Poll shows Rivers a shaky option

I have been meaning to get to the poll results on the site from earlier this month on Charger QB Philip Rivers, and before I forget, let me chime in on the findings.

First up, here’s the question, in case you forgot:

Would you still draft Rivers in the 4th or 5th round right now given the Vincent Jackson situation?

And from over 2000 votes, here are the responses:

Yes, he’s an excellent player 49% (1073)

No, the situation is too scary 28% (618)

I might consider it 23% (511)

So basically, 50% of the voters would not draft him or would only consider drafting him. I guess “consider” is a broad word, but 50% of the respondents having serious concerns is quite a precipitous fall for Rivers, who would have likely commanded a 95% positive vote had he not had this issue with WR Vincent Jackson and LT Marcus McNeil.

I asked Greg Cosell for his opinion about the Rivers situation on the radio yesterday and he expressed some serious concerns over the potential loss of Jackson. Not only does Rivers lose a major playmaker and security blanket in Jackson – who is both a downfield threat and a huge, physical target – it could really change the way teams defend TE Antonio Gates and WR Malcom Floyd. Gates is a stud who should be able to handle anything, but Floyd’s a little unproven, and very unproven as a #1 WR. If Floyd is contained, Rivers’ options in the passing game are severely limited. There’s really no one else, unless Legedu Naanee really steps up. And of course if McNeil, their LT, holds out then Rivers’ chances will be hurt even further.

These issues could potentially all go away in a month or so (but Jackson’s out three games no matter what), but right now it sure doesn’t seem that way. If things get ugly here, we could see Rivers revert to his spastic ways, which worries me. He’s come a long way the last two years and he’s been fantastic. But back in 2006 and 2007, his inconsistent and frenetic play was maddening at times.

It’s a pretty deep group at QB this year, so right now I want no part of Phil Rivers.

The other question is, how does this affect RB Ryan Mathews? On one hand, he should be even more important to their offense, but a poor passing could potentially slow Mathews down. I’m not ready to move him down because of these issues, but that could change in August.

Category: Fantasy Football

Tagged:

12 Responses

  1. Stretch says:

    John,

    I here what you saying about P.Rivers and some of his potential issues. But have you taken a look at San Diego 2010 schedule. They are in the top-5 as far as having one of the easiest schedules this year. Plus their inter-conference schedule is against the NFC West which is cake.

    I also took a peek at Weeks 1 thru 3 when V.Jackson will be suspended. They play (@KC-1, JAC-2, & @SEA-3). All 3 teams were in the top 15 as far as points allowed to QBs & even in the top 8 to WRs in fantasy last year.

    I know KC drafted Safety E.Berry but he’s no Ronnie Lott. And I am aware that DSTs changes year to year but these teams will not upgrade that much in the first month of the season.

    Just for conversation, lets say Vjax holds out until week 10 or 11. He should be ready to go by fantasy playoff time. SD schedule is idea but great against (KC-week 14, SF-week 15, & @CIN-week 16).

    I feel P.Rivers will be fine because the easy schedule is just what the doctor order.

  2. hemdilly says:

    The def. can’t double team Floyd, Gates and put 6 in the box to stop Matthews – I don’t think there’s enough D to go around. Anyway, let’s just hope VJax gets some brains & common sence & plays football.

  3. MDS says:

    Kolb will be a better value and Favre will outproduce him

  4. John Hansen says:

    That schedule does help, but they are really thin without Jackson. Not sure I’d want to take him based on where he’s going.

  5. Eric says:

    Assuming we draft with this year’s mantra in mind of as many “sure things” as possible, I think I will pass if I have the opportunity to get Matthews in my keeper league. I am sure he will go in the middle of the first round or early 2nd at worst. I have potential shot at him at pick #9 but would take P. Thomas or Ryan Grant over him. I don’t think I am off base on this and it seems to go along with taking the more proven talent. I am still pretty high on Floyd though, and won’t really shy away from drafting him if he falls a bit (he will probably go around round 4 or 5 in my league where each of 12 teams keeps 3 players and gives up the round corresponding to the player).

  6. John Hansen says:

    You’re going to take Grant over Mathews in a keeper league? Dude, don’t do it, or Thomas for that matter. Huge mistake.

  7. jack says:

    mathews will be a keeper for the next 6 years. you cant say that for grant or pt

  8. eric says:

    Only reason for passing on Mathews is he will then cost me a 1st rounder every year. I already keep Gore for a 4th rounder. The first rounders tend to get thrown back most years unless the player is a Peterson-type talent. I also keep Turner for a 16th rounder, so decision is not as wacky as it seems.

  9. John Hansen says:

    Ah, well that’s a key difference. Still think Mathews could be worth it. Not exactly a value, but still worth it.

  10. eric says:

    I agree for sure! I think it is unfortunate that the VJax situation is happening for those of us who had targeted Malcolm Floyd as a potential late round gem! He appears now to be going earlier than maybe he should. I do think Rivers is enough of a star to shine no matter who he has around him though!

  11. Burton says:

    Yeah Eric, take Mathews in either case over Grant and Pierre T. He is likely to over produce both of those guys This Year, and you have a whole year to decide if you want to keep him next year.

    Although I like Grant this year to be a consistent producer that you can rely on every week. For example, S.Jackson was a disappointment last year, but at least you knew he was going to get 90-110 yards every week.

  12. Luke says:

    John–

    Does the V-Jax absence open any doors for Sproles? With San Diego becoming more of a passing team last year, I wonder if they might use Sproles in more creative ways to maximize the receiving talent on the field. Could mean splitting him out, or it could also mean more snaps for Sproles and a few less for Mathews. Any thoughts?

Leave a Reply