Week 14 main slate in daily fantasy football is gonna force us out of our comfort zones because we're either going to be using lower salary running backs or tight ends, guys who have somewhat flimsy roles or diving into games that have lower totals. I'm okay with some of those. I think there are some gains of lower totals that are pretty in play for stacking and potentially underrated in that regard. But either way, you're not gonna build a lot of ups that make you smile at the end for week number 14. That's okay. That's very okay because everyone else is in the exact same boats. We're gonna break down how to navigate that, where to find plays we like, where to find some value. Hopefully get you set for week 14 and the DFS main slate. This is the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Numberfire. That's right here on the FanDuel Podcast Network and Numberfire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for Numberfire.com. Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the senior managing editor of Numberfire.com. Brandon, are you ready to be uncomfy on week 14? I guess I don't have a choice. But it's good to know that I'm not the only one who engages my interest in a lineup with whether I smile when I click submit.  Yeah. I mean, I smile and like laugh on this show way more than is normal.  Yeah, that's exactly what I would have picked. But yeah, I guess I never thought about, you know, literally smiling once I click submit. But do you have that feeling ever? Because I have it like sometimes or it's like a special lineup. And like, you know, the joke is like, oh yeah, and then those always go wrong. Let's actually typically tend to be okay.   So I think maybe it's just perception differences, but. That doesn't happen often this year. You're still up eight to six, I think at this point. Or I don't know, you're up, you're up by enough where I'm in a hole. Oh, it's eight, must be nine to six. Cause we've had no eight to five, eight to five is the score. So that doesn't happen very often so far this year. I think I was like three and oh, and then I lost like 17 straight. So we're trying to follow it back here. I think you started off two and oh, and then it was a three, one through four weeks, but it's been mostly Brandon's in the spreadsheet column since then. I did beat you last week, despite not using DJ Chark, who was $4,000 under salaried. So I guess that was, that was only good lineup I built last week. So I guess that's a good thing, you know. Did you smile after you submitted it? No, I hated that lineup. I hated that lineup so much. It was awful. I didn't like my head to head lineup at all, but I liked some of my tournament lineups, not a ton, but like, you know, they just didn't work out. Hopefully this week is better though. We're gonna break down, guys were prioritizing, which games were actually okay stacking, whether it be the games that are the traditional game stacks or potentially some other ones as well, and get you set for week 14 in just one second. But first, a reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed, wherever you get your podcasts. We have course, R and Apple podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google podcasts, Amazon, I think has the podcast app. Anyway, we're there wherever you get your podcasts, you can find us. And while you're there, if you like what you hear, leave us a rating and review because it does help us out a bunch. Twice weekly NFL shows, still got UFC for big events as well via Austin Swain and also NBA BFS via Tom Vecchio every weekday.  With only a handful of Monday night football games for many of the season, Fatal and Visa are coming together to make sure the excitement surrounding Monday nights that an all-time high. Introducing Monday night perfect picks presented by Visa, a free to play fantasy contest on Fatal that gives you a chance to win your share of $10,000 in cash prizes courtesy of Visa. Here's how it works. You'll be presented with 10 questions centered around on-field action for Monday nights NFL game. Fans who answer the most questions correctly win their share of the $10,000 prize pool. It's that easy. The contest is now live. So head to fandual.com slash free slash contest slash Visa perfect picks. Make your picks before Monday night. That's fandual.com slash free slash contest slash Visa perfect picks. No purchase necessary. Age and location restrictions apply. Void were prohibited C terms at fandual.com. Visa and its financial institutions have not sponsored or offered this promotion in any way. Let's dig into this slate here, Brandon, for the week 14 NFL DFS main slate. And like I said, I think that my slate overview is you gotta be uncomfy and that's okay because everyone else is uncomfy too. That does not mean I'm down on this slate. It just means that I'm gonna have to do some stuff that is uncomfortable, but I think that that, if you're tuned in, that's a good thing for you. So for me personally, I do think it's a good slate for us because we're tuned in, but it is gonna force us to do some things that make you cringe a bit. That's my slate overview. What stands out to you? Yeah, I think I would, well, I'd follow that up with the question of like knowing like what is it that's making you uncomfortable? Is it a good feeling? If you feel uncomfortable and you're like, I don't know why that can be tough. So like, is it the game stack, like the lack of game stacks? Is it the state of running back? Is it everything for you? For me, it is knowing I will need to spend down on a running back with several paths to failure in order to make my lineups work and get in the players I wanna prioritize. I don't like to use running backs with roles that I think have a ceiling on them. And I think that I'll have to this week. So that's kind of where it's at for me.  It depends on, do I have Justin Jefferson in my lineup? Because if I have Justin Jefferson, it'll be my second running back. I'll probably have a receiver in the flex. But if it's not a Jefferson lineup, then it could be the third guy. Because I can definitely be okay with a lot of guys in the 7,000 range. Like Tony Pollard, we talked about him Monday. I'm still on board with that one for sure, $7,500. Trev's ETN, not a great match up against the Titans, but I do think that game is enticing a bit at 74. Isaiah Pacheco at 73. DeAndre Swift popped up on the injury report again Wednesday, which was annoying. I thought we were done with this, but that happened. Still okay with him. So I'm okay with a lot of guys in the 7,000 range, but I will need to have one, I think, guy in the 6,000 range to make things work. So I think the overview for me, and this is applicable whether you play, if you play anything other than one lineup, if you play more than one lineup, we have three, five, 10, 150, is making sure that because there's a lot of uncertainty, the, what feels right and what feels good is saying, well, okay, well like DeAndre Swift's in a good game, but he's not 100%, I'll get some of him, I'll get some Tony Pollard, I'll get, and you just go down the list, you're cycling in everyone, you have no real exposure advantage over the public, the contest you're playing in, and therefore you were kind of playing the consensus player pool. And so it's almost impossible to see a way that that is beneficial for you, because in the lineups that you have, like let's say DeAndre Swift does have a good game, but you had 15% of him, and then you're mixing in, all these other game stacks, and you have like no concentration, that's what I'm feeling I might fall into, and I need to find ways to take stands, plant some flags, and that way in the event that I'm on the right core, it's actually beneficial. Yeah, I think that just kind of going through the prioritization process, which for me involves like hand ranking guys, deciding like, okay, in this 7,000 range, I want to commit to Pollard. I think that that's probably the way it'll wind up is I just want to commit to Pollard. I think that's where it'll wind up, but going through the process and deciding, which of these guys do I feel best about, which of these guys has the most probabilistic and highest path to a ceiling, stuff like that. Go through that process and decide, whether it be because of workload, efficiency, game environment, whatever it may be, actually sort things out, so you're not getting too spread out in that regard, but it is a bit uncomfortable for sure. And again, that's a good thing, I think, but we'll see. Yeah, like I can see right now, I currently have Pollard and I think ETN is like my top two running backs, but I'm going to feel by Sunday, like I should get some like Pacheco. What if DeAndre Swift's role was actually like scaling up and if the practice thing doesn't really matter, like then I'm just playing too many guys, I'm not saying four running backs in this similar salary tier is too many guys, but you that is at the top end, because we have some studs, I just got to figure out ways to whittle things down by Sunday. I think if I have my like, if I have optimal situations on Sunday, I would love to have one running back in the 8,000 range, one of the 7,000 range, one of the 6,000 range per lineup, I think that's where I want to be. Yeah. Because the 8,000 range, I think is a lot better than the 7,000 range. I liked 7,000 range, but I think that like McCaffrey, Seyquan, mixed and if he's depending on our confidence there, DALV, maybe Nick Chubb, even in game stacks, like I think that range is pretty good. I'd like to have one of those guys. If I can get there, it is uncomfortable though, for sure. Yeah. And I did a study on pivots entering the season and like the sort of 7,000 range roughly for running backs is not a great tier to be in, especially if there's chalk, because there's the guys you're talking yourselves into for the role being better, like Pacheco overcoming the matchup, overcoming his workload limitations, ETN potentially that, you know, the matchup maybe quarterback, not 100%. And so you're doing that and then maybe you're missing out on those studs. So it's a lot of questions throughout the position, all positions this week. I think it's the toughest running backs that we've had in a bit. It feels like it. Yeah, for sure. Okay. Let's take into the injuries here for week number 14. Talk about ETN's team because Trevor Lawrence missed practice Wednesday with a toe injury. He suffered in week 13. He played through that in the second half and it sounds like Doug Peterson expects to play. Lawrence expects to play. So we'll talk about the Jags against the Titans in the trend section. Brock Purdy will start for the 49ers in place of Jimmy Garoppolo. Purdy played decently against the Dolphins last week, but now facing off of the Bucks much tougher task there. How are you viewing Christian McCaffrey and Debo Samuel Purdy starting for this week? I don't mind it. This guy's got peppered from Purdy with the targets. Debo, 10 of the targets from Purdy, which was about 28%, McCaffrey, nine, 25%. IU had seven, which was 19%. And I've seen some positive comments about like Purdy as a leader and the fact that he like took ownership. He missed the thread of Brandon and you can, he's like, I'll, you know, I'm gonna get you the ball. So like the one name that not involved in that is George Kittle who had just two of the targets, low A-dot from Purdy caught both of them. But, you know, the question is, do you think all four guys are involved? If so, might be a bit sticky. If you think that Kittle maybe just blocks a bit more to help things out with Purdy, like McCaffrey, Debo, both very much in play. So I'm not that concerned. And as much as I think Jimmy's probably like underrated, I don't think this is- He simultaneously over and underrated. That's my thought. But I don't think this is like a huge downgrade. I think it's a downgrade enough. I don't want to go at IUK. IUK sat at 67. I probably don't want to go at Debo at 71 just because like, he's still dealing with an injury. He hasn't had a lot of explosion so far this year. Even though he got 10 targets in that game, just 58 yards on those, that's a concern for me. McCaffrey, I will be on this week. Despite the fact that he's facing a Bucks Rush defense that has kind of surged back to being what they were previously who got healthier up front, that's helped them really come on strong there. So it's a tough matchup, but with the way he was using the passing game, 10 targets, 17 carries, four targets inside the red zone this past week. I think that we talked last week about like, with this knee thing, can he still torpedo us? I think I got lucky he didn't torpedo me last week because I think that the way he was used was well within his range of outcomes. So McCaffrey, I'll be there and of the guys in the 8,000 range. As of now, he's my favorite. I want to do more digging into Saquon Barkley because he could unseat him. Questions around Joe Mixon with Piran playing well and stuff like that. But I think McCaffrey as of now is my one in that tier. I think it's Mixon for me. Okay, that's fair. We'll talk about them on the bookmaker section. Lamar Jackson likely out this week with a PCL injury. Tyler Huntley will start in place against the Steelers. Huntley is $7,000. Is that low enough where you consider him given his rushing upside? And how are you being Mark Andrews, who went nuts with Huntley at the helm last year? Yeah, so Huntley's like fantasy, they kind of run like the similar goal line stuff that they deal with Lamar Jackson. Obviously that, you know, the game winner last week. But the fantasy production for him overall was not as good as it might've seemed, especially like in starts. And if memory serves, he came in relief two different times and like was pretty good. And I'm not saying that they're, you know, he's a very different quarterback than Lamar Jackson because they run a similar system whenever they're both playing. But I think it's different if you're prepping for Lamar and then like someone else comes in. So I don't want to like, it's weird because he has that upside, but he also has a really low floor. And we don't care about floor so much, but I kind of do it when it's a quarterback because if your quarterback gets you 12 points, you have no chance, even at 7,000. So I don't, I wouldn't like fault anyone for getting there, but I think that there are much better plays and I don't know if the salary savings is enough for me for this week. Yeah, I think that if he were in like a softer match about to give a consideration with TJ Wapping back, like this is not a soft matchup against the Steelers. I think the Steelers defense is awesome this week for DFS, $3,800 to them. Huntley, his efficiency was legitimately pretty bad last year on the whole. Wat did leave briefly during week 13, but he got a limited practice on Wednesday, which means I think he's going to play. So we should be good to go there. So I won't be on Huntley. I think that the Andrews stuff is fun, but like with decreased passing efficiency, Andrews seems like he's been banged up all year. I'm okay. Being lower on two, it could burn me, but that's fine. Both Kenneth Walker and DJ Dallas mispractice for the Seahawks on Wednesday. Travis Homer got in a limited session after he was inactive for week 13. If both Dallas and Homer are active, it seems likely to be a committee, but would you have any interest if it were Homer active with Tony Jones there and then likely Wayne Gullman being activist after he was signed to the practice squad this week? If there's Dallas and Homer, I'm not getting there. Yeah, I agree. If it's Homer, Tony Jones and Wayne Gullman, I would kind of view it not only as Travis Homer, but that Homer would get enough work where I'd consider him. I don't think that they want to use Tony Jones based on the fact that they brought on DJ Dallas back when he was hurt last week. So I'd have some passing interest in Homer if Dallas is out. Yeah, Homer's not an early down guy, but like I know he'll get work in the passing game. I know that. And then there's always the potential he gets work as an early down guy too. He's a very good pass catcher. We've seen him get involved there before. So if we get just Homer with Jones and Gullman, I would be intrigued by Homer. I'd still view him below James Cook at 61, but I'd at least be looking deeper into Homer and seeing if I could talk myself in there because I think that that is intriguing enough to buy in, especially in a good spot against Carolina. Joe Nixon practiced in full on Wednesday, meaning he should be cleared from concussion protocol this week. Hayden Hurst seems likely to sit due to his calf injury. We'll talk about them in the bookmaker section. David and Joku got in a limited practice Wednesday with his knee injury. He missed week 13 due to that. We'll talk about them in the bookmaker section as well. Deontay Foreman this practice Wednesday with a foot injury. He said he's 95% sure he'll play, which implies to me that it's closer to like 70 because NFL players tend to overestimate their health by quite a bit. Everyone says I'm gonna play. I'm 100% to play. 95 left a lot of women. 95, yeah. The 5% is telling. Might as well be 50%. People don't understand odds, probability. So 5% is a lot and it's interesting. The Panthers are three and a half point underdogs against Seattle, actually four point now, but they got good quarterback play from San Darno before their buy week. Any interest in Foreman for you assuming that he's good to go? Normally I would say no. Yeah. But I could see myself in sort of a bind or just I guess overall mini stacks. I want correlation despite the fact that I don't love a lot of games on this slate. I feel like I could do worse than Foreman with the assumption that game stays close and like DK Metcalf. I think Metcalf's at a high salary of 79. It's a little bit hard to prioritize, but I could see that being something that I get to in my fifth through to like 10th lineups. I don't think it's that outrageous where I need 150 to get there because running back is so bad. And then again, I'm playing the narrative that that game actually stays close. Yeah. I really don't mind this game in terms of like some mini stacks because I mean, Seattle might have to pass a lot given the running back injuries. That's a good thing for Pace. Their rush defense is bad, which means that Carolina could be efficient. Sam Darnold, like I said, played well. I don't expect him to keep on playing well, but like it's within the range of outcomes for sure. So having like a DK Metcalf Deontay Foreman stack or a DK Metcalf DJ Moore stack for the full abbreviation stack, I think that that's enticing. Are there abbreviations if there's no periods? I think so. I'm also, if you have periods in your name, you should reevaluate, not you personally, but like it's a lot of work to add the periods in. So like I just checked their Twitter accounts and if they use periods there, cool. If they don't, I'm not using them. Like DJ Chark has no periods in his name on Twitter. So shout out to our King DJ Chark. I think that my interest level in DJ Moore this week might be higher than it's been all year. Combined. Yeah. I would back off if he projects for like 15% roster rate, then I'm like, oh, that's a lie, but I'm interested for the first time. It's been a while. Yeah. I don't hate it, but the salary of 6,900, I don't know how often I can specifically be in that range just because unless I go completely balanced, which even then you still need value receivers and tight ends and like, I mean, he's game stacks only, correct? Yeah. Yeah. Because like if it's not game stacks, I'm using Devonte Smith every time plus two. Like a hundred percent of the time, 102% of the time. So yeah. Michael Carter got in a full practice Wednesday meaning he should be back this week, but Robert Saw said that Zonovan Knight is not going anywhere, which means I think that it implies he'll have a role. It does not imply he'll keep the same role, but it also means he could. I don't know. It's a wide range of outcomes there. Knight is $6,300, but a big underdog against the Bills. Is Zonovan Knight DFS viable for you this week? I would say if we weren't gonna get Carter, which I know we are, he would be quite viable. I think that he is still, again, because I'm gonna take some imperfections somewhere in my lineups. I could see playing Knight in a stack with the Bills. To some degree. Like he's gonna be game stacks only. So it's kind of weird where I'm not exactly playing, but guys I like the most based on process. I'm probably gonna be figuring out which games I wanna stack the most. And just if it ends up being like Gabe Davis and Zonovan Knight mini stack, I'm okay with that. And again, I gotta watch that I'm not getting mini stacks of like Forman Metcalf, Zonovan Knight, Gabe or some other passcat. Like that's what my fear is. And I'm already like devolving into that potential. Yeah. Yeah, I don't have a lot of interest in the Jets honestly in this game. Right. I did bet them the close, but we'll talk about the Bills side and the Trends section. And I think there are better ways to be a bit different this week than being super behind the Bills. Like Gabe is a one-off. Stefan digs is a one-off. Mike and James Cook is a one-off. But like, I don't know if this will be a game that I wanna stack. Repeat divisional matchup. They just played a couple of weeks ago. That game was low scoring. Bills being more run heavy now. I think Mike White's not the best. You know, he's better than what they have, but like not the best still. So I don't think this will be a game stack situation for me. Canarius Tony practice Wednesday for the first time since suffering his hamstring injury. We'll talk about the Chiefs and the Trends section. Cortland Sutton likely to miss week 14 due to a hamstring issue. Greg Dulcich had eight targets last week. Jerry Judy had four on very few snaps. He returned from an ankle injury then. Didn't practice last week until Friday, which I think is why he was super limited during the game. Are either Judy or Dulcich in play for you against the Chiefs? Dulcich for sure, because he's a tight end. And finally got some yardage last week with 85. He had been, he had a two 11 yard games out of the past three entering, which like, I'm not saying he's Travis Kelsey, but you gotta get Greg Dulcich more than 11 yards. It's just egregious. Where's Judy? I haven't looked at Judy yet. He had 65, which is higher than I was hoping it'd be. Yeah, that's a little tough. But again, if I wanna play the Chiefs, if I wanna play my Holmes, I gotta be open to Judy and Dulcich doing something. Right. Especially because the Chiefs and Bills have not been airing it out as much. We talked about that on Monday. They've been scaling back their pass rate over expectation. They're still about league average in recent weeks. And I expect them to be, you know, just generally pass heavy and, you know, overall, but I'm higher on Dulcich than Judy though. I am too, because of salary, because of the position and stuff like that. I will say that you can make a Mahomes, Kelsey, Judy lineup work. If you do that, if you put in Mahomes, Kelsey, Judy and with DJ Chark as an assumed value play in there, Steelers defense at 38 as kind of the fill in. You're at 6,800 left for two running backs, receiver and a flex. If I put in James Cook at 61 and that's 70, 33, I can live around the 7,000 range. That's okay. So I can make it work with Jerry Judy. I do wish he were lower salary, but I think it's okay. I prefer Dulcich, like you said, but I think both those guys are options. I just prefer Dulcich, which is exactly what you were saying. But Judy's salary is off-putting, but I'll still be there probably at times because I will have Mahomes. Yeah. I mean, he got four targets on eight routes last week. Yeah. And he's like been, I think better than perception this year. Like looking at his yardage totals are actually not bad. So I think he's played better than perception. Ross, when targeting Judy has been fine this year.  Traylon Birx just practiced Wednesday after suffering concussion last week with Birx out, Chica Conquo had five targets, ran a healthy number of routes. Where does he sit on your radar at $4,800 against the Jags? He is way up there. Yeah. He's a love for, for I think both of us. Yeah. Like yours per route runs a good stat. And I would assume it stabilizes fairly quickly. I know it's very predictive year over year, but it accounts for, you know, the volume that you're actually on the field, but also your efficiency and like target share. That's why it's a good stat. That's why like yards per team attempt when you're like just got in college players is, it's probably a very similar stat, but he leads tight ends. He doesn't have a huge sample, but he's very good. He has your depth of catch ability. We saw Pat, Pat Fryermuth last week have one long catch and be a really good tight end play. I think that that's very much in the cards for him. I don't think we'll see more than like seven targets at max just because of this offense, but I'm pretty heavy on, on Okonkwo this week. Yeah. I think the, the only worry I have is that it'll be super popular because we're not alone. There's been a lot of like the Okonkwo drum has been banging on Twitter throughout this week. So I think people will be there. And so I've been thinking through like, okay, are there viable pivots? I dug into Daniel Bellinger at $4,800. His eight out is 2.6, whereas Okonkwo's is 9.1, I believe. Okonkwo has had a lot of yards of the catch potential. So I do want to pivot at times, whether, I mean, Dulcer should be probably the most popular guy in the slate. I want to pivot to Bellinger at times, but like that's kind of the only concern with Okonkwo is like, if he maintains the same role he had last week with a 59% route rate given how productive he is on his routes. And the fact that again, I think this game is pretty okay. Also the Jags, Rush Defense is the one thing they do well, which could encourage the Titans to throw more. I feel like I, it's really just the roster rate concern that kind of sticks out there for me. Everything else is pretty sick for him, honestly. Yeah. And that pivot study I did entering the season, you know, value chalk tight ends are pretty good. We're usually pretty good at identifying opportunity relative to cost. It's not to say that, you know, true eruption games are like super common. But if your goal, it sort of quote unquote, punting the position is decent, like some sort of pulse. You know, it's usually a pretty good, pretty good option. Okay. And Okonkwo, like you said, will be a guy we'll discuss later on as well. Let's dig in now to the bookmaker section and start things off with the highest total on the slate by a wide margin. That is the Detroit Lions hosting the Minnesota Vikings total is 52 and a half with the Lions favor by two and a half. This total was 51 and a half got up to 53 and a half now back down to 52 and a half. And we've seen a lot of bets coming in the Lions because they, I think it was a pick them on Sunday night and is now Lions minus two and a half. So super high total. What's your view of this one for stacking? You know, the, the instant reaction is to love it. But for me to truly love a game stack, it's got to be like a two QB game. And I think there's a legitimate question this week for both quarterbacks in this matchup. And I want to hear your thoughts on both Kirk Cousins and Jared Goff. I think with Hertz in a really good spot, Burrow in a really good spot, Mahomes being a fun pivot, Josh Allen always me is Josh Allen. I won't use either. So I think the way I tend to view these games where it's a no quarterback game for me is I will build my, cause my, the way my line of building process works is I have a skeleton in there for the game stack. You know, it's Mahomes, Juju, Judy. And then I fill that in and then put those three guys in and then go from there. A lot of times when there's a game like this where I don't want either quarterback, what I will do is put in the first stack and then build in a mini stack of the other game that I like right after that. I think this game is good enough where I will probably do that, not in every lineup, but like do that pretty often and consciously make sure I'm getting mini stacks of this game. And it's like, okay, I got a couple of spots left. Even if I don't like building the stack right away, I got a couple of spots left, one receiver, one running back. Let's try to get a game stack in from that Vikings Lions game. I think that's probably the way I'll wind up handling it. Yeah, so they played already at a season back in week three. Cousins had 18.3 Fandall points. Goff was at like 14.8 or 14.9. I'm not saying that you just copy paste that, but these two teams have met already, which is generally bad for efficiency that the following game, especially for like quarterback ceilings that just typically is a bit more muted because teams have- Especially true for quarterbacks who are dependent on efficiency and because neither of these guys run, that is true for them. So I think that they're very good like season long plays if you need to stream or there's a lot of buys, whatever, like I can see that case. And I can also see that how that would bump up their popularity numbers. I think that they'll rate out as good like per dollar plays this week. But again, anytime it's a zero quarterback game for me, I can't say that I absolutely love it. That being said, elsewhere in this game, I'm very intrigued. And I do think that Justin Jefferson is someone I'm gonna go out of my way of to have exposure to. I very rarely get to the superstar, like 9,000 plus receivers, but I think I need to try it because he's the guy. He's a guy always, but I think this week he's the guy who could put up 35 and really give us no Jefferson, no cash. Yeah. I think that he's pretty like. No Jefferson, no smiles this week. Let's get that. Yes, exactly. And that's part of why it was like, we were talking in the beginning, like, okay, the lower salary back might be my running back too, if I'm getting Jefferson in. Cause I was building consciously building Jefferson line up earlier on this week. I don't tend to build early in the week very often, unless I need to get a feel of like what the roster construction the slate looks like. And I don't tend to build early in the week and I thought I had to, in order to see what getting Jefferson in there was like. And granted, you know, that was a lineup where I was shoving in T. Higgins and Devonte Smith because I adore both those guys relative to salary. So that was a factor in wanting to get those guys in while still getting Jefferson and I could make it work. But I think a lot of times I wind up not having enough of the high salary receivers. I wanna make sure I don't do that with Jefferson this week for the reasons you mentioned. Now, people are gonna cite Jeff Acuda and his numbers against Jefferson back in week number three. Acuda, I believe got banged up in week number 13. He played every snap, but he missed practice on Wednesday. Let me double check that. He has an illness, so he'll probably play. But I think people will probably cite Acuda's numbers against Jefferson in week three. I think that that might allow us to get like Jefferson at 15% as opposed to 20% and that matters. I don't worry about Acuda that much because I think that Kevin O'Connell is a smart guy and can find ways to scheme Jefferson open and- Two carries last week. There we go. I think that Jefferson is like more of a priority for me than most high salary receivers typically are is the way I'd phrase it. Yeah, I'm messing around with some lineups with, you know, two mid-range running backs like Joe Burrow with a Tyler Boyd because I gotta be realistic here in Jefferson. And I think it's doable. Yeah, I don't know. My question to you is, is Jefferson someone you're prioritizing in your main or like head-to-head lineup? Head-to-head potentially not because that would force me to get pretty thin in some spots where I don't want to get thin. I would like to, obviously, but I don't want to be super thin and using guys with bad medians but also bad upside in cash. So I don't know if I'll get there. I'd like to, but I'm not sure. DJ, or I'm on our St. Brown, more realistic to get to in that type of format and still very desirable there. But like a main tournament lineup, I guess it depends where I settle in on James Cook because if I decide James Cook is worthy of that roster, then I gotta spend that savings on a guy who has juice and name me a guy who has more juice than Justin Jefferson.  How can he have more juice than that? Justin Jefferson? But yeah, with, so I think he's great, but I don't want to overlook Amon Ross, St. Brown, Minnesota last and catch rate over expectation allowed to opposing receivers. I think it's just like sort of by nature of how their defense kind of works a little bit. Yeah. And he's someone who can do damage on like 12 underneath targets. So I'm, you know, I don't think I could really stack those two together this week. Yeah. It'd be fun. I'm so, but if you go like Jared Goff to stack both of them and Goff goes for like 303, I think that that, you know, is something worth considering. Okay. So Amon Ross, St. Brown, Justin Jefferson, I don't want to put shark in there because I don't really want to have two receivers on the same team that kind of caps your upside a little bit there. So I'll put Isaiah McKenzie at 56 in tentatively as like the value receiver, Chica Conquo at tight end and a defense 6975 left with no quarterback yet. So we'll put James Cook in here. Let's put a burrow in there. With burrow and James Cook, I'm at 6750 left. So if I can put Pollard in there and then I'd have 6,000 left for my flex, it means I have two thin wide receivers and James Cook. I can make that work, but also means I have no burrow stack. I just realized I could use Boyd, but I'm not as high on him as you are. I'm high out of necessity. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Not a good feeling. And I talk about that a lot. I don't like to play guys based just on their salary, but. For sure. You can make it work, but it does, it's pretty gross. And it would look easy. It'd be easier if you had golf or cousins in there. Maybe it means we should be behind the quarterbacks. Honestly, if we like this game this much, but. So like if you go golf, Jefferson, Amon Ra with Chig and the Steelers, you have a flex receiver and two running backs. You're at 6,600 even. I think that you could do a lot worse than that. Yeah. So I think that for what those two receivers could do relative to this slate, I think maybe I got to bump up golf and make that like a half quarterback game. I don't know if I'm like Kirk Cousins though. I would not use Kirk either. Running backs. We have DeAndre Swift and Dalvin Cook. What's your view of those two guys relative to the slate? Cook, I think just a little over salaried for. You had to use stuff for the matchup and they went a little bit too far with it. I mean, I think he's got like true eruption potential. Yeah. But it's not as legitimate as other backs historically in the upper 8,000 range. So I'm not quite feeling like I have to get there. And then, you know, I think DeAndre Swift is fine for game sacks because then you're playing the angle that he just does play more than expectation, but he, you know, if he got in a full practice on Wednesday, I would probably have said that Swift was someone I was considering for a main lineup because I think that the salary would have been too low. But I think it's probably about fair if he's gonna be iffy and we don't really know what to expect. If he gets into full practice Thursday, I'll bump him.  I think it makes sense to actually care about practice, honestly. I'd bump him there.  Yeah, I'm gonna, like it's a, it's something I wanna prioritize. It's just really hard to build around an $8,700 salary running back this week. Especially if we have concerns around what the true ceiling is there. Let's move now to the Browns at the Bengals. Second highest total on this slate. That one is at 47 and a half with the Bengals favorite by six and a half. That spread is lengthened. It was four and a half on Monday, now six and a half. I think I can say we know we want Bengals. I don't think that's a overreach on my part, but what's your interest level on the Browns after their struggles into Sean Watson's first game back? I don't, I don't know how long it's gonna take for Watson to get like back, but he's got a second straight road game. This time against the division rival. I know that he hasn't had like a long history within the division, but I think that the Bengals fans will want this game a lot obviously and not make it super easy on this offense, which is something that can easily be overstated, but also can be understated if you don't think about that angle at all. These are real people. They're not just stats on a spreadsheet. I would say that the most realistic angle for me is probably Donovan Peoples-Jones just because regardless of any situation, I think that he is one of the better, he's one of the better archetypes for a value receiver to have a path to a ceiling. So I'm gonna say DPG number one for me here. I feel like not having any Nick Chubb and game stacks is wrong, but I don't think that Chubb is someone I'm prioritizing even if the salary decrease in a single entry lineup. I think I'm open to Chubb and game stacks. What's that? Like outside of game stacks, I'm not gonna play Chubb. So I very likely might stack this game in a single entry. So therefore, I just wanted to clarify that Chubb's in play for single entry, not necessarily for outside game stacks. Stand alone play, would you rank him below both McCaffrey and Barkley? I would. I would too. But I'm, like you said, probably gonna game stack this one, so that might inherently inflate it, but like as a standalone player, I prefer to go with one of those guys. As for me, I think I like in Joku a bit more if he gets in a full practice by Friday, because we've seen DPJ's workload really fluctuate based on whether in Joku is good to go. And in Joku, I think it was a shifty tweet on Wednesday saying that in Joku would practice this week. If it was shifty, I tend to put more weight in that. And he did practice Wednesday in a limited fashion. That to me implies that there are very good ads he plays this week, which implies that he is decently healthy. What? As someone who's needed David and Joku in season long, fall season, I've been through this before and I don't have high expectations. Yeah. I like the appeal though, if we have like two obvious value tight ends and Greg Dalsuch and Chica Coquo to pivot a little bit and go a little bit more to in Joku, a guy who's proven he has yardage upside, has proven role if he's healthy. That's a major caveat. Because he does impact DPJ. Now DPJ is still viable for game stacks of 61, but he would be downgraded as a standalone play if in Joku winds up going. And I would say like of the lineups I've built this week, the ones that are most, the ones that if he cringe the least, which may be a good or bad thing are the Joe Burrow lineups. Like Joe Burrow, yeah. Joe Burrow, T. Higgins, David and Joku lineups are hot. Like those are the smile lineups. That's three and a half smiles out of five. Are Burrow, Higgins and Joku stacks because I can get to Pollard, no sweat. I can get to Devontae Smith as a standalone play, no sweat or a game stack. But say Quam Barkley pretty easily. I can get my one running back in the 8,000, 7,000, 6,000 range in that lineup. So I think that right now my main lineup are like my, like if I've got one, it's probably gonna be a Burrow Higgins stack as of now. Close to that as well. Okay. So you said you like mixing a lot. I don't disagree in general. I'm just a little bit worried about the way that break that, that distribution could break down with him and Samajepi Rine. Now there's Jamar Chase back too that could impact past catching all those Samajepi Rines past catching rule last week was phenomenal with Chase being back. So talk me into why I should be higher on Joe Mixon than I am. I mean, we like Joe Mixon generally, right? Like throughout the season before the concussion, before Samajepi Rine, right? Or no? Yeah. Yeah. Yes. So now that they are actually good as a rushing team, yes. So Mixon practiced in full Wednesday and Zach Taylor said that looks like basically Samajepi's been good but Joe Mixon is our running back specifically citing the last time that he played, he had five touchdowns. That is the type of the touchdown thing is like, okay, you're not looking necessarily at just efficiency or like trying to, like you think that Joe Mixon is good enough to score five times. That's what you're fixating on. He's gonna come back to a big role in a game that we like. So I'm okay overextending a little bit with the salary and I would think that they're gonna wanna get him touchdowns if they can, plus it's a really good ground matchup. So. It is. I think that the salary is a bit too high for the potential for that rule to be a little bit worse. But I think that injected into this game, it's very like fair then. So one lineup you have Mixon over McCaffrey? Yes, but I'm probably I don't know if I'm gonna play either of them in my like primary lineup. And would you rather go Mixon at running back or have a, you can go Mixon with burrow, I should make that clear. But would you rather go Mixon at running back or a burrow stack with like Higgins or Chase at quarterback? I'd be more likely to go a burrow with tee. I think I would too. Yeah, I should probably find that Taylor quote so I can dig into it. That does help to hear him say that. So I think that is influential. I think I have a quote based in. If you have it in full, I'd take it. Zach Taylor said quote, Joe Mixon is our starting running back. He had five touchdowns the last time he played and quote. Okay. That works for me. That does up him for sure.  Yeah. I mean, like, I think, aren't the TJ Hernandez it's a research on from 444 found that people are too low on players coming off of an injury report. So. Okay. Cool. I'm sure. I mean, if it wasn't TJ, I'm sure he's actually done something like that. But. It sounds like a TJ thing. TJ is very good at what he does. So I would not be surprised at all. Okay. Eagles are favored by six and a half against the Giants. Total for that game is 45 and a half, which puts the Giants implied total or the Eagles implied total at 26. We're going to be on the Eagles here. They're very similar to the Bengals where it's kind of assumed we'll be there. But any bringing backs for you on the Giants side with their implied total at 19 and a half. So I'm going to say it sounds like you're higher on sequel than I am. Because I like this game. That's fair. I wouldn't get to say Kwan. I don't think I'm going to play anybody else from the Giants here. Like you can talk to me about a specific tight end here, but. I don't know if I want to do anymore if I did my research. Okay. I think say Kwan is game stacks only. I don't really care that I can't bring it back so much because the Eagles are probably the easiest team to stack in football right now. Yeah. Especially with Devante Smith under salaried. So like if you want Jalen Hertz, you play him with AJ Brown and or Devante Smith. I'm not saying same lineups although last week would have been great. It's just, this is like as good as stacking gets. These guys have like 25 plus percent target shares. Downfield work, Red Zone work. They're very good. They have a good quarterback throwing them the ball. So usually I'm lower on an offense if I don't want to bring it back. But here it's not the case. I love Hertz and Brown and specifically Devante Smith. Yes. I agree with everything you said in the Eagles. No, no feedback there. I think that's 10 out of 10. As far as a Kwan goes, the reason I like him is now the, the matchup is not as good as it was previously because Jordan Davis, I believe was full in practice on Wednesday, which means he didn't play a lot of snaps last week. I'd expect that to increase this week. They haven't done McKinsey. They've got some really good like buck kickers at the tackle once again, which they did not have previously. So the matchup is not why I want to go to Saquon. The reason I want to go to Saquon is I don't think people will because the productivity has not been there. The, we haven't seen him go nuts all that much recently, but we know that that's kind of a thing with Saquon. He is a volatile back who he wants to hit dingers. He's not trying to hit singles. The slugging percentage for him is very high, which means he can be in ruts. He can have these, these down ticks for sure. But I also still think that the psychopath game is within his range of outcomes where he goes absolutely bananas. He has had a lot of passing involvement recently. He's had five, six and five targets to pass three games. Not a lot of production on that, but like getting work in the passing game, he can explode as a rusher. And I think that's still in there. So if his salary has come down, you know, like $1,300 from what it was, maybe he won't be as popular as he, you know, as maybe he should be. He is an explosive runner who is volatile in a good way. I think that all adds up to make him a pretty fun tournament play. So I kind of like, I almost want to actively try to get to him in like my primary single entry lineup this week because the factors are listed there. I don't hate it. Philly, you can run on Philly. That's not really what usually good, like smart teams have bad rush defense. It just kind of seems to happen very often, but I see the case for it. I think that, so my default like assumption lineup is that I'm going to play burrow with T and then find a way to bring it back. But honestly, if you like Hertz, Devonte and Seguan, that's a way of differentiating without being silly. Yeah. And I don't think you'd really regret that. So yeah, you can make a, you could also do a lineup where you don't run it back with any Browns. I guess you could go in Joku. All right. So if I've got burrow, Higgins in Joku with a Devonte and Seguan mini stack, I've got 64, 33 left for three slots with the Steelers defense in there. I could put DJ Shark in there. I can put James Cook in there. Oh, gosh, this is fun. Okay. I might actually use this lineup. That's a fun lineup. Okay. I'm going to use that one. Okay. I feel really good about that. So I can get exposure to both these games very easily. I can use like if, you know, who's your quote unquote one guy this week? It's like a toss up between Teagan's and Devonte Smith and I can get both those guys in that lineup with Tony powered with, I think this is kind of fun. This might be my lineup. I might have just built it.  Did you know that you can click, like long click on a player on Fandall and drag them throughout your lineup? No. What? Oh my gosh. That's so cool. I never knew that. How many times have I built lineups and like had to like take a guy out to like put him in the flex because he wanted to be in the latest start time guy? Wow. That's life changing. Wow. This is, can you do this on mobile? I've never, I don't build lineups on mobile because I respect myself. But like, can you do that on mobile too? I've done single game lineups on mobile. I guess I should clarify that. Oh yeah. I just, if I'm building like- I have a lineup reserved for Thursday night. Let me just do this really quick. Let's put Josh Jacobs at the MVP. Oh no, I want to put Devontae at MVP. Can I drag Josh Jacobs? No, I can't. Okay, but you can't do it on desktop. So be a true elite DFS player. Build on desktop, but you know, that's good to know you can do that. You changed my, blew my brains. Okay. But I think that for me after- I just wrinkled my brain. Yeah. After talking through these three games, I feel like if I'm building one lineup, the one game I am most likely to omit from a game stack and not game stack is probably Vikings Lions, which kind of goes back to what you said about it being a zero quarterback lineup and thus shoving it down. I might wind up doing acting in that way. I don't think you can, I mean, you can regret it, but from a process standpoint pivoting to like Jalen Hurds or like Joe Burrow, I think you can feel really good about that before kickoff, whatever happens from there, you know, but process-wise, it doesn't make sense. Okay. So let's dig into our trends for week number 14 and start things off by talking about the Dallas Cowboys. They're facing the Texans, a 16 and a half point favorites. My numbers say they should be favored by either 17.8 or 19.1, depending on the model. They're favored, Texans bad, Cowboys good. You're going to discuss the Cowboys tendencies while leading. What did you find when digging into that? Yeah. I mean, like very few games are perfect. Even that Vikings Lions game might not be the place you go for a quarterback. I know that we're now lower on like value quarterbacks than we have been in the past just because rushing upside is so impactful. But I think that other, you know, a lot of people like to play the value quarterbacks. It's going to make their, the rest of the lineups good, but, you know, long story short, no game's like really perfect this week. We have questions with bringbacks or quarterbacks or whatever. So why not take a look, like a long look at the Cowboys, despite their status as a huge favorite, because they've been very good, Dak good, Dak back, play Cowboys, right? That's just what it should be. But since Prescott's return, the Cowboys have run 97 plays while up eight or more points on those. That's a lot of plays, man, in a small sample. On those plays, they have an adjusted pace of 27 and a half 27 and a half seconds, which would rank seventh as a standalone team on the full season. So, I mean, they're always planned fast, but they keep up the tempo pretty well in this split. Their raw pass rate on those, just 40%, but their pass rate over expectation, pretty reasonable, minus 1.5%, but they're just really good. Like when they play from ahead, they, you know, they need win, like they need to keep winning.  That's not how football works. It just, it just doesn't, they're not going to be up, well, they might be up 42 at halftime, but realistically probably not. But their EPA per play on pass and run plays in this sample is a 0.32. The NFL average when playing from ahead like this is just 0.02. Teams usually like just run the ball and don't care when they're like trailing or are leading substantially. Their passing EPA per play is a 0.67, which is sick. They can pour it on, they're still quick, they can be good. Houston, we know, not a good defense. 27 against the pass, according to the number of fires metrics. So like they should score points, right? And what does that cost us in terms of this game just being a blowout? I think the primary plays here are still the running backs. We had a lot of interest in Ezekiel Elliott on Monday's recap show before we learned that his salary was 8,000. We had a lot of interest in Tony Pollard whenever we realized that his salary was 7,500. In the past two games with Elliott snaps backup since his return, he has a 53% snap rate, 39% route rate, which actually beats Pollard's 50% and 33% respectively. But similar overall workloads, if you look at the adjusted opportunities, which for us is carries plus double your targets. Elliott, 20 and a half, Pollard 20. Red Zone shares a lot better for Zeke than Pollard. Both get a lot of opportunity per snap so that their snap rates are not, they're not great, but they also get the ball when they're out there because they're just featured in this offense. So both are viable. Pollard definitely better at the salary given the yardage upside. I don't think I'll get to Zeke. He's been scoring a lot. He just doesn't have the yardage upside really to burn us. So I think he's over salary at 8,000 and I'm gonna stay there. Now, I've looked at teams who were big favorites in the past, you can still see yardage upside from top receivers. And I think that CDLAM is someone who honestly will be more rostered than I would think. People like to- That's what I've seen based on early rostering projections too. And so we might not be able to get sneaky by playing CDLAM, but he's got a 29% target share since week 10 with Noah Brown back in the lineup. Five downfields targets per game, which for me is 10 plus yards downfield. Michael Gallop said a 20% target share though. 2.8 downfield targets per game. Salt and Schultz 17%, Tony Pollard 13%. So like, you know, it's a spot where like historically this leads to really high floors for quarterbacks, maybe not elite ceilings. So I'm probably not gonna get there with Dak. I thought initially that Zeke would be a good play in like the low 7,000 range, but we didn't get that. I thought initially that CDLAM would be like a weird pivot if you could talk yourself into it. I don't know if that's gonna happen. So is it just Pollard for you despite this huge implied team total? What are your thoughts on maybe some value pieces like Michael Gallop, Dalton, and Schultz? Yeah, I thought Schultz, it's kind of the same discussion as Zeke, where I'm like, okay, if Schultz is in the 5,000 range, he's got yardage upside. It's a super high implied total, which is always good for tight ends, but he came in at 62, which is like high. Allop at 6,000, that's pretty okay. So I would say Pollard is like a focal point for me. The guy I want to be very heavy on. Gallop is like, I guess I'm differentiating off of DJ Chark at 6,000, trying to lower, so I don't have 54% DJ Chark again. I might, but maybe I'll, so I don't get to 90 again. I didn't actually get there, but it was a joke. I think it's really just Pollard as a priority, but I feel really good about him and Gallop filtered through. I probably won't get to Schultz because of the salary, probably won't get to Lamb and that could be stupid, but I think the reason I feel better about doing that is because the Cowboys have shown both last year and other times, if they can kick your butt on the ground, they're going to do it and they can do that here. So I think that like if Fandall's sports book were to offer a rushing yardage prop for the team, like how high would be too high for that? Like they went for 220 last week. That's the kind of thing that I don't know. And if someone were to ask me, like, oh, like what does a team usually rush for in a game? Like as a team, I don't know. They've gone for like 140 in like six straight games. I don't know. That's a stat I look at. So I don't know, but... I think they just kick butt on the ground. I think that's very possible too. Is that enough though for you to get to Zeke? No. I don't think so either. Cause his salary is high enough where it's like, if he gets you, well, a hundred yards and two touchdowns, that's still 22 points at 8,000. And that's like, does he have more than a hundred yards in his range of outcomes? Maybe, but it's not super likely. Yeah. Whereas Pollard went for 189 in Zeke's first game back. So I think that Zeke has a high floor, which is, it is what it is. I don't care about that. You may and that's fine. But, and like he's a good player. I just wish he were lower salary. So Pollard for me. Okay. Let's talk about the bills facing off of the Jets. It's a repeat divisional matchup. The first one was in week nine. So not that long ago, tough spot for the bills. So I want to dig in and see what the bills have done against tough defenses so far this year is because the Jets do lead my defense of power rankings this year. But across the entire season, the bills have just two matchups against top 10 defenses by number fire schedule adjusted metrics. The other one was Patriots in week 13, that Thursday night game. So that's a small sample. I think that in itself is kind of noteworthy. But in those two games, the bills have scored 17 and 24 points. The first meeting was with the Jets, Alan sustained his elbow injury, but that happened late at the end of the game. He finished that game with negative 0.27, passing net expected points per drop back. It was their second worst offensive showing this year, even after adjusting for the matchup ahead of just week one against the Rams. Alan still scored 26 fandal points, but it was thanks to 86 rushing yards and two touchdowns, which is a lot. Against the Patriots, the bills went pretty run heavy there. 18 passes to 17 rushes on early downs in the first half. And they were pretty effective in doing so, honestly. James Cook finished with 14 carries and six targets for 105 yards. He did lose two minute work and he played just one of the eight non-Kneeldown snaps in the fourth quarter, but they seemed to really like what he was doing. He even played 12 snaps with Heinz in the field at the same time, which is very odd, but very cool.  So I think that Cook is pretty lively at $6,100. A rush heavy approach to the bills would in theory hurt the pass catchers, but in four games since Alan's injury, Stephon Diggs, 11.3 targets per game, Gabe Davis is at seven, Isaiah McKenzie 5.25, so they're still getting volume. Against the Jets, Diggs had 10 targets for 93 yards. Davis had five for 33, McKenzie not really involved. Diggs' salary of $8,500 is reasonable. I just don't know if I'll get to him when the alternatives are Justin Jefferson, Jamar Chase, Amon Ross St. Brown and AJ Brown, all of whom are in games that are better for stacking. Davis 62 is interesting. He did line up against Toss Gardner on half of his snaps in the first meeting. DJ Reed playing pretty well too. Thinking his practice due to illness on Wednesday, so he should be fine. I'm gonna have exposure to Gabe, but I do wanna keep it suppressed in a way. As for Josh Alan, he could be an elite tournament pivot if he gets glossed over, but that's due to his rushing primarily. The key pitch is as a pivot for Alan and he's not a priority for me as a result. I think there's a guy I'd rather pivot to. We'll talk about later on, but as a result, I think that Cook is kind of the one guy I see myself actively seeking out here. Where are you on Cook and where are you on the rest of this bill's offense? I think Cook is, I think you said lively. I think he's lively this week due to the salary and the salary primarily. This is one of the spots that if we had tons of running backs or we had enough value elsewhere, I would say I'll just wait and see. And I'll love the matchup. I don't know if what his workload was in week 13 is what it's gonna be the rest of the season. I don't know if that was like the Harbinger or is it Harbinger, Harbinger? I've read, I've never said it. I've heard, what is it? I've heard it both ways. Yes. So that could be like the lead-in to an expanded role outside the mini buy for a rookie. Like I could see it from that angle. So I'm not like out on him saying like, well, that's absolutely he's gonna be in like sort of 50-50 time share with the single Terry. I think there's potential for more. So I'm most interested in Cook. I think everyone else is more of a tournament pivot. Like you said, even the past catchers, even Davis at the salary, the catch rate over expectations been a little bit down lately. So they kind of- I think he's still playing hurt. Like you could spin that as like, he's still hurt or regression's about to hit. But I think it's just, I might play Cook in a single entry or head-to-head out of not just necessity, but I really need value, but everyone else I think is just sort of trying to get cute. Yeah, I think that if we assume that James Cook's role remained the same in week 13, which I think is the floor. I think that the floor is that his role remains the same. He'd be like a 20% exposure guy for me because like he can get by in that role, but then you bake in the potential for that role to get better. Cause like he had a 56% snap rate in the first quarter and 65% snap rate in the third quarter. So like- The question is just, I think we'd all agree that like 20% is fine, but is it main lineup like single entry priority? Does he get there? Yes, because it allows me to get other guys. I like a lot and he has a ceiling. That's what I'm thinking too. Cause if he increases the odds, I can get to Devontae Smith, T Higgins, et cetera, et cetera, without reducing the ceiling of my lineup, I want that. And that's kind of what I think we get here. Would you stack James and Dalvin Cook? Whoa, yeah. Heck yeah, absolutely. I might rebuild this lineup just to get there. I'm just having fun dragon players around the lineup now. Okay. I'm gonna have to ask you to take a break from that to tell me about the Jags because they're facing the Titans. So my numbers like this game a lot in terms of its potential for offense relative to what the total is. And if it's a stupid slate, a weird slate, where there's a lot of paths to destruction in good games, we wanna find games that may fly a bit under the radar and could blow up. I think this game is probably my favorite from that perspective. So talking about the Jags and what you see against them facing the Titans. So obviously this is under the assumption that Trevor Lawrence plays. Sounds like he's gonna play, may not be a hundred percent. That hurts him a little bit cause he does run. I mean, he's had 32, 1, 26, 53 yards over his past four. So like there's some juice with him from a rushing standpoint, but he's had no more than six carries in a game all season. So it's not like it's his sole source of getting there. But again, assuming that we get Lawrence, I think this is an interesting spot. This is a divisional matchup. And despite the fact that it's already week 14, this is the first matchup between the two, which I'll take pretty rare to get that this late into the season. Against similarly ranked adjusted past defenses. So teams between 12th and 20th, Trevor Lawrence has averaged 250 yards, 2.2 passing touchdowns for over 22 fandal points per game while rushing three times, 3.6 times for 13.6 yards. But again, like the production still there rushing a little bit, but not, it's more not talking like 60, 80 yards per game, which is how he's getting there. Cause you would expect that he doesn't run as much this week after that really scary looking injury from last week. But in those matchups, the efficiency is really good. On a per drop back basis, he's at 0.28 passing that expected points over the defenses expectation, like the defensive average with almost a 57% passing success rate. He's just like not been good against great defenses. And like that's fine. There are, there are just quarterbacks, especially, you know, a lot of younger guys, but some older guys too, who are like matchup dependent. There are a few who it doesn't matter what the matchup is and that's why they're salaried in the upper 8,000s always, but his salary is only 7,200. I'm not saying I'm going to get there on a worse quarterbacks late. I think I would very much consider it. But yes, there's three games with at least 24 fandal points, but none above 26. So it's more about the, this offense is ceiling, rather than like, can they get me something? I think they can get me something. Are they going to make me regret not using them? Like any of these guys, that's the bigger question. In 10 games with all the main pass catchers, healthy Christian Kirk has a 24% target share at eight and a half per game, 25% weighted target share, which just accounts for red zone and downfield work for me. Zay Jones is actually pretty close at 22.6% overall, 22.4% weighted. I know we generally like Zay. I think that's interesting this week. Marvin Jones, 16%, but 18% weighted. Evan Ingram, not our, I mean, I always, I know the joke is I like Evan Ingram a lot more than you, but 14.5% target share. It's interesting. I think that like Kirk and Zay are very much in play. The guy I have the most interest in though is Travis Etn. Step back into an 87% snap rate last week, had both of the red zone carries. The production was down, but now the salary's down. And if you just take a step back and look at his salary relative to everyone else, we're gonna guy who's probably gonna play like 85% of the snaps tied to a team who should do something against the non, like completely elite defense. I think that Etn, if you look at it from that perspective is one of the best running back plays I'm not saying the best, but top two, maybe alongside like Pollard at salary, all things considered. But again, as far as the ceilings go, Christian Kirk has two games with 20 plus as does Etn. Zay has a game with 19 and a half and 22. So like those three guys have somewhat of a ceiling despite the fact that Lawrence himself is probably not gonna get to 30. What are your thoughts on the Jaguars here? Probably not a full game stack by any means, although we can bring it back with Chuga Conquo. What are your thoughts on Jacksonville this week? Yeah, Etn not on the injury report at all on Wednesday. So that's good, which means the foot injury no longer even like a lingering concern with him. I think that that's intriguing. I think that they'll have a tough time running on the Jags, but maybe that encourages them to get the ball to him more in the passing game. And his salary is very low at 74. He has like the same burst as Pollard, same salary likely lower roster rates. So I think that there are a lot of paths to liking Etn.  He said he had 22 in a game. That game had no touchdowns. He had 145 receiving yards in that game. Like that's juice. He's not like a good real world receiver, but he's getting a lot of work against a secondary that doesn't have a lot of talent in it. So like, I think Kirk carries a lot of opportunity cost because he's right around like T, he's around Devonte Smith. I think both those guys had better students than him in better games, but Zay doesn't carry that same cost because the guys around him like George Pickens, what are we doing? Why is he 63? I love Gabe, but like, yeah, some question marks there. Darius Layton's fun. He gets yardage, but like, you know, so I think Zay is okay. I would say ETN, guy I want to get to. Zay, I'm okay getting to. That's probably the primary look for me in this one. Same here. Zay had a two point conversion in that game, which is not a touchdown, but it's something. Good call out. And yeah, I think ETN by default is going to be someone that I have a lot of exposure to. I think the salary for the snap rate and for the offense being as good as it is, which is, I'm saying it specifically, it's as good as it is. It's not. But I think that I would be open to Zay, especially because I'm going to have a lot of a con quo and just kind of tying those two together in case there's a lot of yardage in this game. I think those guys have potential for a good portion of that. Yeah, Jags are 13th in my offensive power rankings after last week where they came up short against a very not elite defense. So that's pretty encouraging I think for this week. Okay, my second trend is the cheese against tough defenses because similar to the bills, the cheese are in a pretty rough spot this week against Denver. It is the first time they faced. So similar to the Jags Titans first time in the division, that's a positive thing. Broncos ranked second in my defensive power rankings behind just the Jets. This would be the fourth time the cheese have faced a top 10 defense by number fires rankings, first time against Denver. In the previous three games, the cheese have scored 41, 20 and 44 points. So upside still very much there. Mahomes himself had 24.4 fan dual points, 21.6 and 27.9. All good, nothing groundbreaking, but in that San Francisco game, he could have gone nuts, 423 passing yards and no rushing yards, but they ran for three touchdowns, two by Meikle Hartman. So I think Mahomes has an upside game well within range of outcomes despite the tough matchup here. If he is tracking to be low rostered, which I've seen about 5% right now, I would rather pivot to him than Josh Allen. The same thought process would apply to Travis Kelsey. It is tough to get there for sure, but I'd have to trust at least one low salary back and DJ Chark and maybe more at wide receiver, but it could be worth it. Jujusmas used to return to his typical role against the Bengals, just didn't have the production. His salary is down to 66. I think this could be a good week to buy back in on Jujus again, assuming he's low rostered. As far as Isaiah Pacheco goes, he could get run here, 66% snappery in the second half against the Rams, a game where they were up comfortably, 52% against the Jags in week 10. I do worry a bit about the fact that this is a Melvin Gordon potential revenge game, but Melvin's on the practice squad, which means we'll know Saturday at 4pm Eastern whether Melvin will be active because they'd have to elevate him to the active roster to get him active here. So between the Chiefs and the Bills, I'm more interested in the Chiefs as a pivot among the powerful offense and tough matchups. I can see Pacheco being a rotational piece in tournaments. I don't mind bring backs with Dalsich or Judy, again, as mentioned before. So where are you on the Chiefs as a potential pivot this week? I mean, the Chiefs are always the all time pivot if they're not popular. Yeah. And I think that you can just, if you just play the Chiefs whenever they're not like the mega chalk, probably gonna be like, you're gonna have a good long-term. We've seen this team do very well over the years against bad defenses, or sorry, against good defenses and just like buck all the trends and be like, yeah, that makes sense. Mahomes, I think last year against top 10 defenses at like 0.41, passing that expected points for drawback, which is like, it would lead the league if it were as full. That's like Tua this year, a little bit above Tua this year now after the 49ers game, like just disgusting stuff. Travis Kelsey coming off of a really down game. I know. Thanks. Yeah. Finally prioritized them. I mean, I've done it a few times this year, but... Love to see it. Like uncertainty around the pass catchers, a little bit of uncertainty around the boundaries down a bit. Yeah. The issue is, there's, ain't no guarantee that they do put up points or that Denver can score it all and like keep this game interesting. I don't think that's gonna matter to the Chiefs though. They'll pour it on. Along with that though, you have the question marks of the non-Kelsey pass catchers and the running backs. So like if you, it's almost like, look, if you want a chance at the glory, you got to take a chance unless you're just playing Kelsey and Mahomes, which going to Kelsey and Mahomes stack after Kelsey had a down game in a very, very tough matchup this week. Like that's one of those that we can regret not doing by 435 on Sunday. Yeah. I think I'm talking myself more into them as we go along. Yeah. But I'm okay with that. I'm okay with talking myself into the Chiefs. Like that's not gonna make me too scared. So I think that if I'm, like my highest dollar single entry lineup is probably gonna be burrow, but like second or third highest single dollar, or highest dollar single entry, that might be in the home spot. And I'll definitely get there in multi-entry for sure. Would you rather knowing the rest of the, the constrictions that this would cause to differentiate, let's say, play Mahomes and Kelsey stack in a tough matchup or go down to like Jared Goff to pair with Amon or Kelsey? Even though it's gonna cause more restrictions, do you think that's the better? Like in which, in which situation are you more likely to kick your own butt? Saying, ah, I used Patrick Mahomes or saying, ah, I used Jared Goff. Right, like I'm saying. I feel like I beat myself up in an alley if I'm like, yeah, I'm gonna load up on Jared Goff instead of Patrick Mahomes. It's not like loading up. It's just like, okay, I can save a lot of salary by going Goff, St. Brown, or I can spend up to be contrarian. I think it's probably Mahomes, Kelsey. I agree. Okay, let's take a look at the weather for this week. We got 11 mile per hour winds in Jersey for the Giants and the Eagles with a chance of rain. Nothing too concerning there yet, but I would note that. There's a chance of rain in Buffalo for the Jets and the Bills. Winds at nine miles per hour there. 11 mile per hour winds in Denver for the Broncos and Chiefs. As of now, I would not flag any of those as being concerning, but they are noteworthy. Check back on them on Sunday to make sure they have not gotten worse, but as of now, I think we're good to go. So let's dive in now to our positional plays for week number 14, starting off a quarterback, Brandon. Who are you targeting on FanDuel in the main slate? G. Allen Hurts, 87. I don't know if we talked about him like enough specifically, but the Eagles are just a smart team. They've played proper football against what opposing defenses allow you to do when a team forces them to keep the ball closer to the line of scrimmage they do, but the Giants are 29th and 8th allowed. Hurts, just we know what the upside is overall. He's averaging almost 10 carries a game, 52 yards per game, two very obvious stack candidates, and they need to keep winning. So I'm not that worried about workload getting scaled back if they're ahead. Second love, most realistically, my main quarterback for the week because the 400 goes a good amount of the way this week, but Joe Burrow, big ceiling, also two potentially three stack candidates depending on I guess if you count Mixon or Tyler Boyd if you're open to Tyler Boyd, but he's had nine and 11 carries over the past few games for 32 and 46 yards in them. That comes along with 270 passing yards, 270 and 286 passing yards. So has it really like had the game where everything clicks together even? Like last week was great, but potentially there's room for more against the Browns. I think it's very possible. Cleveland's not a big issue with pressure either. So I love Burrow. He's probably gonna be in my main quarterback this week. If I give you a three entry max tournament, I think for me, I would go one Burrow, one Hurts, one Mahomes. How would you distribute those three? I mean, yes, I would wanna do that, but to max. Are you more likely to go like a Burrow chase, Burrow, Higgins and then one Hurts? I think if it's like three entry, it's just gonna be all one quarterback. Okay, sure. And I think it's gonna be Burrow based on, it's Burrow or Hurts. Yeah, I think that they are the top two plays. And then Mahomes is the pivots. Let's talk about Mahomes here as he is my, my first love as a pivot again. I prefer Hurts and Burrow over Mahomes. And if I had three, like a three entry max, I would go with one of each personally because I'm more okay being a bit more spread out there because I'll have 90% DJ sharks. Like who cares? Yeah, so like if you go very similar lineups, but then just kind of tweak that. Like I will probably have the same three or two running backs. Yeah, okay. Yeah, all right. That's the way I tend to go is more so that way. With Mahomes though, Kansas City actually leads my models projected offensive efficiency for the entire week, not just the main slate. They actually have the highest projected offensive efficiency this week.  They're absurd. They're nuts. Mahomes has blown up in tough spots. He shouldn't be super popular first time facing Denver this week. So give me Mahomes as a pivot. Second love is Joe Burrow, likely my primary quarterback similar to you this week. He's been running a bit more recently. He had 11 rush attempts. Three of those were Niels I believe last week. So eight rush attempts, eight legit rush attempts last week for like almost 50 yards in the touchdown. He has all of his weapons facing off at the Browns. They want to win the AFC North and it's actually obtainable now with Baltimore having Lamar banged up. So Joey Cool back in once again, but I think that I would go one of each. And I don't want that to make it seem like a lower on hurts because I am higher in hand than the Holmes. He has two paths to lighting up a slate, which is sick. So maybe I should have heard some of Burrow, but I don't know. It's one of those two guys. It's like the top play for this week. Yeah. The more I'm sitting here, I'm like I should probably just play Geon Hurts primarily, find a way to get there. And a way to get there is DeWonte Smith being under salaried. Correct. That helps. And a Saquon bring back. Or Daniel Bellinger. Anyway, let's go to running back. What'd you got there? I have Joe Mixon, 85. I have Joe Mixon or Samajip Irine, but I can't really see how Mixon goes from a full practice Wednesday to not playing, but you know, I've been saying that I might be worried about Mixon's workload because Samajip Irine has been good. So like once Mixon comes back, do they scale him back? But the tweet that I was quoting before came from Paul Daener, Deener, Junior, who works for the athletic covering the Bengals. The quote is, Zach Taylor says many great things about what Samajip Irine has done. Also says quote, Joe Mixon is our starting running back. He had five touchdowns the last time he played. So I feel like that's a very ringing endorsement for Mixon to get a lot of work. Also probably feels good to get Joe Mixon some touchdowns. You know, from inside the five, I think that there will be enough of those. Cleveland is 28th and adjusted rush defense according to number fire's metrics. 28th also in rushing yards, over expectation allowed per carry. I think the team makes a lot of sense in the game that we like. My second love, Tony Pollard at 75. I think the salary is just too low for what the ceiling is. He has a per carry average of 1.82 rushing yards over expectation, which is just sick. Houston, fourth worst by rushing yards over expectation per carry allowed. Basically last in rushing net expected points per carry and success rate allowed as well. Even with Zeke back, the yardage upsides there. So I just, I like Pollard. And then my third love, because yeah, you're gonna talk about James Cook. It was gonna be Travis ETN. I didn't want to spoil that, but I wanted to make sure that he was one of us. You can spoil it, all the people care. Travis ETN, again, like 87% of the snaps coming back last week, the week before, could have returned, but didn't had a 61% route rate. You should really get like this grade of a workload or snap rate from someone at 7400, let alone someone as good as ETN. So I think ETN is the most likely running back that I'm gonna play this week. Over Pollard? Very close. Okay, I think that's fair, but I was surprised, but I think that's fair. My first love is Christian McCaffrey. I typically don't want to tie my running backs to backup quarterbacks because that process lower touchdown expectation, but the way McCaffrey was used last week was like vintage McCaffrey with 17 carries and 10 targets. In two games, he's played with no Eli Mitchell. He has a 74% red zone share, like not of running backs of all opportunities on the team. He had six and nine and seven out of 10, I believe, in those two games. He's had 17.5 carries and 9.5 targets per game, 140 total yards in both those games. The passing game usage will help him overcome a tough matchup, so I do like Saquon, and Saquon might be in my primary lineup as a bringback for Hertz, but McCaffrey I think is a standalone play is my favorite guy in this range. My second love is Tony Pollard. In three games with Zeke being back, Pollard's at 15 carries, 3.7 targets, and 118.7 yards in scrimmage per game with a huge upside game in there, which does skew the sample, but also it's nice to know we can do that still. The Cowboys are willing to kick bottom the ground when they can and they will be able to here. So the snaps won't be there, but the production has still very much been there. So Tony Pollard to me a great play this week. My third love is James Cook. It is risky because we don't tend to go with Bill's backs very often, stuff like that, but I think it's worth it. Even if he keeps the same role he had last week, he had 14 carries and six targets with 105 yards in scrimmage that could expand. It's a big game for the Bills because the Dolphins are now three and a half point favorites on Sunday nights. The Bills need to keep their foot on the gas to both win the AFC East and potentially get the one seed in the AFC. So I think we can see James Cook role expand. James Cook's role expand. And if it does, it's to the moon, baby. What do you got a wide receiver? I'll start a little bit lower with Devante Smith at 7,000 even. Just it feels like taking like you're in the layup line with Devante Smith here just at 7,000. Again, similar to Pollard, salary is too low for what the ceiling is. Single game target shares over his past for 32%, 39%, 36%, 21%. The Giants allow an ADOT of 11.2 yards to receivers, which is above the league average, not substantially, but it helps. And again, they're 29th overall in ADOT allowed. I'm gonna bump down below 6,000 for my second two loves because I am warming up to the idea of like a core of Nixon Pollard and ETN. And I think it's doable if you're open to some value receivers. I don't think I'm as into receiver in the flex as I was on Monday, but Tyler Boyd should benefit with Haydnhurst banged up. Last week, 94% route rate, five targets with almost a 12-yard ADOT, four of those downfield for him and a drop touchdown, but two red zone targets last week. So I think that Boyd very much in play at that salary. And my third love is your boy, DJ Chark, 5,700. 15% target share of the past two games, which usually is not enough, but he has a good matchup against the Vikings who were 30-second in catch rate, over expectation allowed to receivers. They allow 1.83 yards per route run to receivers. That's the fourth highest rate. It's the game of the week and I just wanna have some exposure to Chark again this week. Chark week back. My first love is T. Higgins. He has a 23% target share in games played with Jamar Chase, which is not elite, but also when you're T. Higgins, you don't need a lot to go nuts. He has a monster ceiling $7,800 a salary there. I don't expect him to get a lot of attention this week because he had the touchdown last week, but a dud from a yardage perspective. He got a salary reduction too, playing in one of the better games this week. I think T is nuts as far as how much I like him this week. My second love is Devontae Smith because in three games with no Dallas Goddard, he has a 31% overall target share, 38% deep and 38% inside the red zone. He has an eight plus targets in four straight games. He's had efficiency on those targets too. There's been a lot of talk about A.J. Brown getting John Robinson fired this week. So a lot of A.J. Brown discussion on Twitter. That may help Smith come in at a lower roster rate than where he should be, not low roster, but lower than he should be. So love Devontae. I think Hagan's and Devontae are my two favorite plays regardless of position for this week. My third love, I'll go with DJ Chark too. So two overlapping here with Smith and Chark, but the Vikings do let up a higher A dot than the league average because they've got pretty bad cornerback play. 46% of the deep targets in games that Reynolds and Chark have played have gone to Chark. I think Jameson Williams should play more this week, but he's probably more like the agent to Glee Raymond and Reynolds than Chark. They had a picture on the Lion's social media account this week and it was named that album. And the three receivers in it were Amon Ross St. Brown, Jameson Williams and DJ Chark.  Yes, I do look to social media memes and graphics to learn final info of playing time. Are you joking?   That's all you gotta say. I'm right. Well, I don't know what the Broncos socials doing, but if they're not just like plastering Greg Dulcich all over, they're doing something wrong. Tell me about Greg Dulcich and his moves to that end. Eight targets last week with Coralyn Sutton leaving early. Jerry Judy was limited in that game, just eight routes, but four targets, which is so sick. But Dulcich could kind of be like the de facto wide receiver one, depending on how healthy Judy is. 85 yards for him last week in that game. I know touchdowns in his first game, I do recall a touchdown that he scored, but got called back. So like he's gonna score eventually and he's got yards upside in this game they should have to throw. Maybe they'll finally get over 23 points if they're trailing by 23 in the first quarter. Maybe they'll get there. And my second love, Chig Okonkowo $4,800 salary. I don't know how often I'm gonna get to Kelsey. I do like the idea of differentiating there, but it changes a lot about the rest of lineup. So I'm gonna be in a lower salary range pretty often. Okonkowo 20% targets here last week with Traylon Burks leaving early. It was only five targets, but on the year he is averaging according to next gen stats, 3.06 yards per route run. That leads all tight ends. Only six have at least a 2.0 in that metric. It's only 75 routes for him, but- He's Tyree Kill except bigger. Basically it's what we're saying. Like he can like have a 60 yard catch and run and pay off and be fine. I think he's had like, I saw, I think it was Bill Barnwell tweeted this week that like Okonkowo is like near the top of the league in 40 yard receptions this year, which is disgusting. And like he said, he's in my loves too. 59% route rate last week overall. 69% from the second quarter on. He was in the slaughter out wide on 14 of 19 routes, which is not always great with Kyle Pitts, but like it means that they view him as a receiver and get him out in like good routes, which is fun. They need explosive guys if Burks fits. So I like Okonkowo too. My first love was David and Joku. The fact that it was reported on Monday, I believe that he was going to practice this week up my confidence in him. The Browns, still the shot at the playoffs. Not a super big shot, but in Joku has yarded upside, $5600, logical bring back from my Joe Burrow team. So I do want to get to in Joku. I will say, I tried to talk myself at a Daniel Bellinger at 48 as a pivot off of Okonkowo. I haven't been able to successfully yet. I've lowered my enthusiasm about it, but like he played almost every snap last week. I'm going to have stacks of that Eagle's Giants game. So I will have lineups where I use Bellinger as a way to lower my exposure to Okonkowo a bit and have a game stack in that game, but what? Are you looking at his profile? It's bad. His eight out last week on five targets, 0.7. Yeah, okay. Yeah, I mean like that's why I'm not higher on this, but every snap, like you could do worse. You could do worse. You could definitely worse. It's not, Okonkowo is the better play. You could do worse, especially because assuming Andrews doesn't erupt, you're betting just against Kelsey to torch us against our really good defense. Yeah. Which can happen, but it's not, you don't need to overcome too many potential big games this week. Extremely dumb question that you can reject very quickly if you want to. Would you consider Kelsey and Dulcich in the same lineup with Dulcich as the Flex? Probably not. Yeah. I agree, but I'd ask at least. I don't ever want to play two tight ends. I agree. I'd ask. I didn't want to play one, so. Correct, I agree. Okay, defense, what'd you got there? I have the Steelers. I think they're just the easiest play, 3,800. Tyler Hunley doesn't really have a lot of pass catchers to throw to that are like 100% healthy. This team, they played last year and week 18 and both teams had like a really weird chance to make the playoffs, but he didn't do very well. That's not like all that it's based on, but that's relevant because the sample on Hunley is pretty small. And that means that they also have like enough film on him specifically. So I think the Steelers just are the best play of the week by far. I agree. They're my love too. He's fun, Hunley is, but he's also mistake prone. He should not have gone undrafted. That should not have happened, but like he was undrafted. So like, you know, undrafted guy who makes some mistakes. It's not a very well-designed offense, not a very like, I don't know. They put a lot on the Mars shoulders and putting a lot on Hunley shoulders is a tougher ask to mask the issues of their scheme. So I'm okay with the Steelers too. I will say the Lions at 31 are not totally out of play. I thought about it. That line did move back to one and a half. So there's been some money coming into the Vikings, obviously, but it's 31, their defense has been a lot better the past six weeks or so, like a lot better. They've gone from debt, like DFL, my defensive powering gates to 27th. So getting there, they're getting better, which is sad that 27th is better. But I think they're in play. I think the Jags are also in play at 34 with their rush defense being pretty good, forcing the Titans to pass. Tannehill still has some sackiness in him. No Traylon Birx, that helps. So I think they're at least interesting as well. But Steelers primary play with considerations for the Jags and the Lions if I need to save some salary. Any final thoughts for you, Brandon, before we wrap up this week, 14 Slate? I think we covered it. I think we covered ways the pivot, ways not to be silly. I feel good. I'm looking forward to the Chiefs finally dropping a dud on Sunday. What could go wrong with pivoting them against a world-class kind of defense? That is all that we have here for today on the Heat Check. But as mentioned, we are back once again Monday to recap everything, albeit Florida, Marco Island for the WFFC this weekend. So if you're at the WFFC, say hello. More than happy to chat down there. Enjoy Sun down there recording the recap podcast from Marco Island on Monday, 10 a.m. Eastern on the Fando YouTube page and up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed after that. So go get that wherever you get your podcast. And while you're there, if you like what you hear, leave us a rating and review as well. Brandon, if people have questions for you on your favorite social media platform, Twitter, where can they find you there? I'm on Twitter at Kudall13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the Fando Podcast Network at Fando Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in. Good luck to you with your NFL DFS lineups before this week. We'll talk to you once again on Monday to wrap it all up. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy Podcast powered by Number Fire.


I-T-T-T, my name's Darian and I've recently just graduated my TEFL qualification, so what is international TEFL and TESL training? It is teaching English as a foreign language and teaching English to speakers of other languages. This institute offers a carefully selected variety of courses for the aspiring teacher and even courses for teachers actively engaged in teaching. Now, the course I selected is the 120-hour TEFL course. It's a comprehensive guide containing 20 units in total. It covers in detail all the things you'd need to know in order to effectively teach and manage classes. This is my certificate. I recently just graduated and let me just tell you it was worth the time. Now, for grammar, genetics, lesson management, planning, the roles of a teacher, lesson materials, resources, technical and practical knowledge as well. So, it really is comprehensive and it will prepare you in that way. With this course, if you're looking for a career in teaching English, I would strongly suggest checking out these guides, I-T-T-T, as a provider for this qualification. Now, they do provide full 20 units in my course, for example, that is all carefully composed and they will provide resources such as videos, tutors, email support, instructional support, and an active team who you can contact and support you along your journey. Now, with this kind of certification, an aspiring teacher and their passion for teaching, you would be able to technically travel the world and effectively work doing a career which you love, which is something that not many people have the opportunity to do. So, it's quite a rare opportunity and you'll be able to travel and enjoy what you do. So, give it a shot. I suggest I-T-T-T, international Teflon TESOL training. They'll equip you with all you need to start on this exciting path. I'll just say it is very exciting and give it a go. Thanks so much for watching. We are I-T-T-T, the leading provider for Teflon TESOL training courses. If you like this video, please subscribe by clicking the button down here and click on any of the videos here on the left for more interesting teaching tips for getting certified to teach English abroad and online.