something I needed to continue doing anymore. On one hand it helped me get to where I am now, but on the other hand it's annoying. I toned it down some and even went through my forum post history and deleted posts that I no longer wanted to be associated with (all related to ego & attitude) since I now represented someone other than myself. I kept with it to some extent since it helped me get to where I am, but I never really found a sweet spot.

I was getting sick of the 100% claim. I also knew the bubble would burst and didn't care to make it any bigger than it was. If you look at my JT thread, unlike other claims I made in the past, I didn't make any mention of it. The post was strictly JT related, replies included. I find it both odd and humorous that the day I was challenged on my 100% claim was also near the same day that I didn't bring it up.

The other misfortunate thing to happen was that I wrote that rookie piece for the DLF site two weeks ago. I kept the 100% claim in there originally on purpose because of some feedback I received about it (I copy/pasted the header from a 2019 article). When it started to hit the fan in here I went to replace the 100% part with my 2019 article instead, but became a space cadet and after I added the 2019 content links I forgot to delete the sentence before it. I had 4 days to double check that part before it posted and I never did. That's just going to pile on but I deserve it.

So here we are. I'll just weather the storm since I created it. The 100% claim is officially dead (It was always dead since my first post, which was my CJA take. I can't believe I was able to avoid that bad call entirely) but it was a fun ride. There are two sides to every coin, and with the good comes the bad, so I deserve all that comes my way for as long as it does. Huck your tomatoes if you still have em.

I apologize if I rubbed anyone the wrong way with my egotistical persona. I am definitely somewhat ego driven, as I think we all are, but not to the extent I tried to make people believe I was. That was just a shtick. I'm sorry.
Make Your Own Customizable Draft Pick Value Chart Here
"This is awesome" --- dlf_jaronf
"I've made a few draft pick charts. This is better than any of them." --- dlf_jules
"Whatever rookie draft pick chart you're using isn't as good as this one from MEuRaH" --- dlf_jules
"Excellent work on this!" --- dlf_zachb

User avatar
YouMightDieTryin
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby YouMightDieTryin » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:29 am

Keep being you Mike. Be bold, be different, and stand out. Like you said your opinion will be remembered.. You'll fly high with it or you'll crash and burn. Either way you tried which is more than some people here do.
10-Team Dynasty League QB/RB/RB/WR/WR/WR/FLEX (23 man rosters + 2 IR + 2 Taxi, non-PPR scoring)
QB: Brady, Mayfield
RB: Saquon, Elliott, CEH, K.Hunt, Antonio Gibson, Malcolm Brown, Justin Jackson
WR: OBJ, Kupp, B.Cooks, D.Parker, Jeudy, Pittman, Shenault, Tyler Johnson, ESB, Scotty Miller, Jakobi Meyers
TE: H.Henry, C.Herndon, I Smith Jr
Taxi: Edwards, Herbert
2021: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th
:dance:

Chwf3rd
Starter
Starter
Posts: 655
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2017 4:44 pm

Re: Peer Review of DLF Mike's 2016-2019 RB Analysis

Postby Chwf3rd » Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:44 am

dlf_mikeh wrote:
Tue Mar 31, 2020 8:20 am
I used to make claims all the time on the forums. I'd put hours upon hours of work into one player and post it up. Some people thanked me for the work and then it would disappear within a day and it'd maybe get 1-2 pages long at best. I even had one write up that got 0 replies. I really hated that. I wanted to generate discussion but instead it felt like wasted effort. I see this happen to other users today and it bothers me.

Meanwhile threads made by another user (name withdrawn) stayed active for days on end. His takes were not only controversial but he was full of bravado. I was jealous that I was trying to be nice and accurate and this guy was coming off as obnoxious and bold and HIS thread was getting all the attention. I figured that was something I needed to do if I wanted to get the same results.

I tried it out with my CJ Anderson thread, my first bold take which was on an undrafted rookie, and I went in guns blaring. Instant success. The thread lasted for what seemed like several weeks. I found a formula that worked and so I rolled with it.

I kept raising the stakes because I love to gamble and it was getting my threads attention. I didn't feel like anybody was really calling me out either. Maybe a few but the noise was minimal. Then DLF took notice of my posts and bold takes, citing specific good calls I made, along with my mathematical work in my draft pick trade chart (in sig). The fact that my threads kept getting replies and views was a huge bonus. They offered me a position in the staff.

After accepting the position, I was unclear if the bravado facade was good or bad, and if it was something I needed to continue doing anymore. On one hand it helped me get to where I am now, but on the other hand it's annoying. I toned it down some and even went through my forum post history and deleted posts that I no longer wanted to be associated with (all related to ego & attitude) since I now represented someone other than myself. I kept with it to some extent since it helped me get to where I am, but I never really found a sweet spot.

I was getting sick of the 100% claim. I also knew the bubble would burst and didn't care to make it any bigger than it was. If you look at my JT thread, unlike other claims I made in the past, I didn't make any mention of it. The post was strictly JT related, replies included. I find it both odd and humorous that the day I was challenged on my 100% claim was also near the same day that I didn't bring it up.

The other misfortunate thing to happen was that I wrote that rookie piece for the DLF site two weeks ago. I kept the 100% claim in there originally on purpose because of some feedback I received about it (I copy/pasted the header from a 2019 article). When it started to hit the fan in here I went to replace the 100% part with my 2019 article instead, but became a space cadet and after I added the 2019 content links I forgot to delete the sentence before it. I had 4 days to double check that part before it posted and I never did. That's just going to pile on but I deserve it.

So here we are. I'll just weather the storm since I created it. The 100% claim is officially dead (It was always dead since my first post, which was my CJA take. I can't believe I was able to avoid that bad call entirely) but it was a fun ride. There are two sides to every coin, and with the good comes the bad, so I deserve all that comes my way for as long as it does. Huck your tomatoes if you still have em.

I apologize if I rubbed anyone the wrong way with my egotistical persona. I am definitely somewhat ego driven, as I think we all are, but not to the extent I tried to make people believe I was. That was just a shtick. I'm sorry.
Good post!

I really enjoy your content as well, even if I disagree with some of it. It’s generally very well put together and thought out.

The issue isn’t the content but the attitude like you admitted to. Not only the hyperbolic claims but also the general snark. For instance, I was defended RoJo during his rookie year and you replied to one of my posts 1 year later to try to rub my face in it.

The snark can be fun but if that’s your persona then you need to be prepared to get called out as well.
Team 1 - 12 team PPR
QB: MRyan, PRivers
RB: AKamara, JMixon, DHenderson, LMcCoy, RArmstead, TPollard
WR: ACooper, SDiggs, CSamuel, AJGreen, SWatkins, AMiller, DiJohnson, ZPascal
TE: MAndrews, ISmith, KWarring
Record: 4-6
Picks: 1, 1, 1

Team 2 - 12 team, PPR, superflex
QB: MStafford, SDarnold, DJones, BRoethlisberger, ALuck
RB: DCook, PLindsay, TColeman, DSingletary, JWhite, DFreeman, CHyde, MWalton, RMostert, MGaskin, QOllison
WR: DAdams, MEvans, SDiggs, DSamuel, SWatkins, MHardman, GAllison
TE: JDoyle, TBurton, DKnox, DFells, KWarring
Record: 6-4
Picks: 1, 2, 2

Team 3 - 12 team, PPR, 2QB, 2TE
QB: DWatson, CWentz, MStafford, DJones, ALuck
RB: NChubb, DMontgomery, SMichel, KDrake, CHyde, TJohnson, MWalton, KBallage, CThompson, JDMcKissic, QOllison
WR: THill, DAdams, SDiggs, DSamuel, PCampbell, DiJohnson, JCrowder, JWashington, ALazard, ATate
TE: GKittle, HHenry, TJHock, KWarring
Record: 8-2
Picks: 1, 1, 1, 2, 2


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dpham503, Johnny B. Goode, mgscott, spider321 and 36 guests