I would grab either of those guys. I would lean towards Jennings this week because Driver is banged up.
Williams appears to be the new Jimmy Smith in JAX, so he'd be fine too. In the short term, he will have it a little harder with Matt Jones out, and they are a run first team. That little MJD guys is poaching yards.
Long term, you should try to get at least 1 marqee WR. Try to get Chad Johnson now, while he's cheap. Someone might do a two for one.
2006-10-06 08:36:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you been living under a rock, just check out the depth chart for Seattle. Engram is "officially" useless in Fantasy Football, as Seattle is deep in recievers in D-Jax, Branch, and Buerlson, although Holmgren likes to use Engram at the slot reciever, but nothing more. Out of the two, I really like this Jennings kid. Favre is showing that last year was a total fluke and he still has the mobility to pass the ball. With Ferguson out of the pic a long time ago, Jennings is filling the void left by Javon Walker and he's not letting it go. During pre-season, Coach Jack Del Rio has said that Williams wouldn't be in my fantasy team, but RW is benefiting from Leftwich emergence and that Matt Jones went down this week. Howver, Jax is a defensive team an Leftwich spreads the ball around, although Williams might not have the same help that Jennings has.
2006-10-06 10:00:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by mojo8983 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeh Engram should have been gone a long time ago. For a spot start this weekend I would pick up Jennings, otherwise look into gabriel out NE, he seems to be Bradys new best buddy. Either way send Engram down he road
2006-10-06 08:48:27
·
answer #3
·
answered by Jesse19rap 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Definitely YES, RIGHT NOW. if you can get either one (Jennings first because Favre just keeps throwing it up) Engram is at best #3 in Seattle, whereas you get a solid #2 (and with Driver questionable, a possible #1WR), or a borderline #1 in Reggie Williams.
2006-10-06 08:35:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Paris P 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
i could play Engram this week. then you particularly've the blend with Hasselbeck. you comprehend Engram is enjoying for particular and he will maximum possibly nonetheless get 50 yards or greater and perhaps a TD. He has been good for that most of the season. Hackett is an unknown, do no longer threat it! in case you desire to have the superb hazard to win, then do no longer take a threat. The Browns have a terrible D. So i think of the Seahawks could have the means to pass at will, making Engram an more desirable play than Holmes. The Steelers would be enjoying the Ravens so i do no longer anticipate a extreme factors day from Holmes. Esp. with H. Ward back healthful. you're precise to counter factors with the Seahawks gamers. flow with Engram! you're able to, it sounds like it replaced into your gut feeling besides. wish it works out for you. P.S. look at my question.
2016-10-18 22:40:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by montesi 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. EnGram is the # 4 reciever on the team. Behind. DJ, Branch, and Burleson. He wont get many looks. Pick up Williams (the #1 option on that team)
2006-10-06 10:05:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Platlander 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
R. Williams (Jax) i like Greg Jennings but just a bad offense
2006-10-06 08:35:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by bigtime 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yeah, he's pushed to #4 now because branch is in there.
And I don't know if this is surprising to you or not, but Greg Jennings is a major unknown. That guy catches everything, and never has to be out of position. He watches his quarterback, reads him, adjusts route accordingly. He looks like he's been in the league for years.
2006-10-06 14:53:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by The Sheepdog 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Engram will get his catches every game no matter what, but with 4 recivers he wont get much. Go with either Jennings or Williams and you'll get more production
2006-10-06 10:27:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by benriedell2002 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd definitely go with Jennings. Favre's hot right now, so Jennings is, too. As long as Favre keeps up, expect Jennings' numbers to climb.
2006-10-06 08:46:43
·
answer #10
·
answered by J. M 2
·
0⤊
0⤋