What's going on everyone, JJ Zacharias in here. Here to answer some start-sick questions before I get going, similar to last week. You know, last week on the show, I talked about Elijah Mitchell being a potential waiver wire ad. You know, a lot went in his favor where he most gets hurt. Obviously this was after Trace, everyone was already inactive. And then Elijah Mitchell ended up being, you know, one of the highest, if not the highest. I mean, he was the number one waiver ad this past week. So a lot of you guys benefited from that. I think this week's Elijah Mitchell pickup, we should not expect that kind of production in that kind of player to come forth every single week. But I think JJ Taylor, elite name, JJ Taylor should be added off waiver wires right now, only because Ramandre Stevenson is inactive. You know, we saw him have that fumble last week. That's probably the main reason why he's inactive. And then Damien Harris had that fumble also last week. So who knows how Bill Belichick's gonna split that backfield, JJ Taylor, smaller back, a good pass catcher, sort of a Deon Lewis type you could, you can consider him as they're, you know, a newer Deon Lewis, but he's intriguing. He looked good in the preseason too. So let me go to the chat really quick and let's answer some start sick questions. First question, two deflects and half PPR, Julio Higgins, Brandon Cooks or Elijah Mitchell. Half PPR, I think I would go with Julio. I like that spot. I like that game. I mean, you can, you can make a case for Higgins there too. Mitchell would give you the floor. So I'd be between Higgins and Mitchell there. Mitchell is the floor play though. PPR need two, Miles Sanders, Sutton, Tyson, Williams, Kenyon Drake and a PPR Lee. I'm going to go with Cortland Sutton, you know, without Jerry Judy there, good matchup for him. I'll go with Sutton. And then I'd probably play Miles Sanders is the other one. Start Ayuk, Terrace Marshall or Jacoby Myers and half PPR. Can't go with Ayuk just given his usage last week. Look, if Ayuk does really well this week, great. You have them on your bench, you know, you should still feel good about that. And I would still keep them on my bench. So I'm going to go with Jacoby Myers out of those three. Hertz or Tannehill, I think you go Hertz.  I love him in a GPP over on Fandle this week. I think he's at a good price point. So Tannehill's in play for me and I don't mind him, but just the rushing component with Hertz and you know, how he played last week and how Tannehill played, you know, what if that Tennessee offensive line looks as bad this week and it could spell trouble. He's a higher, higher variance, a highly volatile play. I'm just going to go with Jaylen Hertz. Half PPR, Elijah Mitchell or DJ Moore. Probably go with DJ Moore, especially because Latin Moore is out. One point PPR, 14 team flex, Givante Williams. Oh, Jamal Williams against for Detroit or MVS in Green Bay. So I'll probably say Jamal Williams is a safer play, especially with DeAndre Swift banged up, but I love MVS this week. So this is what I would do if I were you.  But if not, then I would use Jamal Williams because I think he has a safer floor. Full PPR Elijah Moore, Ronald Jones, Emmanuel Sanders, Tony Pollard or Trey Sermon. I am going to go with Emmanuel Sanders. I actually like Emmanuel Sanders today. Hey, JJ Melvin, Gordon or Tyson in the flex. I'm going to go with Tyson. PPR, Tyson, Edmunds or Drake. I will go with Edmunds there. I just like that game environment. I think he's in a decent spot. And PPR pick one, Woods, AB or Edmunds and PPR, I'm probably going to AB there, but I think that you can make the case for the other guy. Broncos or Browns defense, they're both really, really good plays. They'd probably go with the Browns, but both the Broncos and Browns are great plays. Drop Renfro or MVS for a kicker. I think MVS is a higher ceiling. So I'm just going to say drop Renfro. But I did talk about Renfro on my podcast this week. I got to be the only fantasy football podcast that talked about Hunter Renfro this week. Just because the Steelers do not play well against slot guys. You know, he's not a high ceiling option by any means, but he's a high floor option. But MVS, better ceiling season long. Which two high upside, I would also for the record play MVS over Hunter Renfro. Which two high upside wide receivers should I snatch this week? Rondo Moore, Elijah Moore, Michael Pittman, Terris Marshall. I don't have a strong, strong preference here. I think Elijah Moore is the best prospect of those four. Actually, I think Terris Marshall, I forgot Terris Marshall as part of this question. I would say Elijah Moore still has the highest ceiling this season, probably stash him. But I can make a case for any of those guys. Maybe Pittman aside, it was not shown up. Full PPR flex, Jacoby Myers, Brandon Iuk or Marvin Jones. Again, you can't start Iuk. I'm going to go with Jacoby Myers there. Start two and half PPR, Swift, Mitchell, Mike Williams. I think that you have to just go with Mitchell and Mike Williams. Just because we don't know the status of DeAndre Swift.  But, you know, Mitchell's a good enough play. Mike Williams is a good enough play. I would probably just go that route. Need two from this group in PPR. Tyson, Javante, Tyler Boyd, James White. I really like Tyler Boyd today. Good slot matchup firm against Chicago. I would probably go with him since this is a full PPR league. And then I would probably go with Tyson Williams. Because I might go Javante. I might go Javante there. Start two PPR, Edmonds, Mitchell, Javante or Sutton. I'm going to go Sutton and Edmonds in a PPR league. Packers defense or the Cardinals defense. I'm going to go with the Packers defense. Goff or Matt Ryan in Superflex. I'm going to go with Matt Ryan. I say that not confidently because I'm really, really worried about that Atlanta offensive line going up against Tampa Bay. Half PPR, sit one, Mitchell, Tyson or Claypool. Look, if you need floor, then I would just play the running backs. If you need more of a ceiling, then obviously you're going to sit one of the running backs. And if you need that ceiling, you know, throw Claypool in there and I would start Mitchell very, very, just not by much, but I would start Mitchell over Tyson this week. Pick two non-PPR, Jacoby Myers, Tim Patrick, KJ Hamler, Rhonda Moore, Anthony Schwartz. I'm going to go with, okay, okay. So I think Tim Patrick, between Tim Patrick and KJ Hamler, he's a safer bet. He played more snaps, ran more routes last week. You know, last year he had a pretty underrated target share in that offense. But I think KJ Hamler is a very, very intriguing play. Non-PPR, I don't like Jacoby Myers as much. I'm going to go with KJ Hamler here. And I want to say Anthony Schwartz, just because I think that he has the ability to have a big play too. Let's get ballsy a little bit. KJ Hamler and Anthony Schwartz, both big play threats in their offenses. I think Jacoby Myers is the safest option there, but in non-PPR, I'm just not as attracted. Teddy or Tani at quarterback. I'd still go with Tani, although Teddy is my number one streamer this week. Superflex and a half PPR league. Darnold versus New Orleans who shut down Rogers or AB and a smash versus Atlanta. Did I frame that enough? Yeah, I mean, that's fair. I'd still go with Darnold. I still lean quarterback in those situations, but I can understand if you don't want to do that. Tanyan or Robert Tanyan or John U. Smith. I'm going to go with, I'm going to go with Tanyan. I just think the offense is bound to score a lot of points. I think their implied total right now is like 30. Full point PPR, Rondale Moore, Elijah Moore, Devin Singletary or James White. I will go with Rondale Moore there for ceiling and James White for floor. Hey, JJ PPR flex choose to hunt boy, James Robbins and Jamal Williams. I'll go with the first two. Sit one, Higgins, Debo, Robert Woods or Javante Williams. If it's a PPR league, I'm going to sit Javante Williams. Start one in the flexible PPR, Landry, Antonio Brown or Brandon Cooks. I think Landry is probably the safest option there. I'm going to go with Landry over AB. I know that might be a little bit controversial. AB is a really good matchup as well, but AB still only saw 15 to 16% of the team's targets in week one. Landry should see 25 plus percent of Cleveland's targets this week in a very good matchup against Houston. Mayfield over Teddy Tannehill and Winston. I would play Tannehill, but I can understand it. Pick one PPR, Chase Claypole, Devontae Smith, Brandon Cooks. I will go with Devontae Smith. Juju or Tyson in half PPR. I'm going to go with Tyson. Pick one PPR, Rob Grunkowski or Robert Tunyon. I'll go with Grunk. Jamar Chase or Deandre Swift with Swift now questionable. It sounds like he's going to play.  That's what I'm doing in a league. So for instance, I have Elijah Moore, or sorry, Elijah Mitchell in a league where I have Deandre Swift. I put Swift in my flex. I have Elijah Mitchell at my RB two spot and then I have MVS on my bench in case something does happen to Deandre Swift.  But in a situation like this, I would rather just play it a little bit safer. Pick three PPR, Debo, Devonte Smith, Mike Williams, Landry, Antonio Brown. I'll go with Debo, Mike Williams and Landry. That's very good. I mean, sitting Antonio Brown and Devonte Smith is rough, but I think that's the direction I would go. Troutman Conklin, Farrow Brown for tight end. I'm going to go with Troutman. He saw a huge target share last week. Full PPR, Daryl Henderson or Dramonte Williams. I'm going Daryl Henderson. Tyson Williams or MVS in full PPR. I mean, I want to say MVS in full PPR. I think Tyson Williams is safer though. Corey Davis, Dramonte Williams or Dracoby Myers in half PPR. I would probably go with, I'm going to go with Corey Davis regrettably. That one's pretty tough. PPR flex, choose one. Robbie Anderson, Boyd, Waddle Myers. I'm going to go with Boyd. Full PPR, pick three. AJ Brown and Mari Cooper, Chris Godwin, Deontay Johnson. How is that your team? How are these guys on your team? I will sit, Deontay. Hi, JJ, happy Sunday. What's your favorite type of coffee? I don't drink coffee anymore, guys. I am all in on tea. I'm drinking some chamomile tea today. Flex James Robinson, Tyson Williams, Corey Davis. Cortland Sutton or Jalen Waddle. Thanks for all your advice. I would go with Cortland Sutton there. Are you ready for some football? I am always ready for some football. JJ, in a half PPR format, one quarterback, one tight end, seven player bench league, would you keep Cole Comet or add Troutman or Johnson and keep Tre Lance or add, I would keep Tre Lance because he's your backup and I would probably add Troutman. Elijah Mitchell or Tyler Boyd in PPR. I'm going to go with Tyler Boyd in a PPR format. If it was half PPR, maybe I'd lean Mitchell, but Mitchell didn't see love through the air last week. It's a little bit concerning. We still don't know exactly how they're going to split that back good. I know Ian Rappaport said that Elijah Mitchell is going to see the majority of the work, but Rapp has, not saying that his sources are wrong or anything, but he's not been totally correct on everything that he's ever said. And so I would probably lean Boyd in that PPR matchup. Half PPR Chase or Higgins. I'm assuming this is Jamar Chase and not Chase Edmonds. I am going to go with Higgins. JJ, half PPR, Claypool or Devonte Smith. I'm going to go Devonte Smith. Trey Sermon or Peyton Barber, hashtag FML. I'd go Trey Sermon. Just hope for that positive game script. I do think Barber is going to be more involved than people expect. And he's probably going to see goal line work as well. But I'm going to go Trey Sermon and just throw that dart and hope that it, that it hits. Pick one Landry, DJ Moore, Miles Sanders and full PPR. I'm going Landry, non PPR for Reflex, Tim Patrick, MVS, Tyler Boyd and manual Sanders. I'm going Boyd again. Elijah Mitchell or Kareem Hunt. I'm going to go Kareem Hunt. Start one, half PPR, Jacoby Myers, Corey Davis, Mike Williams. I will start Mike Williams there. Half PPR, need for flex. Chase Claypool, Corey Davis or Miles Gaskin. I'm going to go with Gaskin for floor and Claypool for ceiling and Corey Davis sort of in the middle there. So it depends on what your team needs. PPR, need one flex. Elijah Mitchell, Chase Claypool, Corey Davis. I'm going to go with, oh man. I think I'm going to go with Mitchell there and just play it safe. Naheem Hines or Mike Davis. I will go with, man, I hate Mike Davis today guys. I don't love Naheem Hines really either but he's seeing a huge target share. It's a full PPR league. I'm still going to go Mike Davis but I think that's very, very close. Full PPR, James Robinson or Darryl Henderson. I'm going Darryl Henderson. Gaskins or Sutton. I'm going to go Sutton in a full PPR league. KJJ Dibo at Philly or Julio in Seattle. I want to lean Julio there. Just like that game environment a little bit more. James White or Peyton Barber. Depends if it's PPR or not. I mean, I think regardless I'd go with James White. Christian Kirk or Marquez Calloway. I think you got to go with Kirk given the game environment the fact that Calloway didn't see a huge target share last week. But I think it's pretty close. I wouldn't be shocked at all if Calloway saw like a 20% target share today. Hey, JJ, I'm worried about Wentz against the Rams defense. Should I start Elijah Mitchell over him in a super flex PPR league? I would probably still go with Carson Wentz but I can understand if you want to do that. Full PPR, Tim Patrick or Jacoby Myers in the flex. I think Myers is a little bit safer because we just don't know exactly how they're going to utilize a guy like Patrick. But I think Patrick might just be the play. I just don't really love that Patriots jets game all that much. Myers is, I mean, they're both sort of in the same tier for me. Worth dropping James White for JJ Taylor in a PPR dynasty league, no. Bench wanted PPR Robbie Anderson, Tim Patrick, Corey Davis, I'd benched him Patrick, I think. Hertz or Tannehill, I'm going to go with Hertz. Let's see. I feel sick asking this. Javante Williams or Peyton Barber? I mean, easily Javante Williams for me. PPR, Corey Davis, oh, I just lost my spot. Sorry about that. Let's see. Elijah Mitchell or Miles Sanders. I'm going Miles Sanders. Damien Harris versus AB and a half PPR. I think Damien Harris could be in store for a pretty big game. AB obviously has the ceiling, I would say just because he can gain those chunk yards, but I might go Damien Harris there. Chase Edmonds or Branding Cooks in PPR, I'm going Chase Edmonds. Pick two PPR, Debo, DJ Moore, Antonio Brown, Robert Woods. I'm going the first two. Hey JJ, need one in full PPR, Iuk, Terrace Marshall or AJ Green. I guess I'm going, I might take a risk with Iuk with this one. I just hope that he's involved a little bit more. Teddy Bridgewater or Joe Burrow? I'd probably still go with Joe Burrow. Hey JJ, love the show. Half PPR, Flex and a wide receiver spot. Pick two, Devante Smith, Claypool, Julio, Kenyon Drake. I wouldn't be playing Kenyon Drake over those guys. Let's go Devante Smith and Julio. Pick one of Tyson, Williams, Branding Cooks or Devante Smith and non-PPR. Non-PPR, I might go with Tyson. Gaskin or Sutton, I already answered that one. I went Sutton. Trey Sermon or Latavius Murray. I will go with Latavius Murray. Half PPR, Devante Williams or Elijah Mitchell. I'm going Elijah Mitchell just because there's a higher likelihood that he's the bell cow, but I like Devante Williams. You know, he's in a split backfield, basically a 50-50 split going up against Jacksonville and what should be a positive game script. Jamal Williams, Tyson Williams or Tyler Boyd. It's a PPR league. I'm just going to assume PPR whenever you guys don't specify. So I'm going to go with Tyler Boyd. Full PPR, pick two. DJ Moore, Debo Samuel and Jamar Chase. I'll go with the first two. Sit one, Higgins, Debo Woods or Devante. I will sit Devante of those three. PPR pick two, Robert Woods, A.J. Brown, Devante Smith, Corey Davis, Mike Williams. I'll go A.J. Brown for sure. And I will probably go with Devante, but I think that you can make a case for Robert Woods. I'm just, the only reason I'm not going with Robert Woods is because of his usage last week. You know, Van Jefferson played a lot. He actually played just as much as Robert Woods. Ridley, Kenan Allen and Debo pick two. I'm just going to go with the first two. Drake or Mitchell or Clay Pool and half PPR. I will go with Mitchell, but I think Clay Pool has the higher ceiling. Pick two, Tyson, Singletary, Connor, LaVisca. Definitely Tyson of that group. Non-PPR, I guess I'm going to go with Connor because I think that he has a higher likelihood to find the end zone. But I think, actually I might go Tyson and LaVisca there. Pick one in standard, Everett, Troutman or Comet. Let's go with Cole Comet there. Hey, JJ, love this show in the podcast full PPR, Tim Patrick or Jacoby Myers. Answer this one earlier. I think it's a toss up. I might just go with Tim Patrick and see how they utilize them because I just don't think Jacoby Myers is like this amazing, amazing ceiling. Let's see, Mr. Flacco, Tyson or Gaskin and half PPR. Probably Lean Gaskin, but it's pretty close. PPR, Higgins, Julio or Sanders need a ceiling. If you need a ceiling, I'd go Julio. Start, sit, JJ or Field, Yates, definitely sit JJ. Gaskin or Sutton, Mike, I've answered this 13 times. It's Sutton, Sutton over Gaskin. That's the way that I'm going. Sermon or AJ Dillon. I will go with AJ Dillon there. Drop Zach Moss for JJ Taylor. I think that's about the line. If Zach Moss is like your RB six or something, sure. If he's like your RB three or four, probably not. Emmanuel Sanders or Tyson Williams and half PPR. I'm gonna go with Tyson Williams. I think he's a little bit safer but I love me some Emmanuel Sanders. Who's my PPR flex? Gronk, Melvin Gordon, Corey Davis, Chase Claypool or Chase Edmonds. I will go with Chase Edmonds there. Devonte Parker or Manny Sanders. I'm gonna go Manny Sanders. I love me some Manny Sanders today. You got a banged up Gabe Davis. He should be fine. Mike Williams or T. Higgins. I think I might go with Mike Williams. Half PPR, Jamal Williams, Tyson or Boyd. I'll go Tyson there, but I think that you can go with Boyd if you want a little bit more. Yeah, I mean, I love Boyd this week. Let's go with Tyler Boyd. A, B or Higgins and non-PPR. I'm going to go with A, B. Mr. Flacco, I already answered that one. Again, I answered that one. Hey, JJ, thanks for doing this. Half PPR, pick one for Flex. James Robinson, Jacoby Myers, KJ Hamler, Visco Chanel, Rondell Moore. I will go in a half PPR league. I think that the floor play, probably the safest play as Jacoby Myers. Half PPR, second flex spot, Corey Davis or Kenny and Drake. I'm going Corey Davis. PPR, Damian Harris or Elijah Mitchell. Let's go with Damian Harris. A little bit better of a matchup, but I mean, I can make an argument for Elijah Mitchell there too. Half PPR, Flex in a wide receiver spot, pick two. Devontae Smith, Claypool, Julio, Kenny and Drake. I think I answered this one earlier. Devontae and Julio. PPR, James White, Callaway or Emmanuel Sanders. I am going to go with Emmanuel Sanders. Half PPR, Devontae Williams, Tyson or Boyd. I'm going to lean Boyd. Elijah Mitchell or Mike Davis. I'm going to Elijah Mitchell. Full PPR, pick T Higgins, Jamar Chase, Tyson Williams or Devontae Smith. Probably going to go with T Higgins there. Sermon or AJ Dillon. I'm going AJ Dillon. Pick one, Kirk M.V.S. or Landry. Definitely going Landry there. Pick one of Tyson Williams, Brandon Cooks or Devontae Smith and non-PPR. I think I'd go Devontae Smith probably, but I think Tyson's pretty close. JJ's start three in full PPR. Sanders, Patrick M.V.S. Terrace Marshall, Michael Pittman, Julio. I'm going Sanders and Julio for sure. And then I'll probably go with M.V.S. as my third. Pick one of Tyson Williams. I already answered that one. Henderson Waddle or LaVisca and the Flex and half PPR. I'm going Henderson there. Robert Woods or Tyson and half PPR. I think I'd go Robert Woods. PPR need one Flex. Mike Williams, Miles Sanders, Devontae Smith. Probably go with Miles Sanders, but actually PPR, I might go with Mike Williams. Henry slash Hunt or Chubb slash MG3. I'm going with the first one. Pick one of Tyson Williams. Brandon, I already answered that. Ridley, Kenan Allen and Debo pick two full PPR. I think I answered this one too. I'm going with the first two.  Full PPR, James White or Gainwell or Tony Jones. I'd go with James White, but I don't mind Gainwell. You guys should all be, have added Gainwell this week. Claypool, Drake or Mitchell and half PPR. I think Mitchell's safest. I think I answered this one earlier too. Julio or Elijah Mitchell in full PPR and full PPR. I'm going Julio. AJJ, who are you paying up for on Fandle today? I'm walking in Najee Harris, Austin Eckler, C.D. Lamb and Darren Waller in most of my lineups. But if you want to pay up, just go for like an Alvin Camara, Dalvin Cook. And then you can obviously stack guys like DeAndre Hopkins with Kyler Murray. Drake or James White in PPR. I think I'd go Drake and just hope that they utilize them more than we expect. AJJ, I need one in a full PPR. Iuk, Teris Marshall or AJ Green answered this one earlier. I'm going Iuk just hoping that they use him more. Pick one of Tyson Williams, Brandon Cooks or Devonte Smith and non-PPR. I will go, I think I answered this one too. Corey Davis or Tyler Boyd, full PPR. Let's go Tyler Boyd. I really like Tyler Boyd today as I've been saying. Full PPR pick two, Mike Davis, Melvin Gordon, James Robinson. I don't really love all these options. I think I'll go with the last two. I just do not like Mike Davis going up against Tampa Bay today. Pick one, RB two, Tyson Williams or Gaskin. I'm going to go Gaskin in a full PPR league. Manual Sanders or Tyson Williams and half PPR. I'm going Tyson. Let's see. Sorry, it randomly skips forward. So I have to find my spot again. AJJ, I love the show. Pick one standard scoring. Debo, Corey Davis, Antonio Brown or Chase Claypool. I'm going with Debo there. Patrick or Pittman in standard. I'm going Patrick. Pick two, Chase Edmonds, Claypool or Theland. Let's go with Edmonds and Theland and get that game stack going. Half PPR, flex option, Givante Williams, Tyson Williams or MVS. I would go with Tyson, but I think it's very close between all three. Love the show and the pod, JJ. Thanks. Half PPR, Dylan versus Kirk versus IUK versus Van Jefferson. I will go with, oh man, I guess Kirk, I guess, but I think that you can go IUK for ceiling. Dylan's sort of in the middle. Big Ben or Teddy, I'm going Teddy. Pick one, Gaskin, Calloway, Pittman or IUK at the flex. I'd probably go Gaskin. Hey JJ, love the show and the pod. Thanks. Sutton, Claypool, Devontae Smith, Full PPR. I'm going to lean Sutton there, but I think that you can make a case for the other guys. Full PPR, three of Chanel T. Higgins, Mike Davis, Jamal Williams, Edmonds, DJ Chark. I'm going to go with Chark, Edmonds and Higgins. Full PPR, pick two. Beasley, Robbie Anderson, Elijah Moore, Tim Patrick, Terrace Marshall. I will go with Robbie and Beasley. Swift or Devontae, I'm not sure which Devontae you're referring to because there's now more than one. I'm assuming it's Devontae Smith. I would just play Devontae Smith over Swift. And then unless you have like an MVS type option that you can throw into your flex for DeAndre Swift. Patrick or Pittman, I'm going Patrick. Pick one, PPR, Mike Williams, Eli Mitchell, Devontae Smith. I will go with Mike Williams there. Julio Claypool or Boyd in half PPR. I'm going to go Julio. Hey JJ, full PPR, pick two. I just answered that one. Drop Singletary for Gainwell. Yeah, I would do that. Mike Davis or James Robinson in half PPR. Probably still go with Mike Davis just because the usage that we saw from James Robinson last week. Let's see, Mike Davis or Gainwell in full PPR. I just answered that one. Sorry, I gotta change my screen for a second. Bear with me. All right, sorry about that. Do you love Devontae today? Love is too strong of a word. I like Devontae Williams. I think that he's a good flex play. Elijah Mitchell or Corey Davis, full PPR. I'm going to go Elijah Mitchell. Tana Hill or Living the Stream, parentheses, Teddy. I'm going Tana Hill over Teddy this week. Need one, half PPR, Williams, Boyd or Davis. I don't know off the top of my head which Williams you're referring to. It could be Tyson, it could be Mike. So I'm going to skip over that one. Half PPR, pick one. Jamal Chase, Devontae Smith or Jacoby Myers. I'm going to go probably with Devontae Smith but I think that you can make a case for Jamal Chase there. Pick two non-PPR, Marvin Jones, Robbie Anderson, Tim Patrick, Latavius Murray, MVSAJ Dillon. I will go with Robbie and Tim Patrick. Corey Davis or Elijah Mitchell. I'm going with Elijah Mitchell. Start two in PPR, Devontae Williams, Tyson Williams, Elijah Mitchell, Chenalton Beasley. I'll go with Tyson and Elijah Mitchell. Jamal Williams or Tyson and full PPR. Probably go with Jamal Williams because I think there's a chance we see him featured a little bit more and it's a full PPR league. If it was a standard league, I might go Tyson but full PPR, give me the guy who caught a lot of passes last week. Appreciate all of your work. Half PPR, James Robinson, Tyson or Drake. I'm going to go with Tyson. Half PPR, start two looking for Floor. Gaskin, Mitchell, Devontae, Robinson or Mike Davis. I think Mitchell is probably the Floor. Gaskin might be, but I'm going to lean Mitchell. Do you think Troutman or Joanne Johnson is worth a pickup? I think Troutman, I think they both are technically. You just got to hope that Joanne Johnson starts to see more of a role as the season goes on but Troutman was second in the NFL last year in last week in Target share behind only Darren Waller. Miss the beginning, any last minute recommendation ads based on inactive this week? Yes. Just to reiterate what I said at the beginning, JJ Taylor would be my ad this week. Don't expect him to be Elijah Mitchell but JJ Taylor is going to be stepping in for Ramon Dre Stevenson who is inactive after that fumble last week. Gronk or Daryl Henderson, I'm going Daryl Henderson. Tim Patrick, Rondell Moore, Bryan Edwards, Elijah Moore. I'm going Tim Patrick. Pick two half PPR, Singletary, Chase, Melvin Gordon. I will bench Singletary there. Need one and a half PPR, Mike Williams, Boyd or Davis. I think I'd go Mike Davis and half PPR. You get more touchdown equity. Half PPR, Swift or Elijah Mitchell. I think you got to go with Elijah Mitchell. Hey JJ, big fan of the show. Thanks, half point PPR. I need to drop one for a defense and might not get them back. Tyson Williams, Melvin Gordon, Jamal Williams. I think that you could, man, I guess I would drop Melvin Gordon. Need one and a half PPR. Mike Williams, I just answered that one. Full PPR for my flex, Marquise Brown, Chase Claypole, Corey Davis, Elijah Mitchell or Robbie Anderson. I will go with Elijah Mitchell. Waddle, Sermon, Calloway, start two. I will start Waddle and Calloway. Evans or AB. I think it's a Mike Evans week. He didn't see a huge target shared last week but really good matchup for him. I think that he could go off. He's also a pretty good DFS play at $6,700 over on Fandle. Start two full PPR, Jamar Chase, Mike Williams, Devonte Smith. I'm going to go with the last two, Jacoby Myers versus Christian Kirk. I'm going to go with Jacoby Myers, Goddard or pick up a waiver wire tight end and full PPR. I'd probably just play Goddard. Rogers or Russell Wilson need floor. I would probably go with Russell Wilson. Drop Calloway for JJ Taylor and PPR, probably not. Cedric Wilson or Barber and Standard Flex. I'd go Cedric Wilson. I should get some slot play this week. Drop Cordero Patterson for JJ Taylor. I think that's probably worth it. Yeah, I think that's okay. Drop Tony Jones for JJ Taylor. Now I get all these JJ Taylor drop questions. I would keep Tony Jones. Jalen Regger or Cordero. I already answered the Cordero one. Ertz or Cooks. I'm assuming that's Jared Cook. I would go Jared Cook over Zach Ertz. I love Jared Cook today. Julio or Branding Cooks. I'm going Julio. Mitchell or Edmonds. I'd probably go Edmonds. Full PPR pick two, Swift Lock at CEH. Just go with the last two because we don't know Swift's status. Manny Sanders, MVS for Jacoby Myers. I love Manny Sanders today. I love Manny Sanders and MVS tomorrow. I'm probably going to go Manny Sanders though. Jamal Williams, Gervonta Williams or Devontae Smith. I'm going Devontae and probably a non-PPR Gervonta. Beasley versus Gaskin. It depends if it's a PPR league or not. Half PPR pick two, James Robinson. MVS Christian Kirk. Love what you're doing, man. Appreciate it. I'd go MVS and probably James Robinson. Just hope for that negative game script. If you want to go with Kirk, go ahead and go with Kirk. I just think last week was a little bit fluky. Full PPR, Rojo or AJ Dillon. As much as I want to say AJ Dillon there, I think I'd probably go Rojo. Just hope that they utilize him the way that we want them to utilize him. Claypool or Chenalt. I shouldn't say that. Utilizing the way that you probably hope that he would be utilized. Claypool or Chenalt, I would go with Claypool. Matt Ryan or Sam Darnold. Neither, can I say neither. I'd probably go with Matt Ryan but I don't like either of them this week. I'd rather just stream with Teddy Bridgewater. Pick two full PPR Chase Higgins or AB. I'm going with the last two. PPR Mitchell or Daryl Henderson. I'm going Daryl Henderson. Elijah, I don't know what Elijah you're talking about because it could be more. I'm assuming it's Mitchell or Mike Davis. I'm going to Elijah Mitchell over Mike Davis. Stashing fields over land since he will start first. That's fine. Half PPR pick one, Hamler, MVS or Christian Kirk. I really liked the first two. They were both on my podcast this week as sleepers. I'm going to go MVS but wouldn't shock me at all if Hamler does work today. Half PPR, Devontae Smith or Elijah Mitchell. I think the safer play is Elijah Mitchell but Devontae Smith, it doesn't matter. I think you can go either direction there. If you need floor, Elijah Mitchell's a lock to see some work. Drop hasty for JJ Taylor, yes. One point PPR, Gaskin versus Beasley. I would go Gaskin. Buffalo, Arizona or Carolina D. I'd go Buffalo. Let's see Swift or Mike Williams at the flex. I'm just going to go with Mike Williams if it's a PPR league just because of the Swift injury. Again, anything that's Swift related have a backup if you're going to use them. It would be very, very helpful. Drake or Elijah Mitchell. I'm going to go with Elijah Mitchell. I got one more question that I can answer and then we are going to switch streams here but I will go with the half PPR pick one Swift, Sermon, Hyde, Tony Jones. In that case, I would just risk it and go with DeAndre Swift. But that's going to do it everyone. There should be another stream hopping on here in just a second with Liv and Josh. They're going to be answering some of these start sick questions. They are going to be, there's Liv. They will be answering some start sick questions. There's Josh and talking some NFL betting. So guys, take it away. I got to go rest my brain a little bit after that. I will talk to you guys later. I don't blame you JJ. That was intense. A lot of questions. You got to a lot of start sick questions there. Every week. Very good job. All right guys, take care. Thanks JJ, thanks JJ. How is everyone doing? Fandall family and welcome. We are here to talk some betting, heading into week two of the NFL season. Please feel free to ask any NFL betting questions you might have. We're about 30 minutes away from kickoff and I am excited for week two. Let's go. My name is Josh Feaster. You can follow me on Twitter at FYF Josh and I'm joined today by Liv Moody. She works for the volume sports and also works with us over here at Fandall. You can find her on all platforms at Liv Moods, L-I-V-M-O-O-D-S on all platforms. Liv, are you excited for week two of the NFL season? I am, but to be honest with you, I'm feeling like a little bit of pressure. I went three and O last Sunday and you know how betting works.  And I think week two is kind of the overreaction week and it's that fine line of, okay, we saw, I mean, dogs were great in week one. 12 and four against the spread. Do we see that again? I have a lot of favorites as my picks. So of course that makes me nervous cause you've always got those dogs come out of nowhere. So I'm a little more nervous this week to be honest, but I've got my picks, they're locked in so there's no going back now. I've got to just push through. I mean, three and O week one is pretty good. It was kind of a weird week. I feel like a lot of people had some trouble making some of their locks, their favorite picks. For me personally, I'm right there with you Liv going into week two of the NFL season. I love the capitalizing on overreactions from week one. Look at it, it's week one is the first time we actually get to see these players on the field, but week one does not typically tell the whole story last year, the box, they lost week one, they won the Super Bowl, the Jaguars won week one and they have not won a game since. So let's take advantage of those people overreacting. Am I right? Yeah. Absolutely. Just like you week one, I typically like to take the underdogs. I like to take the points because we don't really have a lot of data to go off of but we too, we got a little bit data to work with, right? Yep, absolutely. That's what I like to hear. That's what I like to hear. So like JJ mentioned, there's a lot of good starts questions in the chat, but we're going to focus on our betting questions today. But let's see, Lamar or James, he got to go Lamar there, Saints or Bucks defense. I'm going to lean the Saints defense actually in that one. So let's just, let's just get into some betting, betting. Yeah. Let's get into it. So we were talking a little before the stream here, you had a couple of locks. I've got a couple of locks. I got a couple of picks. I like, is there, let me just share the screen here. So we can actually go through the Fandall sports book. Just give me a second here. Perfect. All right, I got the screen up. Perfect, perfect. All right. So where do you want to go first here, Liv? Where do you want to, what do you want to focus on? So the first game that I'm actually looking at, and I guess I should probably go in order. Well, I think actually, yeah, I guess I am technically in order. My first spread, the first spread that I like is Saints minus three and a half. And you know, this is a tough one for me because I actually feel like the Saints and the Panthers played pretty similarly in week one in terms of yards allowed and how their offense performed. However, they went up against very different opponents. You have the Saints who dominated the Green Bay Packers, a team that brought back the majority of their starters and had Aaron Rodgers. They dominated the Packers. And then you've got the Panthers on the other hand who kept it pretty close with a team like the Jets. And I don't really have a ton of faith in a team like the Jets. But I think it's worth noting, you know, the Panthers put a lot of great pressure on Zach Wilson. I think he had six sacks and the defense forced two interceptions. So the defense looked really strong for the Panthers. The Saints also had great defense, only allowing 43 rushing yards to the Packers. The Panthers held the Jets to only 45 rushing yards up against the Jets team. So I think this is gonna be a very past heavy game which makes me look at the QBs. In this situation, I'm looking at James Winston or I'm looking at Sam Darnold. And maybe it's the excitement and the overreaction like we talked about coming off of week one, but I love the way James Winston look. He had five touchdowns on only 20 attempts. So if you're asking me, you know, out of those two QBs, who do you feel more comfortable with? I would go ahead and say James Winston. And so I think that's why I am riding with the Packers in this one because like I said, both teams performed pretty similarly in week one, which makes it tough to, you know, to try to figure out what this game is gonna look like. But I think we see a very past heavy matchup because both of these teams were great with the rushing defense. So past heavy game that makes me rely on the QBs. I have more faith in Winston than I do in Darnold. So I am taking Saints minus three and a half in this one. I love it. And it's actually on the Fandals Sportsbook here. It just changed the Saints for minus three now. So you got to like that even more, right? Let's go. Absolutely. At three and a half, I was a little close on this game. This one's tough for me.  I really think it's gonna come down to who has the better game there. These are two former number one overall picks going head to head, kind of had a roller coaster of a career so far on each side, and they're both with teams that are different from the teams that drafted them. I think James Winston is going to have another good game. People are worried because he only had 148 passing yards last week against the Packers, but five touchdowns. I know there was a couple passes that were a little iffy, but I am looking for him to have an art big game as well. I love this pick, especially now that the line changed a little bit. Absolutely. That makes me feel a whole lot better. So that, because that hook can be, that hook can really get you. So I'm actually loving the minus three for the Saints in this one. Yeah, that's a great move on the Fandals Sportsbooks. And all right, it looks like we got some questions here in the chat. We have Travis coming in and asking Tana Tani over under 257.5 passing yards, 257.5 passing yards. And let me actually go to the prop and see what the line is actually sitting at, at the moment in the Fandals Sportsbook. So the Titans game, where are we? There we go against the Seahawks. And actually I want to get into this game in a minute because this is actually one of the games that I am picking against the spread as well. Passing yards, Tana Hill. So right now you've got it right. You got it right, Travis. 257.5 passing yards. And I am actually, I know this line moved up. This line moved up. I was looking at this line earlier in the weekend. I think it was at like 245, I believe at 257, I have a tough time taking this. I think I like the under here personally, 257. Tana Hill. I do expect a better game from him going forward, but I do think this is the week that Derek Henry gets a little bit more right against the Seahawks. So I'm taking the under on 257.5 on Tana Hill. Do you have any opinion here, Liv? Not a huge opinion. I've been hot on the Cardinals since the very beginning. So I was fading the Titans in week one big time and people did not really like me for that one. I took a lot of heat for that bet. Cardinals plus three in week one. So I, to be honest with you, I don't think we saw enough of this Titans team at their best in week one to be able to like, I'm personally not laying any money on this game just because Seahawks didn't do a whole lot for me in week one, Titans didn't show up to me at all up against the Cardinals. So this is one of those games that I would go like this and just walk away. Slowly. More than fair enough. More than fair enough. Absolutely. There's actually one player prop in this game that I absolutely love. And I mean, we're here. Might as well get into it, right? And it involves the rushing yards and it's Chris Carson at 67 and a half rushing yards. And I love the over here. Listen, week one against the Colts, Carson had 19 carries for 91 yards and at 5.7 yards per carry. And I fully expect a very similar game this week. Chris Carson's a very good running back. They got some injuries in that backfield already for the Seahawks. I think Chris Carson is the guy for the, I mean, he's gonna get at least 15 carries again this week. So this is a smash play for me. Over on 67 and a half rushing yards for Chris Carson. I love it. If you've got a game like that in week one, it's really hard to not want to take the over again in week two for a guy that has, you know, five point, did you say 5.7 yards per carry? I mean, that's pretty impressive. So I would be riding with you on that one for sure. All right, let's go. So you also mentioned there was a couple other games that you really liked this week, right, Liv? Yes, yes. What was the next one there? Another spread that I like in this one is Cardinals minus three and a half. Like I said, I have been hot on this Cardinals team since the beginning. I really love them. I think they've got a lot of powerful playmakers on this team. Kyler Murray looked awesome in week one. Then you've got Chandler Jones on defense. They just look pretty great on both sides of the ball and not to mention this is their season opener. This is their home opener. They're at home. So if they were able to play the way they played on the road up against the Titans and the Titans aren't a bad team. So to be able to play the way they played up against the Titans and now they're getting that home field advantage coming off of an awesome win. I just really liked the Cardinals in this one minus three and a half. You know, the Vikings didn't do a whole lot for me. They definitely did not impress me in week one losing to the Bengals and Cousins was sacked five times and hit seven times. And then you've got Chandler Jones walking away with five sacks in week one makes me a little nervous for Kirk Cousins in this situation. So unless Kirk Cousins has some sort of protection I think we see another game similar to week one with the Cardinals and the Titans where the Cardinals just have a heyday against this Vikings team. So if the O-line on the Vikings can't protect Kirk Cousins in this one and then you've got Chandler Jones coming out of every play. I mean, I would be nervous if I were Cousins in this situation. So hopefully they have stepped up their protection for Cousins in week two and I think that's the only way they have a chance to hang in there. So I just think the Cardinals have more in their favor in this one. So again, I'm taking that minus three and a half. I like this live. I really do. I'm actually a bigger Cardinals fan than I think most people are out there. I've seen a lot of people like the Vikings on this one. And if I had to play Devils Advocate I think it's probably because like they played a very, very close game in overtime against the Bengals last week that Dalvin Cook kind of fumbled the game away. They had a ton of penalties which is a little bit uncharacteristic with Mike Zimmer and the Cardinals won big against the Titans. I mean, everyone knows they destroyed the Titans but I do think the Titans were a bit disorganized going into that game. And I do think that isn't a great representation of who the Titans truly are. They had a lot of practice time due to COVID being missed. But so I do like the Cardinals here for me personally, I don't think I could bet on this one. So I'm here as well on this one personally. That's fine. And it might be because actually the Cardinals coach in Cliff Kingsbury I am not a big Cliff Kingsbury fan when it comes down to it. I just, I'm not sure if he's a good NFL coach. I love Kyler Murray though and I love that offer. Oh, I love Kyler Murray. Yeah. This will be a fun game. I think that both teams have some mistakes that they need to clean up and if they do everything right and clean up those mistakes from week one coming into week two, I think we should see a pretty good match up here. I just think that the Cardinals have a little bit more in their favor. And like you said, lots of penalties coming from the Vikings in week one. It was I think 17 or something.  So if they can just tidy up some of those little mistakes here and there. I mean, we should see a good game, but I still got to ride with the Cardinals. I think the Cardinals are going to be one of those teams for me where I'm going to ride them until I can't anymore. Once they let me out, then I walk away. But until then I'm just going to keep riding with them because I love the way they looked. And I think they're very exciting and they just got a lot going for them. So I'm definitely riding hot on the Cardinals this year. Don't know if that's a good or a bad thing, but I'm just being honest. And I think you summed it up perfectly when you talked about the offensive line for the Vikings. If they can't keep Kirk Cousins upright in this game, then the Cardinals are winning this game handily, in my opinion. So that's what it's all about here. That's what it's all about here. I do have one game I wanted to quickly go into against with the spread. And I know we're just talking about it. And it is the Seahawks and Titans. I understand, but we just talked about going into this. We love capitalizing on overreactions a little bit. The Titans are getting six and a half points against the Seahawks, all right? And I actually like taking the points. I know they're at home. I know the Seahawks are at home. But the Titans, they did get beat up by the Cardinals. I'm not going to deny that. But again, I think it was an overreaction on both sides of the card here. The Seahawks played well against the Colts. I think this game is a lot more even than the spread actually shows. I don't think the Seahawks will be able to kill the Titans, like the Cardinals did through the pass rush. I think the Titans offense really gets Derek Henry, Julio Jones, and Ryan D'Anne Hill, like all involved in rolling this week. I would not be surprised if just like the last team that has the ball in their hands gets the win in this game, six and a half seems kind of like a crazy number to me. I feel like it should be more like four and a half personally. So I like taking the Titans with points in this game. How does that make you feel? You know, like I said, hard for me to make a judgment call on this Titans team just because I don't think we truly saw what they're capable of in week one. I don't think, I think you said it best. I don't think they came prepared to be honest with you. I think they might have just thought that it was an easy win and they weren't they weren't as prepared as they should have been. So hard for me to make a call on this team, but six and a half points up against two strong teams. That's a lot of points. And like I said earlier, if you missed what I said, the dogs were 12 and four against the spread last week. So we saw a lot more dogs covering than not last week. So it definitely doesn't bother me. And I am more likely to take a dog to cover than I am to take a favorite to cover just because of that overreaction. I say that and I've just given two favorites that are going to happen. So I kind of contradicted myself just a little bit, but you know, three and a half is very different to me than six and a half. Now you're talking about a whole lot of things. Very different, very different. Yes. And so that's why in this situation, I don't hate the plus six and a half. I love the dogs to cover. I had a crazy seven leg parlay last week, plus 9,228 odds in the Fandle Sports Book. And believe it or not, it was the Green Bay Packers who ruined the entire parlay. I had the Browns to cover it plus five and a half. I had the Eagles to cover it plus three. I had- Eagles was a great bet last week. I made some money on that one. I had the Cardinals to cover it plus three. I had Steelers to cover it plus six and a half. I had the Under and the Broncos Giants game. Raiders to cover it plus four and a half. So literally all dogs covering and an Under. And then the one favorite was the Green Bay Packers minus what was the spread? Three and a half. It was three and a half. And boy, did that last week destroy my whole entire week. So really tough, but again, worth noting that the dogs were covering incredibly in week one. So you can absolutely see that again. Just keep in mind that the dogs, they performed well in week one and we could see that again in week two. So I don't hate it.  I like taking the points in this one. Like we just said, I do see another question here in the chat. A couple of player props waddle with over under 48 and a half yards. Personally, one of my player props that I wanted to talk about actually was waddle with over three and a half catches. Waddle had four catches for 61 yards and a touchdown in week one against the Patriots. And now he's going against the Bills in week two. I do expect more scoring in week two against the Bills. You might be concerned because a willful are coming back, but he's supposed to come back from the suspension in week two, but he will miss week two due to personal reasons. So yes, Jalen waddle, he's a rookie, but he looked awesome last week. I actually expect him to get more involved in this offense as the year goes along. I expect two would improve. I am hammering all the Jalen waddle overs in this game personally. So yeah, I'll see what I hope I'm pronouncing that right. Waddle over, I'm definitely taking the over 48 and a half. I love it. I think you just talked about something that I just want to, I don't have an opinion on those player props, but I absolutely love, this is going to sound so bad. I love when there's an injury, not because I love that someone is injured, but it makes it way easier for me with player props to try to figure out, okay, this person's gone. So who is going to get that more involvement? Like you talked about, like who is going to be more involved in offense that we typically don't see? I think that that always helps me when it comes to player props. I felt that way about the Ravens team when you didn't, when, you know, they lost their top three running backs. Kind of my brain was like, okay, I think there's going to be more passing in this one. I'm going to look at the receivers since they're running backs are out. So Andrew is always helped me for whatever reason, which I know is super unfortunate because you never want anyone to be injured, but it definitely does help when it comes to picking player props. Oh, no doubt, no doubt. Broncos, that's my team. Oh, are they your Broncos Ravens fan personally myself? Born and raised in Denver. I'm going to be honest, I was a really, really bad Broncos fan last year. I kind of jumped off the bandwagon because they were just so bad that I was like, I can't even watch anymore. I didn't even watch them. It was so hard for me to watch, but I got to say Teddy Bridgewater in week one, I think he surprised a lot of people. I know he surprised me. I definitely thought that Teddy Bridgewater was the way to go for this Broncos team. I think Drew Locke, he's had his time. I think it's time for him to move on and I hate saying that, but I just think it's the truth. I think at the end of the day, Vic Fangio knows that his job is kind of on the line this year. I mean, there's a lot of pressure from a coaching perspective of we've got to win games. Like that's end of discussion. Take your emotions out of it. The Broncos knew they needed to win this year. I think Teddy Bridgewater looked awesome in week one. If anything, I kind of watched that game. I was more nervous and disappointed in the receiving end of the game. He had great passes to his receivers and a lot of dropped passes that should not have been dropped. So I think Teddy came prepared and I don't know if the receivers were ready for a fighter like him who's gonna throw the ball regardless and he's gonna get it to you. You just have to be ready for it. So I loved the Broncos. I'm sure you, I don't know if you have some player props in this one because there's a lot I think that you can look at in this matchup just because the Broncos looked really good. And you've got guys like K.J. Hamler that dropped some passes but that's very out of character for him. So I would actually loved as a Broncos fan I would love to know your thoughts on this matchup because I've got to take my bias out of the equation for a little bit. I would love to know how you feel about this one because I thought they looked awesome. Well, I wanted to bring this up because first we had a question about Sutton with an over under of 53 and a half receiving yards.  I thought Teddy Bridgerwater looked fantastic as well. I think he was pretty good. I mean, outside of the touchdown category he was good at getting the receivers the ball last year with the Panthers. He supported three 1000 receiver, wide receivers last year with the Panthers. So he can support multiple receivers. You mentioned K.J. Hamler with some drops. I wanted to focus on Cortland Sutton a little bit here. You know, I mean, Jerry Judy, we were just talking about injuries and we kind of like capitalizing on that. Do you think Cortland Sutton gets more involved with this offense now that there's no Jerry Judy? I mean, he's coming off of a pretty bad injury from last season. I think a lot of people expected more than one catch for 14 yards last week. So do you think he can get over this 53 and a half? Well, it's actually 52 and a half year on Fandals football. Yes, I do. I absolutely do. And you said it best Jerry Judy being out. I do think we see more involvement with Sutton in this game for sure. I will say Jerry Judy's injury kind of broke my heart, but it would have been much worse. Cause to be honest with you, I thought he was like, I thought it was like snapped. I thought he broke his, I thought he broke his ankle. It looked horrible. So Broncos fans everywhere, I'm sure you were cringing just like me cause I was like, no, that's, that's Judy. We can't lose him. But I think Sutton's a great player and I do think that because of that injury, you see a lot more involvement in him. So I think there's great value in his over this week. I really do. I do as well. I'm taking the over. I'm a big Cortland Sutton fan in terms of talent. I think Jerry Judy and him, they play in different spots of the field. Cortland Sutton's a more taller, you know, throw it up to him, maybe kind of receiver and Jerry Judy's more of that underneath really great route runner. But I think they need to get Cortland Sutton involved in this offense. If they want to win this game, I expect a big game out of him. Now 53 and a half, I don't know if, I'm probably avoiding that when it comes down to it. But if I had to choose, you're putting me on the spot, I'm taking the over, I'm taking the over there. We had another question come in saying I've got Brady Murray and Dak all under one half interception. Is betting interceptions just a toss up prop or we can make an informed decision here? He really likes Brady against the Falcons with zero INTs. Yeah, if you're in bed when anyone getting zero INTs is Brady, but I don't love making INT prop bets personally. I do think it's a little flukey at times. So I don't know. Do you have an opinion there? I have never, to be honest with you, full transparency. I've never placed that kind of a prop because I'm the type of person that, as you can see, likes to take notes and there's not enough notes that you can take in that situation. Like you said, kind of flukey and you just don't know what's gonna happen.  With a prop like that, anything can happen. So I definitely wouldn't ever place it myself. I mean, it could bounce off with someone's hands and it'd be an interception and it's not Tom Brady's fault. It's no one's fault really. It's unlucky. Tom Brady had two interceptions last week against the Cowboys. I bet you would think it was a pretty safe bet taking the under on interceptions there. If I had to choose, yes, I'm taking the under on interceptions against the Falcons this week. But again, I don't love betting on it personally. Was there any other matchup or over under or anything that really stood out to you? Yeah, I'll just kind of toss a couple more out there. I don't need to get in the middle about them. Over 49 and a half in the 49ers, Eagles matchup. Both teams combined are walking away from week one with 73 points. The 49ers allowed 33 points to the Lions and despite the Eagles holding the Falcons to no touchdowns, it's that question of, is the Eagles defense really good or are the Falcons just hot garbage? That's really what it boils down to to me. It's hard for me to get a read on this. I think the Eagles looked awesome, but I also think that we may see a different game up against an opponent that's not the Falcons to be completely honest with you. And so I think we see a very high scoring matchup here. I actually also am leaning Eagles plus three. The Eagles are at home. Like I said, they looked really great. Jalen Hertz, in my opinion, looked really great. 77% completion rate, 264 passing yards, three passing touchdowns, 62 rushing yards. I mean, he just looked awesome. And so I don't know, I think we see a really good game here though. I actually am excited about this one because you've got the 49ers who ranked bottom 10 in defense, yards allowed to their opponent. And then you've got the Eagles who ranked top 10 in defense, yards allowed to their opponent. But again, it's that question of, okay, the Eagles ranked top 10 walking out of week one, but they also played the Falcons. So it's kind of hard to get a good read on this Eagles team.  And the Falcons, to me, will have the number one draft pick next year. They are, they look horrible to me. I think that they will be the worst team in the NFL this year. So hard for me to really get a read on this Eagles team, but nonetheless, I think both QBs, actually all three QBs, I guess I should say, since we've got a little rotation happening for the four of them. Oh yeah, Trey Lance, Trey Lance, right? I think we see just a very high scoring matchup, you know, both teams scoring quite a bit. So I'm taking the over 49 and a half in that one. And then another favorite, I know I literally just talked about how the dogs did so well last week, but it's okay, it's okay. Chiefs minus three and a half, it's really hard for me to not like this bet just because the Chiefs are healthy, the Ravens are not. That's just the simple fact of the matter. The Ravens have a lot of injuries, super unfortunate circumstances for them. One thing that really stands out to me, and I actually have a player prop in this game as well, but the Ravens allow the most passing yards to the Raiders last week. They allowed Derek Carr 409 passing yards. Now I'm not trying to dog on Derek Carr, but it's Derek Carr. And to be honest with you, I was not expecting him to have over 400 passing yards. So something has got to change on this Ravens defense because that to me is just like absurd. And so to me, that's music to Mahomes ears. A passing QB going up against a team that allowed the most passing yards coming out of week one is huge. And so 81% of the Chiefs yards in week one were passing yards. This is a pass heavy team. Patrick Mahomes is great at passing the ball and getting it to his receiver. Oh, is he? He is, yes, I don't know if we knew that, but he's actually pretty good. But nonetheless, I think there's just a lot that the Ravens, there's a lot of things against them right now. And super unfortunate circumstances for them this year, but it's just hard for me to not want to take the Chiefs in this one. I know that they were horrible against the spread last year and horrible against the spread on the road. Totally get it. But I think this is a very different circumstance. The Ravens are coming off of a Monday night football loss and a little fun fact for you. Harbaugh is one and four coming off of a Monday night football loss. No, don't tell me that. I know, I know, I'm sorry. But just so, you know, the trends and all those good things and the passing defense is not being very strong for this Ravens team. I just think the Chiefs are going to take this one. I don't think they have any problems covering minus three and a half, but hey, welcome to gambling. I could be so wrong and the Ravens could turn around and just absolutely annihilate. So it is what it is, but I am riding with the Chiefs minus three and a half in this one. I don't blame you. I'm a Ravens fan and everything you said is correct. The Ravens pass defense is just not looking great right now. They've dealt with a lot of injuries. They lot that Jimmy Smith was out last week, Marcus Peters out for the season. Obviously the running games torn apart a little bit. I do think Patrick Mahomes has the opportunity to kind of pick them apart, especially if Derek Carr was able to do so last week. Right, and again, no knock on Derek Carr, but kind of a knock on Derek Carr, like good for you, but also that normally happened. But that's- Derek Carr's an above average NFL quarterback, in my opinion, but that's as high as I can go. I'm not even, I can't put any high in yet. And I actually, I guess while we're kind of talking about this game a little bit, I actually did take Patrick Mahomes over passing yards, over 318 and a half passing yards, just based off of everything I just said. I decided to rock with Patty Mahomes. I know his mom doesn't like him being called Patty, but whoops. So I'm gonna rock with him. Yeah, I do. So I'm gonna rock with him and it does kill me. And I know you're a Ravens fan.  I love him. I think he's one of the most fun quarterbacks to watch. And he is insane. There's a part of me that kind of feels like he's a little underrated. And I know that's like craziness because people are like, no, everyone loves Lamar Jackson. Well, I think people sleep on his ability to not only perform well, but right. I think people think because he's a, you know, he runs the ball so much and he's this great rushing QB, he still knows how to pass the ball. So I'm a big Lamar Jackson girl.  It really does kill me. But again, I gotta just go with the facts of the matter and the facts of the matter are the Ravens just aren't healthy right now and the Chiefs are. So I'm rocking with the Chiefs, even though it hurts, cause I really do love Lamar Jackson. I really do. He's a great QB. All in all, all in all, I'm right there with you. I think the Ravens are gonna figure it over the course of the season, but we too against maybe the best team in the NFL. I'm nervous about them. I also would take the Chiefs minus three and a half myself. And just to get a couple of things, I see there's some fantasy questions here in the chat, just some quick hits here. AB or Brandon Cook's full point PR, I'm going AB there, Gaskins, Higgins, or for net non-PPR. I'm actually going Higgins there, Mike Williams or T Higgins in a flex. I would go T Higgins there. And then Devante Smith or Jamar Chase. I have T starting just because you have T starting. I actually, I think I'm gonna the verse my portfolio a little bit. I'll go with Devante Smith. He looked awesome in week one. And I just real quick another prop just because we just mentioned Mike Williams here. I love taking Mike Williams over 56 and a half receiving yards this week. Week one he had eight catches for 82 yards and a touchdown. This guy's talented as long as he's healthy with Justin Herbert, he is going to eight. Let's go. Love it. Oh man.  I love that. Let's go. Mike Williams is my favorite prop, a player prop that going in this week over 56 and a half points. I bet it guys. Got it. Love it. This was fun.  Absolutely. I won't do this again sometime for sure. I would love to. And thanks for everyone that tuned in on the FanDuel channel. Make sure you guys are tuning in each Sunday for JJ's Start, Sit, Fantasy Questions at 12 o'clock Eastern time. And then you can get it, get your betting questions in here starting at 12 30 Eastern time each week. Make sure you're subscribed to the channel and like the video. Liv, you got anything else to say before we get out of here? Best of luck everybody. You guys know gambling is gambling. If you lose, learn from it. If you win, celebrate it and we move on and we'll be back for week three. So best of luck to everyone. Let's go. We're gonna kill it this week. I'm excited. Let's go watch the games. Let's go. You can find me on Twitter at FIF Josh. Find Liv on all platforms at Liv Moods. Let's go. That was fun.


refresh gwybodaeth I want to make one thing very clear for certain members in the audience. I'm not in fact Australian. I'm actually from a small cold Island nation of the coast of Europe, called Britain. I now live in Sydney. Which is a very large country. In fact, you can see Britain is a percentage wise very small part of a sort of side of Australia and the reason why I'm here talking to you today is I have the honor of being one of the Caught team members for R-Spec. So, first off, hands up if you've heard of R-Spec. That's a good percentage. Hands up if you use R-Spec. Okay, okay, we're going well. Hands up if you've heard of version three. Still a good number, good, the marketing is working. Hands up if you've used version three. That is actually a good percentage of you, I'm glad. So, why is this important? Why is R-Spec three important in particular? So, have you all heard of semantic versioning? Hands up again? Good, so we all know that in patch releases we should only be able to fix bugs. In minor releases we can add new features, but we must not make any breaking changes. And we know that in major versions we get to make those breaking changes. So, just quickly going over the history of R-Spec because it is actually quite an old and venerable project at this stage. Released in 2005 with R-Spec zero versions. So these are the very first sort of minor versions that were quite frankly a little bit of a hack. This was way before my time on the project, way before most people who currently maintain it's time on the project. That's been through several sets of maintainers. And it wasn't until 2007, a couple of years later, that R-Spec one was released and it became stable, you could use it, people actually tested products and shipped cool stuff. And it took another three years until R-Spec two was released, which is the version that most of you are probably most familiar with at this point in time. When it was released we actually reached about 85 different contributors to R-Spec at this point. It had most of the features we all know and love. And it was during this time of course that Rails 3 came out and R-Spec is sort of grown in usage as Rails is grown in usage. So if we fast forward to 2014 now, we actually have at this point a couple of hundred contributors have committed stuff to R-Spec. And we've finally released version three, which has actually been the product of more than a year's work. So why should you care? The astute among you will have noticed, of course, that this talk title contains a pun. They expect you to care. And even more astute of you will notice that I slipped up and said, should you care? I'm sorry, there was no happy accident. It was in fact the product of engineering for this talk. It's because it's the most recent, most visible change that we've sort of made, especially around three. It's not the only change that's in three, but it's the one that most people are now actually noticing the expect syntax. If this was a blog post, the TLDR of this talk would be that releasing version three is about cleaning house, about removing deprecated things and making painful recommendations. The expect syntax is that one of those painful recommendations. A year or two ago, I would have been happy writing should syntax. I would have been more than happy to write should you care for this talk. Just a quick show of hands. Who actually uses the expect syntax? And who uses the should syntax? Hi, Constantine. We all know what the expect syntax looks like. You generally expect something to match some matcher. We all know that the should syntax is slightly shorter and we expect some object to should match. The expect syntax is not actually that new. A lot of people refer to it as the new expect syntax. It was actually released in July 2012 in aspect 2.11. Somehow that escaped a lot of people's notice. Even before that, you could use it to write block expectations. In fact, you had to if you wanted to test that you were raising errors correctly. But in 3.x, as we refer to the 3.0 series, it becomes the recommended syntax. It now has full equivalence with the should syntax, something that didn't have prior to 3.0. This talk is about why you should care about that. Just quickly. Object.should becomes expect object to matcher. Object.should receive becomes expect object to receive. Object.stub becomes allow to receive. Should receive some vowels. We initially weren't going to replace this syntax, but we have people complaining. So we have given you receive messages. And we've had a lot of people complaining about should being deprecated. A fun fact about should being deprecated. It's not. What's happened with aspect 3 is that we deprecated the usage of should automatically. We are trying to get away from you just assuming everything will always work. The big scary warning message it creates forces people to think it's deprecated. I should actually apologise for that. That's something we slipped up on. We didn't think that people would kind of assume people would read the message and not just see should deprecated. And it's caused a lot of people to switch to expect which we like. But what actually made us change this recommendation? The answer to that is monkey patching. Most Rubyists are familiar with this expression. We open a classroom module and we insert some code. This syntax is monkey patching. It's putting should on to every object in the system. And it can go horribly wrong. The original reason for writing the expect syntax was cases like this, which is a proxy object. When the expect syntax was introduced, this actually would have tried to be tested like this. And it wouldn't work. Because the way that obstude is monkey patched into kernel overrides on the object, and B fuzzy tries to match against fuzzy question mark, turns out they go false back to the method missing, and you get an error about the method not actually existing on the object you're proxying to as opposed to on the proxy itself. That bug was fixed when expect was introduced. In preparation for this talk, I had to make sure that this was fixed. And I actually found that 3.0 has a subtle bug, whereby we are deprecating parts of the predicate matches with private methods. This actually trips up the private method warning, so I'm going to have to fix that later on in the conference. And there was also a rather nasty bug surrounding active record where proxy objects for collections would actually remove should, and people would complain that, I should not find my method anymore, and you're like, well, why is that? So realistically, the reason why we're deprecating the usage of automatic should, is to get rid of this chap, the evil monkey in the closet. Our drive, as I said, we want to remove as much monkey patching from our spec as possible. And that necessitated a change to our syntax so that we can provide the right aesthetics so that we can banish the evil monkey from our closet. And that's what the deprecation measure is telling you. We're telling you that we want you to tell us when you want us to monkey patch. We want that to eventually be the default. It's not where we are now. At the moment, monkey patching is still automatically included, but we want it not to be. We want to extract and isolate our code from your code to help you test your code. And this has actually led to one of the other new features in aspect. So previously, of course, the DSL look starts with a describe, and you have context. And that's actually monkey patched into main. It's only monkey patched into main. It's not exposed anywhere else. We go to a lot of effort to try and reduce that surface API. But in aspect three, you can now do this, which is a simple four-letter change in the top left-hand corner. You can now actually have a completely non-monkey patch mode. You can enable that with very nice conflict-disabled monkey patching. It's not the default because of backwards compatibility. So for the moment, zero monkey patching mode is an opt-in, but we'd really like it to be the default eventually. So part of this philosophy is just trying to keep our stuff out of your way. One of the other biggest changes in aspect three surrounds the four matters. These are probably the biggest extensions for aspect. This is what most people will actually... And they extend from everything from custom formatter to CI to NANCAP. So hands up, who has used a custom formatter? Has anyone written a custom formatter here? That's good. So the new aspect three puts a lot of modularisation into the formatter stuff. We're actually now using notification objects to send to formatters, which we weren't before, because we'd like you to be able to write formatters like this. There's no inheritance here. We're not including any modules. This is the purest sort of poro formatter you can write. All you've got to do is tell aspect what notifications you expect, and then you receive notification value objects. All of this is documented in our docs, of course, but I just wanted to touch on that because it leads me into the philosophy of where we're actually trying to take aspect. We're trying to isolate all of our code from your code. We're trying to drive down various APIs so that they're easier to use, and we're trying to help you write better tests, which leads me to my next... This is one of the contentious points in aspect. Does anyone use its? So its in aspect three has been extracted into a separate gem. When I say its, I don't mean the one-line syntax. I don't mean it should. Incidentally, this actually isn't monkey patching because we own the context of the spec. We weren't even going to replace this with an expect syntax equivalent until everyone complained, so we made it as expected. I guess a bit of feedback from everyone helps make everyone's life easier. But no, when I say its, I'm talking about the value test. They've always been a bit of a personal style. Some people like them, some people don't. We've taken the decision to extract into a gem because we don't think it fits with the core philosophy of aspect as a behaviour-driven tool. It's... They tend to lie to you in how they end up documented themselves. So with a quick example, if you were to have an object and you were to implement this name method like this and you see we've got Bob Jones, the test here is saying its name is expected to equal Bob Jones. This test, the implementation is fine. The problem is with the output. The output of this dot because it's literally taking your code and printing it is a lie. That's not what the name method actually does. It's not we're always going to return Bob Jones. With a little bit of refactoring, this test becomes something more like this. All I've done is changed the doc string. The implementation of the test is roughly the same. But now, when we run that documentation output, we get the component first and last. So now the test is expressing the behaviour of the test and not what the actual value is. That's why we've chosen to recommend that aspect, its method be not used. That's why we've extracted for the third game. You're still welcome to use aspect. It's still maintained by the core team, but we don't want it to be by default. So now that we're talking about behaviour, that segway has been nicely into talking about verified doubles. This is an all new feature for aspect three. It was actually mostly ported from Xavier Shea's aspect fire. Xavier Shea is now on the core team to help us maintain it. It's awesome and I'm super excited about these because they're essentially contract tests for free. So just quickly, if you were to write an instance double, this is how you invoke a verified double. This is no different to writing double name values, the same as you would done in aspect two. Because in isolation, it doesn't do anything.  But when you load in a definition for that object, aspect will now say, well, hang on a minute, we know about this object. You've just stubbed out this method, but it doesn't exist. The double will verify that you have actually met the method contract. So when we implement that, it will now pass. The only caveat here is that it doesn't actually verify the output against the method output. So because Ruby is dynamic, it's not going to check that a string, if you've stubbed it to be a string and it actually returns true, it's not going to go and invoke the method for you. Because that would be expensive and that would defeat the sort of speed part of using mocks in the first place. So it's not quite true contract testing because it doesn't deal with the sort of type signature. But it does do a pretty good job of making sure you haven't typoed your method names. A common use case is to sort of, you know, have your mocks in your unit tests. And then when you load the whole suite for integration, all of your unit tests will then automatically check that the methods exist on the real objects. And we can do this with already existing partial objects too. This will actually pass because even though object doesn't receive other, this is an opt-in feature. So that passes straight off the bat. But if I tell it to verify partial doubles, that's what we call stubbing on an existing object, it will again fail correctly. So that's all about verifying your behaviour. And yeah, that's all about verifying your behaviour. Now most of the other things in aspect three are really about cleaning house. As I said, there are four years of development that's happened on two and for most of those four years we've been carrying around backwards compatibility for aspect one. So in aspect three we are removing methods like stub, bang. It's always been the same as stub. It's never done anything differently. But we're going to remove it. Similarly, because we want to reduce confusion, we're removing both stub and mock as ways of creating doubles. They've always been a test double. For some reason we have three methods for the same thing. So we just remove two of them. We've made sure, we've tried to sort of reduce some confusion. So we now disallow statements like this, which you used to be able to specify that you could receive a message at least zero times, which is kind of a confusing English statement. So we've removed that. This one is slightly contentious. You can no longer specify that you can't raise a specific error. Sorry, the inverse. So you can specify that you raise a specific error, but you can't specify you don't raise a specific error. It's so confusing I'm even getting my tongue tied actually trying to say it. If you want to sort of specify that something doesn't raise a specific error, you're better off rescuing it yourself and expecting the right thing has been raised. But this follows a lot of bugs, because it's like, well, okay, my code's blown up. It's blown up with an argument error. But I was expecting a record invalid error and oh well, I guess that failure is not important. So we've removed that. We've removed some of the older aspect of sort of integration magic. So it's like autotest support. Because, well, most people either use Guard or something else or they don't. And it's kind of something that shouldn't live within the core gem. If there's any textmate fans in the audience, I'm afraid we've removed the textmate format in. I'm not sure there's anyone left who uses textmate. Anyone? One person? Wow. But one of the... This is another contentious one. Can everyone read that? That's a before all hook accessing a let. That's now disabled, because that is sharing state amongst instances of your tests. And we've disallowed that to try and increase the isolation of tests. So now if you try to do that, you'll get a nasty error message. Please read it. It explains how to fix it. And that's a duplicate slide. Similarly, we've disallowed access to partial doubles inside mocks. Sorry, inside before all hooks. The reason for this is again trying to prevent you from sharing state between tests. If you need to sort of do that, then we give you a temporary scope. If you need to do some mocking and stubbing so you can do some one-time setup before a sweep, but we don't want those doubles leaking between examples. So if anyone uses those features, I'm sorry, but it's for your own good. So all of these sort of different things that we've changed and we've made it a pain for you and I'm sorry. So let's talk about upgrading from two to three. So a lot of you said you were using three. How many of you still have projects that are running two? And how many of you have had problems upgrading those suites? Less hands, good. So we went through the whole process of inventing 2.99 and then three. 2.99 is officially the last release in the two series, which is designed so that you upgrade to 2.99.  You fix those warnings, then you can do upgrade to three and it will run green. Now that sounds like a pain for some people. So one marvellous person who is now on the aspect core team invented transpec. Who's heard of transpec? Right. All of the rest of you, go to GitHub when you've got some stable wifi and look up transpec. Transpec is an automatic dynamic analysis tool, it runs with your specs and converts all your specs to aspect three compatible. You have to be on 2.99 for it to work properly because it will only translate stuff that works. So if you're running 2.14 into transpec, it will just update to the latest. But if you're running 2.99, it will convert everything into an aspect three compatible. So if we look at a quick example, this is a random spec I'm found I made up. We've got a couple of things that disallow, we've got the it's, we're using the should syntax, we've got an equals equals operator that's no longer allowed and a few other bits and pieces. If we run transpec, you get an output similar to this. It's basically run aspect and it's checked that it's all green and then it's gone okay. So what if you actually tried to test and then you get a list of conversions. And so it returns our previous example into this, which is the only oddity here is what it's done to aspect it. You'll notice it's rather than including the gem, it's describing length and actually going to the effort. The fact that it can figure that out is magic. It's awesome. It's a little bit strange but it's awesome. So if you take away one thing from this talk is that transpec is awesome and you should all use it. So hopefully that's outlined and clarified some of the decisions we've made behind things in aspect three. I'm really keen to avoid cargo culting in our testing culture. I think it's what leads to us to making bristle tests and trying to avoid then leading to self-aggrandising blog posts about TDD is dead. I think that's something is to do with lack of understanding of what perhaps we're always doing. So I really encourage you to sort of research the decisions in testing and not just cargo cult. And I just want to say thank you to all for the listening. Thank you to every single one of these people for contributing to our spec. And I hope you've enjoyed my talk. I'm more of a mini test person, but I just wanted to say that I respect your work. I have to give Aaron credit for the last minute puns on the before and after talk slides. They were initially introduction and concluding until you made the pun. I just want to thank the entire aspect crew who are making this transition so easy. It's actually pretty amazing to see how smooth it was from 2.99 up to 3. I'm glad. Thank you.


For more videos and people's struggles, please subscribe to our YouTube channel. On Tuesday, February 16, after 135 hours of debate, a new bill aimed at reinforcing Republican values was approved by the French National Assembly. The bill, officially named Respect for the Principles of the Republic, has been subject of fierce debate in civil society and among politicians. It will go to the Senate next month for final approval. The bill seeks oversight of mosques, schools, and sports clubs, among other institutions, perpetually to protect France from Islamists. Now the bill does not mention Muslims or Islam. Critics point out that this legislation is against Muslims. The French Communist Party's deputies in the parliament said that the bill will allow the right and far right to develop Islamophobic theories. This bill gives the government the power to dissolve or ban associations as it sees fit. The bill also introduces stricter financial control over foreign money sent to religious organizations. The bill, according to the government, is expected to strengthen Lysith, the French idea of secularism, which calls for a strict separation of religion and state. The legislation will also tighten controls on homeschooling, online hate, and aims to combat misogyny rooted in religion. The bill also allows the state to close places of worship and religious schools as well as to ban extremist preachers. The bill has been put forward in the context of recent attacks by religious extremists in the last few years. The murder of Samuel Patti, a schoolteacher, is said to have been a major trigger. Hundreds of activists, academics, journalists, and religious figures gathered in Paris to protest the bill on February 12. Critics have said that the proposed law will stigmatize Muslims and that the existing laws are enough to cover the issues sought to be addressed by the new legislation. Emmanuel Macron has often been accused of catering to the sentiments of the far right and appeasing them by exaggerating the danger of Islamist groups.


I'm back with my second AI productivity tip for product managers. I've always time-blocked my tasks on my calendar to plan my day, but it takes a lot of time to think through. Instead, you can give your to-do list to your favorite LLMs such as Bard or Chachi PT. Along with your tasks, tell it what meetings and what time constraints you have throughout the day, what your energy levels tend to be, and what deadlines and goals you're working towards. Have the model create your perfect time-block calendar in a fraction of the time.