Nickel Coverage: Five fantasy questions that need answers before Week 2
— -- Week 1 of the 2015 fantasy football campaign brought all sorts of surprises. The Buffalo Bills defense shut down Andrew Luck, rookie quarterback Marcus Mariota exploded in his NFL debut, Adrian Peterson tanked in his return to the NFL, the Dallas Cowboys lost Dez Bryant for the foreseeable future and several young tight ends impacted games all across Fantasyland. Those surprises brought about key questions for Week 2, and we are here to give you some answers.
Each week throughout the season, I will posit five of the week's most intriguing fantasy questions to a rotating panel of experts from ESPN, ESPN Fantasy and NFL Nation. Five questions for five analysts, thus, Nickel Coverage.
Responses this week come from ESPN NFL senior writer Jeremy Fowler, NFL Nation Lions reporter Michael Rothstein, ESPN New York's Anita Marks, ESPN Fantasy analyst Matt Bowen and ESPN NFL scout Matt Williamson.
Tom Brady faces the staunch Bills defense, while Aaron Rodgers faces a Seahawks defense against whom he has averaged fewer than 200 passing yards and totaled two TDs during his past three meetings (including playoffs). Would you sit either quarterback in Week 2 if you have a viable backup with a good matchup?
Bowen: Sitting Brady or Rodgers should be out of the question. Yes, their numbers could drop a bit this weekend, given the matchups versus top-tier defensive clubs, but they are still elite starters. Go with your No.1 guy. For Brady, he must get the ball out quickly against the Bills' blitz packages. He knows what to expect versus coach Rex Ryan, and there will be one-on-one matchups to exploit. For Rodgers, it's time for the Packers' team leader to solve the Seahawks riddle. Make plays versus Cover 3 and create some explosive gains. Even if your No. 2 QB has a better "matchup" on paper, who shuts down Brady or Rodgers for the week? That's bad football.
Fowler: No chance. Ride your horses. Consider: In his past five years against coach Ryan (10 games), Brady has 20 touchdown passes to five interceptions and 2,662 yards (266.2 per game). That's not far off his career averages. Don't let Rex intimidate you. The only reason to veer from Brady would be if you have an undeniably sexy matchup, such as Carson Palmer against a porous Bears secondary. Otherwise, play him. As for Rodgers -- ride, ride, ride. Expect the Packers to struggle running the ball against Seattle's front, which means Rodgers, who will be ornery in this one after the way the playoff game unraveled, will get his.
Marks: Didn't we learn our lesson in Week 1 with Andrew Luck (posting a subpar 243 passing yards with two TDs and two INTs) vs. the Bills? I certainly did in two leagues! Keep in mind, Luck was blitzed on 49 percent of dropbacks Sunday, and I expect Rex to come after Brady just the same. Quick note: Last season the Bills' defense led the NFL with 54 sacks. Meanwhile, Rodgers, who is facing the stout Seattle defense with no Jordy Nelson and a dinged-up Randall Cobb, has me concerned as well. Instead of Brady and Rodgers, consider using Palmer at Chicago and Joe Flacco at Oakland.
Rothstein: In a word -- no. In multiple words -- absolutely not. While Buffalo and Seattle have two of the better defenses in the NFL, I find it very, very difficult to sit either quarterback at any point this year, barring injury or an insane weather situation. I say this because if you have Rodgers or Brady, the chances of you having Drew Brees, Ben Roethlisberger or Tony Romo would seem highly unlikely. Those would be the only three quarterbacks I'd consider playing above Brady or Rodgers this week. Stick with Brady and Rodgers in all other cases, because they are both talented enough to expose any defense.
Williamson: I would sit Brady if I had a midtier, high-upside quarterback who has a favorable matchup. Brady is going to get hit plenty in Week 2. As for Rodgers, I understand his history versus Seattle, but I roll with him every week no matter what.
With Dez Bryant out for the foreseeable future, how much should we adjust expectations for the fantasy value of Tony Romo and the Cowboys receivers in Week 2 against the Eagles and for the next month or two?
Fowler: Did you see the last drive Romo played? He ran the no-huddle like he was back at Eastern Illinois to dissect the Giants' defense on the game-winning drive. His numbers could dip slightly, yes, but not dramatically. Witten will get more targets, which dipped last year because he was blocking for DeMarco Murray so much. The Cowboys don't have that luxury now, so he slides back into that pass-catching tight end role. Romo is playing with a ton of confidence right now. He's finally healthy. No more back issues. Williams should rise to the occasion, and Beasley is sneaky good. He might be a better WR3 than, say, Danny Amendola.
Marks: Whenever a quarterback loses a legit No. 1 wide receiver during the season, his fantasy value diminishes to some degree. Williams and Beasley are good but not great. If anyone's value increases here, it is Witten's, especially in the red zone. Romo faces Philly, Atlanta and New Orleans the next three weeks. Not one of those three defenses ranks in the top 10 against opposing fantasy quarterbacks, so Romo should have some easy sailing the next few games. He does face the Seahawks in Week 8, but hopefully Bryant will be back before he battles the Jets in Week 15 and the Bills in Week 16.
Rothstein: I have no qualms about keeping Romo as a potential top fantasy quarterback because he still has Witten and Williams as options. The more interesting plays, to me, could be Beasley and Darren McFadden. It's possible the Cowboys could try dumping off to McFadden or Lance Dunbar a little bit more. But Beasley is the potential boom player here over the next month, as he and Williams should see a high increase in the number of targets. If they are still on your waiver wire, they are worth picking up.
Williamson: Overall, I think Bryant's injury is the deathblow to Dallas' playoff chances. He is that important. As I detailed in my Insider article this week, the offense, with now below-average running backs, is in dire straits with Bryant out of the picture, because the rest of the Cowboys' pass-catchers are simply complementary pieces. I want no part of this offense for fantasy reasons.
Marcus Mariota put up impressive numbers in his NFL debut against the Bucs. Should he be under consideration as a fantasy starter in Week 2 against the Browns and going forward in 10- or 12-team leagues?
Fowler: Depends what you have, but yes, I like him as a viable backup. Keep in mind the Browns are not the Bucs, at least not defensively. They will fix the pass-defense problems that plagued them against the Jets. The Browns secondary wants to be one of the best but knows it got tripped up last week. Expect the Browns to force Mariota to make tough NFL throws toward the sideline -- deep outs, stuff like that. Make him earn it, which the Bucs didn't do. Mariota's receivers were wide-open. The Browns won't panic in the run game and will sit back in coverage. Mariota can handle it, but he won't go for four scores -- especially not in the first half.
Marks: I could not be more excited for Mariota. As I mentioned in my Mariota video this week, being drafted No. 2 by the Titans was a blessing in disguise. Mariota could not have found himself in a better situation under the tutelage of coach Whisenhunt. Expect great things from this rookie QB this season, but is he a top-12 fantasy quarterback? No, not every Sunday. I like Mariota as a QB2 with some favorable matchups on his schedule. But he also has some difficult secondaries on his docket, such as dates with the Bills, Dolphins and Jets. This week, look for coach Mike Pettine to show some looks that a rookie quarterback will have difficulty reading, so don't expect four TDs in Week 2.
Rothstein: This completely depends on who else you have. Keep in mind Mariota faced the Bucs' defense, and the Bucs' offense couldn't stay on the field. This gave Mariota more opportunities -- and in some cases, great field position. While Cleveland has its own offensive questions with Johnny Manziel, it's hard to believe the Browns will have five turnovers for the second straight week. So there could be fewer opportunities for Mariota. That said, the Browns let Ryan Fitzpatrick have a strong day, so if you don't have a top-10 quarterback, it could be worth taking a shot. But it's going to be a week-by-week thing with Mariota.
Williamson: He absolutely should be. It is obvious from watching tape that Mariota has worked extremely hard, especially with his footwork, which is now excellent, to become more of an under-center quarterback. The accuracy has always been there and Tennessee has an underrated stable of receiving options. Plus, we all know the value of a running quarterback in fantasy. I am on board.
Tight ends were huge in Week 1, including later-round picks such as Austin Seferian-Jenkins (23 points), Tyler Eifert (22) and Jordan Reed (12). Which of these players, if any, do you trust as starters in 10- or 12-team leagues in Week 2?
Fowler: I'm leaning toward Eifert because he has the biggest upside and the best quarterback situation (right now, at least) from this group. The door is wide-open for Eifert to be the Bengals' No. 2 receiving option behind A.J. Green. Mohamed Sanu is a solid option but has had plenty of chances to take ownership of a WR2 spot and hasn't done it yet. Jermaine Gresham is gone now, it's Eifert's show, and he will capitalize. Reed simply doesn't have a stable enough quarterback situation to be a reliable option at this point. I just don't trust ASJ. Jameis Winston obviously likes him, but he'll like Vincent Jackson and Mike Evans more. He's the No. 3 option with the Bucs.
Marks: Eighteen tight ends put up double-digit numbers in Week 1. EIGHTEEN! Five tight ends finished in the top 12 among all positions. What!? I value ASJ and Reed as low-end TE1 options, but Eifert could finish the season in the top five. Bengals OC Hue Jackson loves him some Eifert. He knows that behind Green, Eifert is the best receiving option for quarterback Andy Dalton. And word out of Cincy is that " nobody can cover this cat." Well, that was evident in the opener. If you haven't picked him up off the waiver wire yet, RUN -- don't walk! Hopefully you don't find yourself in my conundrum, having to choose between Eifert and Greg Olsen in Week 2 ... oy vey!
Rothstein: I'd trust Eifert as long as he can stay healthy. The former first-round pick has always shown to have extreme talent when he's been on the field, and he has the best quarterback and is in the best offense of the three players. Plus, Eifert is facing San Diego, which allowed Eric Ebron to have four catches for 53 yards last week, so it could be a favorable matchup for Eifert. I'd throw Ebron in there as a consideration as well, considering Minnesota allowed San Francisco tight ends to catch seven passes for 92 yards Monday night.
Williamson: Eifert was my preseason breakout player, and I have believed for some time that he is on the cusp of fantasy (and real football for that matter) stardom. Eifert is an extremely Dalton-friendly receiving option. As for Reed, I am also on board ... at least for as long as his body holds up. ASJ is a fine talent and certainly should be rostered in every league, but I am far more skeptical, especially once Evans returns to Tampa's lineup.
Week 1 fantasy flops included Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson, whose teams face off in Week 2. Which one are you more worried about being a bust for the rest of the season and will either or both come through Sunday?
Fowler: As hard as it is to say, Peterson has more bust potential, not based on ability, but the current setup in Minnesota. The offensive line obviously has issues, Peterson didn't look overly comfortable taking the ball from the shotgun and the offense struggled as a result. Now, Norv Turner is savvy enough to make appropriate changes to accentuate Peterson's skill set. But so much of running the ball is about rhythm, whereas Johnson, at worst, will get a healthy target count by season's end because of Matthew Stafford's love for him. Even if Johnson loses a step eventually, his size and jumping ability will always make him viable in the red zone. I've always loved Peterson's game and hope he takes off, but he'll face more obstacles than Johnson.
Marks: My biggest concern about Johnson is he had fewer targets (four) than Ameer Abdullah (a rookie running back), Ebron (a tight end who couldn't even sniff the field last year) and Golden Tate. Megatron has not scored against the Vikings since 2012 and has totaled 100 receiving yards against them only once in his past five meetings. In Week 2, expect WR2 or flex numbers. Fantasy owners who drafted AP in the first round (like myself) do not care about the difficulty of a shotgun handoff -- run dude, RUN! Peterson should have an easier go of it this week against the Ndamukong Suh-less Lions defense that allowed 483 yards and 33 points in Week 1 to the Chargers. AP remains an RB1 for me heading into Week 2
Rothstein: I'll be covering this game Sunday, so I'd say I actually expect both to rebound. The feeling around the Detroit locker room is that Peterson will receive a usual workload Sunday, and I think he could have a really special outing in his first home game with the Vikings since his suspension. As far as Johnson, the questions in Allen Park this week have surrounded Johnson's lack of targets. So I'd expect Detroit to prove a point -- and Johnson to prove one as well -- against the Vikings. It is worth noting, though, that Johnson has had only two 100-yard games against Minnesota in his career (Week 3 in 2011 and Week 10 in 2012) and has scored only once against the Vikings in his past five games.
Williamson: Neither worries me as a "bust." I am throwing the Vikings' game in San Francisco out and treating it as an anomaly. Minnesota was sleepwalking in that game and soon will turn to Peterson to break them out of that funk -- although the Vikings offensive line is certainly concerning. As for Johnson, he will be fine. He is a superstar. But his long-term durability does give me pause.