Thankfully I do not have a league on ESPN this year. I would have no problem with the commish stepping in. The team shouldn’t get a huge advantage like an extra quarterback because of a technicality.So ESPN is leaving Hill as a TE this weekend even though he is the starting QB this week. It's causing quite a stir in my league, so I am curious if anyone is doing anything about it? Any commish stepping in or just leaving alone?
He's been out there with that position eligibility, free for anyone to pick up.So ESPN is leaving Hill as a TE this weekend even though he is the starting QB this week. It's causing quite a stir in my league, so I am curious if anyone is doing anything about it? Any commish stepping in or just leaving alone?
What? He's the starting QB for a team that is expected to have one of the highest score totals this week by Vegas.I think he's good for 8-10 rush attempts this weekend, so I hope he has a floor of 4-6 points and always the possibility of a TD.
I would argue there was definitely a disadvantage created by ESPN because their little blurb on Taysom Hill actually blatantly said they would remove his TE eligibility if he were to ever become a starting QB.I see this kind of like baseball. He is gaining eligibility at a position but it shouldn't take away his already earned eligibility.
Everybody had the chance to get him so nobody was at a disadvantage in reading the tea leaves.
I was unaware of this statement but if that was stated then the commish should be in the right to not allow Hill to be played at TE.I would argue there was definitely a disadvantage created by ESPN because their little blurb on Taysom Hill actually blatantly said they would remove his TE eligibility if he were to ever become a starting QB.
Like, I didn't pick him up for that very reason.
There's no reason for ESPN to not be removing his TE eligibility.
No but in Fantasy Baseball I don't believe if a position player comes in a pitches an inning in a blowout that counts towards, or against your pitching stats. Kind of seems like the same thing to me.I see this kind of like baseball. He is gaining eligibility at a position but it shouldn't take away his already earned eligibility.
Everybody had the chance to get him so nobody was at a disadvantage in reading the tea leaves.
If that blurb is there (Hill's news timeline?), then they absolutely need to follow through. Also, that probably changes my stance on non-intervention. Regardless, espn should move quick on this one. No one should be playing TE Hill this week. The guy who thinks he has the TE Hill shouldn't have the rug pulled out from him on Sunday morning.I would argue there was definitely a disadvantage created by ESPN because their little blurb on Taysom Hill actually blatantly said they would remove his TE eligibility if he were to ever become a starting QB.
Like, I didn't pick him up for that very reason.
There's no reason for ESPN to not be removing his TE eligibility.
But in football Hill was able to get his passing, rushing, and receiving stats all year long if he was in your lineup regardless if you had him starting at TE already. Seems like that should continue.No but in Fantasy Baseball I don't believe if a position player comes in a pitches an inning in a blowout that counts towards, or against your pitching stats. Kind of seems like the same thing to me.
Link to crying? Opinions in this thread have been mostly if he's eligible than there is nothing wrong.technically nothing has changed.....any owner could have picked him up all year and played him at either QB/TE/Flex......and this really shouldn't be a surprise if you have been paying attention, he has always had this designation on the site and I am sure it has been on people's radar.....its just that now it is coming into play because he may get more PT at one of the positions he has always been eligible for....as soon as Brees got hurt, this should have been something every owner should have considered.....so IMO quit crying....it is what it is for this week....
with that said.....just because he has been announced as the "starter at QB" doesn't mean thats how things will play out.......Winston could VERY easily lead the team in QB snaps when all is said and done......IMO it is kind of a risky move to play him in some respects....
then this thread (uproar) should have been started at the beginning of the season......Link to crying? Opinions in this thread have been mostly if he's eligible than there is nothing wrong.
I think the issue is that he never should have been listed as a TE in the first place. I'm pretty sure the Saints list him as a QB.
Not sure where to find it. The ESPN app only shows specific player news going back so far, not to the beginning of the season. Don't remember what date they specifically addressed the topic.I was unaware of this statement but if that was stated then the commish should be in the right to not allow Hill to be played at TE.
ETA: where was this stated and is it still there?
saw this morning they said they may consider changing his designation after this week.....which I think is fair.....don't punish any owners this week who may have been sitting on this "golden ticket" advantage for awhile and acted on it....Okay, apparently we're talking about a Mike Clay tweet from April that said we reserve the right to strip his TE eligibility if he becomes the starter.
ESPN Fantasy should be fixing this quick, unless it's complete and utter trash, which I kind of suspected was already the case.
Yeah no one is crying here, it's just fantasy football we're talking about. I don't think our league will do anything about. My league mates mostly think it sucks for the guy playing Hill, but that he's been set this way all year and not really much to do about it.Link to crying? Opinions in this thread have been mostly if he's eligible than there is nothing wrong.
I think the issue is that he never should have been listed as a TE in the first place. I'm pretty sure the Saints list him as a QB.
Idk, I don't think this was presented as a wait-and-see situation from Clay's tweet. Taysom Hill is the announced starter at the position of QB. This is the exact scenario ESPN had apparently planned for, according to Mike Clay, and yet they are going to inexplicably give one week to one owner in every single league to use the guy as a cheat code before they make good on their promise to strip his TE eligibility.Considering we don't know the Hill / Winston mix, I can respect waiting until after this week to make that decision. Based on Clay's tweet, I think it's reasonable to expect the TE designation to be removed for anything north of 10-12 pass attempts. Obviously, the number and metric(s) used to make this determination are extremely subjective. But when Taysom Hill becomes a top 3 TE in their weekly rankings, it's probably time to do something.
Matthew Berry tweeted on Tuesday:I was unaware of this statement but if that was stated then the commish should be in the right to not allow Hill to be played at TE.
ETA: where was this stated and is it still there?
?.....you could have been using him as a TE all year.....Idk, I don't think this was presented as a wait-and-see situation from Clay's tweet. Taysom Hill is the announced starter at the position of QB. This is the exact scenario ESPN had apparently planned for, according to Mike Clay, and yet they are going to inexplicably give one week to one owner in every single league to use the guy as a cheat code before they make good on their promise to strip his TE eligibility.
I'm not even facing him in any of my leagues and I think this is absolutely ridiculous.
Props to ESPN, this is the correct action for this week.Matthew Berry tweeted on Tuesday:
FYI. In light of the Brees news Taysom Hill is given QB eligibility. If Hill plays primarily at QB, using snap count data & our team sees that continuing, we reserve the right to remove his TE eligibility. Please note that ESPN will never take a player's eligibility away mid-week. If he starts the week with TE tag then he keeps it all week. He will have TE eligibility for Week 11 even if he is announced as the starting QB for NO in Week 11
So since he started this week with TE eligibility, looks like it stays.
I get that and do have sympathy for anyone playing TE Hill this week. When Brees went down last year, there was some question about the Bridgewater/ Hill mix at QB. Pass attempts went to Bridgewater in the game Brees got injured and again the following week in Seattle. I can't remember exactly how Peyton played it. Seems like no starter was declared, or he said they would both take snaps at QB.Idk, I don't think this was presented as a wait-and-see situation from Clay's tweet. Taysom Hill is the announced starter at the position of QB. This is the exact scenario ESPN had apparently planned for, according to Mike Clay, and yet they are going to inexplicably give one week to one owner in every single league to use the guy as a cheat code before they make good on their promise to strip his TE eligibility.
I'm not even facing him in any of my leagues and I think this is absolutely ridiculous.
Someone who was able to grab him and put him at TE, let us know next week - if they do take his TE tag away, does he automatically go to your bench, or can you loophole the system and leave him there so long as you never move him? LolMatthew Berry tweeted on Tuesday:
FYI. In light of the Brees news Taysom Hill is given QB eligibility. If Hill plays primarily at QB, using snap count data & our team sees that continuing, we reserve the right to remove his TE eligibility. Please note that ESPN will never take a player's eligibility away mid-week. If he starts the week with TE tag then he keeps it all week. He will have TE eligibility for Week 11 even if he is announced as the starting QB for NO in Week 11
So since he started this week with TE eligibility, looks like it stays.
He wasn't named the starting QB until this week. And as I and others have pointed out, Mike Clay -- a representative of ESPN's fantasy football arm -- made it very clear that Hill's TE eligibility would be removed were he to ever become the starting QB.?.....you could have been using him as a TE all year.....
I'm pretty sure as soon as ESPN pulls the TE eligibility he'll be flagged as invalid and you'll have to move him to another slot or drop him.Someone who was able to grab him and put him at TE, let us know next week - if they do take his TE tag away, does he automatically go to your bench, or can you loophole the system and leave him there so long as you never move him? Lol
I don't think anyone can be sure, but if you don't have one of the elite TEs and 7 to 8 points is what you're expecting in a .5ppr streamer, you absolutely plug him in and have very reasonable hopes for a 15 point game passing and running from the QB position.how sure is anybody that he will actually make a cheat code advantage this week at TE......?......there's a good chance this could be a lot of smoke and mirrors by Peyton....
therein lies the rub.....what exactly does that mean.....nobody knows yet.....you can't assume yet that "being named the starter" means he gets what we normally think of as a starting QB's workload.....based on his usage this year he hasn't really been used as what we think of as a "starting QB".....and in fact last week, he wasn't even really being used as a "backup QB" as Winston took over after Brees went out......He wasn't named the starting QB until this week. And as I and others have pointed out, Mike Clay -- a representative of ESPN's fantasy football arm -- made it very clear that Hill's TE eligibility would be removed were he to ever become the starting QB.
Well, guess what, ESPN? Hill was named the starting QB.
They didn't they would wait to observe his usage as a starter. They didn't say it was dependent on in-game usage. They said he would not be TE eligible if he were named as a starting QB.
So exactly how is the change in their position at all defensible?
Interesting. Every time this has come up in the past, ESPN's position has been:Matthew Berry tweeted on Tuesday:
FYI. In light of the Brees news Taysom Hill is given QB eligibility. If Hill plays primarily at QB, using snap count data & our team sees that continuing, we reserve the right to remove his TE eligibility. Please note that ESPN will never take a player's eligibility away mid-week. If he starts the week with TE tag then he keeps it all week. He will have TE eligibility for Week 11 even if he is announced as the starting QB for NO in Week 11
So since he started this week with TE eligibility, looks like it stays.
There's no rub. It doesn't matter what it means. If he's taking first-team reps all week long, he's the starting QB.therein lies the rub.....what exactly does that mean.....nobody knows yet.....you can't assume yet that "being named the starter" means he gets what we normally think of as a starting QB's workload.....based on his usage this year he hasn't really been used as what we think of as a "starting QB".....and in fact last week, he wasn't even really being used as a "backup QB" as Winston took over after Brees went out......
waiting a week is a very reasonable decision here....
Lol. What classified as a “cheat code advantage” at TE this year, 14 points (non ppr)? Unless you’re a Kelce owner he’s an auto start at TE. This type of amateur hour stuff is exactly why I avoid playing on a trash platform like ESPN.how sure is anybody that he will actually make a cheat code advantage this week at TE......?......there's a good chance this could be a lot of smoke and mirrors by Peyton....
I'm really just playing devils advocate here......but what should his designation have been.....he hasn't been a starting QB, he hasn't even been the backup QB.....he has mostly played RB/TE/WR......Lol. What classified as a “cheat code advantage” at TE this year, 14 points (non ppr)? Unless you’re a Kelce owner he’s an auto start at TE. This type of amateur hour stuff is exactly why I avoid playing on a trash platform like ESPN.
In hindsight he should have been on my radar at TE long before this weekend because my TEs have sucked balls so far this year. Sadly, he was picked up by the guy right before me during the WW process this week. Good for him - at least I don't play him this week. I'll be starting G. Everett on MNF insteadany owner could have picked him up all year and played him at either QB/TE/Flex
As bad as the TE position has been this year, he'll be no lower than the 2nd highest scorer this week. What a free roll at that position. Knowing his skill set, he probably should have been stashed a lobg time ago. If you started him on a bye week and he got you a 0, no different than starting Gelsicki, Fant, Doyal, etc.For this week, I would call Hill an elite TE option. Risky, but the ceiling is higher than the floor is low imo.
A good to very good flex option. There's a scenario where an owner has Kelce, an excellent WR/RB alternative at flex and might not want to risk a Hill flex. I would say that the play there might be to trade Hill to a team desperate for a win that has a mediocre TE.