Every fantasy football player in the country looks for the competitive edge to beat their opponent. Each game means bragging rights and sometimes winning or losing a friendly bet. (Well, friendly might not always describe it, but you get the point.)
When we look for these tips for our team, we often turn to the few people that get paid to research and dedicate their work to fantasy football. This year, I am on the quest to find the most accurate and reliable fantasy football “guru”.
I will spotlight on the four websites that own the fantasy football world and in the end, crown the best guru in the last edition of “Fantasy Guru Rankings.”
The four gurus: Michael Fabiano of NFL.com, Jamey Eisenburg of CBS Sports, Matthew Berry of ESPN, and Brad Evans of Yahoo! Sports.
It’s time for a recap of Week Two of our “Fantasy Guru Rankings.” Last week, CBS Sports’ Jamey Eisenburg had a great week and was at the top of our leaderboard. This week however, we have some changes! Here are the rankings after Week Two:
If you need a refresher on how our scoring system works, click HERE.
*All points will be based off of ESPN’s non-PPR standard scoring for players.*
Michael Fabiano, NFL.com— @Michael_Fabiano
Fabiano had a respectable week with a 52% in Week One, but really turned it on in Week Two.
His quarterback picks were solid going 6-for-8 overall. The only two guys he missed on were Andrew Luck and Matt Schaub as “starts.” He accurately predicted that Ben Roethlisberger and Josh Freeman would have sub-par days.
As for the running backs and receivers, he totaled a combined 12-for-16. Among his picks, he told us to again sit Ryan Matthews and Montee Ball as well as Rashard Mendenhall who also didn’t reach 10 points.
DeSean Jackson and Pierre Garcon both had big days, just like Fabiano said they would.
At tight end, Fabiano missed on 5 of 8 picks—knocking his score down. He predicted Julius Thomas to have a good day, but he wrongly guessed on Brandon Meyers, Owen Daniels and Antonio Gates.
Overall, Fabiano totaled a 26-for-38 on the week giving him a weekly percentage of 68.4.
Matthew Berry, ESPN—@MatthewBerryTMR
Often looked upon as the most talented guru in the world of fantasy sports, Berry hasn’t quite lived up to the hype through two weeks.
He missed on Cam Newton, Eli Manning and Jay Cutler as well as eight of his 13 selections at the running back spot. “The Talented Mr. Roto” was hurt by some injuries to some of his “starts,” but he missed on several key positions this week.
We learned this week that his wide receiver “starts” were as inaccurate as you can get. Of his seven projected “big-game” wideouts, just ONE had a game over ten points—Desean Jackson. Cecil Shorts, Emmanuel Sanders, and Julian Edelman all failed to produce for Berry.
The tight end picks were even worse as the four players he “loved”, Jared Cook and Brandon Meyers included, all had bad games. He also projected Kyle Rudolph to go under ten points although the Viking scored a big touchdown to prove Berry wrong.
Overall, Berry ended up with a weekly percentage of just 41.8%.
Jamey Eisenberg, CBS Sports— @JameyEisenberg
Last week’s winner also had a bad performance this week, getting just 18 of his 42 picks right.
He didn’t see Sam Bradford’s big performance coming, nor did he expect Carson Palmer to go under 20 points. Overall, his quarterback picks were very average, guessing wrong on four guys.
I’m sure Mr. Eisenburg doesn’t even want me to bring up his running back category as eight of the 10 selections he made were incorrect.
He rebounded nicely on WRs, going 5-for-5 with his receiver “sits,” but Mike Wallace was the only pass-catcher that Eisenburg guessed correctly on in his “starts.” Steve Smith was a gutsy pick that didn’t work out here.
As for the defenses that Eisenburg picked—usually a sure-fire category—only one came through for him. The Chiefs and the Bills went in the total opposite direction that Eisenburg projected they would, hurting his final numbers.
Weekly percentage: 42.8%
Brad Evans, Yahoo Sports
As always, Evans only makes 10 picks in his “flames/lames” feature—so the object of tracking Evans is to see how correct he really is with these risky picks.
Here’s how it broke down for Evans in week two:
Weekly total of 50.0%