I'm trying to gear up for my draft on Saturday (I know, after Thursday's game) and I'm realizing my magazine doesn't have a key stat. Our league gives double points for TD passes of 50 or more yards and I can't find anything that lists these. I've Googled this to death, but I can't find anything. I have a general idea on which QB's threw the most long TD's in 2004, but I'd really like to know the actual numbers, as it may affect my draft order. Anyone have these?

I have the fifth pick in a 14-man league. We reverse order every round, so I don't pick until number 10 (24th overall) in round 2. I'm debating going with what will probably be the first QB in the first round. But it's a long wait until I'd have a chance to get a top tier RB. Any thoughts?

Just look at QB's who have the best deep threats. The obvious are Manning, McNabb, Collins, Bulger, Favre, Palmer, Warner. Culpepper also likes to go deep but doesn't have proven WR's (although I love Burleson).

with Moss being such a deep ball threat i think Collins would be a good pick..not sure which round he'd fall in though

If you're looking for a sleeper deep guy, go with Leftwich. He's got one of the top 5 strongest arms in the league (easily) and has some big receivers he will connect with deep this year... if guys like Collins and Manning are gone, Byron will treat you right.

Unless you can get Peyton for your first pick, I'd get a RB first and either a WR or another RB 2nd - THEN a QB.

I guarantee you you can still get guys like Trent Green, Hasselbeck, and Favre and maybe even Vick by your 3rd pick.

That's kind of what I was thinking. It looks like there's quite a drop off on the QB's after Manning and Culpepper - a bunch that can be lumped into that second tier.

If Manning's available at 5, I'll definitely go that route. If, however, he's gone, I'll probably go with the fourth best running back (assuming no one takes a WR in the top 4). I know that Tomlinson and Alexander will be gone. Depending on the third RB taken, I'll be left with two of three from McGahee, Holmes, or James. That would be a tough call.

To me, you gotta go with the Edge. McGahee has not really proven himself yet and Priest is historically too fragile.

Plus, teams are guarding harder than ever against the Peyton pass, so I'd expect more running from Indy this year.

Good call. I would also think that the improved play of Larry Johnson will probably have some effect on Holmes' numbers this year.

I read somewhere that the Chiefs are planning to split carries between Holmes and Johnson, either 70/30 or 60/40. Either of those scenarios will drastically affect Holmes' value.

I just had the same choice in my draft...McGahee/James/Homles. I took McGahee, and here's why:

1) Holmes and Johnson are going to split time - I've heard 70/30 or 60/40 even. I'm guessing Johnson is going to get the ball inside the 20, so that will limit Priest's TDs.

2) James scared me TD-wise. Especially in a passing offense, I'm not sure he'll get the TD looks he deserves. When was the last time he put up a large # of TDs??

3) McGahee is going to be the focal point of the Buffalo Offense. I'll bet he touches the ball 25-30 times a game. He put up 1100 ryshing yards and 13 TDs in 11 games last year. People question Losman, but Bledsoe was shit last year as well.

Good luck!

if you go to http://www.cbssportsline.com and check the player stats it shows how many 20+ 40+ passes they completed which will give a good idea.

for example manning: http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/12531

hope it helps....

P. Manning is my number 1 obviously, but do I start Griese or Rothlisburger as #2 this week?

Thanks. Good rationale. It's a tough call. Do you go with the proven commodities (James/Holmes) or the guy with the biggest upside (McGahee)?

Thanks. Yeah, that helps a lot. I couldn't find anything with a breakdown of the passes. Since our league's scoring system is unlike any of those listed on websites or magazines, I'm trying to figure out how many points the top players would have had in 2004.

neither, find a new backup QB

awful you have to start two qb's a week?

i'm convinced the only way fantasy football should be played is

qb
rb
rb
wr
wr
wr
te
k
def

agreed...you should have options (in my league you can use 2 WRs and 2 TEs, or 1 RB and 4 WRs), but the basic formation should be that

yeah, it's like this

QB
QB
RB
RB
RB
TE
WR
WR
WR
WR
K
DEF

RB's are the highest valued.

How big is your league?? I've only seen that type of lineup used in small leagues (ie, 6 teams...).

Is that what you start each week, or your entire roster?