2019 Forwards

[hawkers65]

I'm probably gonna live to regret this but billings has just made his way into my side at F3 for the first time and I'm not hating it

Nah i really like him. Its either Crisp/Rookie or Billings/Ridley for me... What do you think as a fellow Billings enthusiast?

[hawkboy80]

Danger, Heeney, Mundy ,Greene, Setters, Balta, (Burgess & Parker)

[ubeaut]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

[LaHug]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

You've gotta risk it to get the biscuit

[ubeaut]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

You've gotta risk it to get the biscuit

Yes you have to take some risks. But I feel both those players at F3/F4 is a step too far. Picking Moore also means you kinda have to pick Burgess, whose scoring and JS are iffy

[jvalles69]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

You've gotta risk it to get the biscuit

Yes you have to take some risks. But I feel both those players at F3/F4 is a step too far. Picking Moore also means you kinda have to pick Burgess, whose scoring and JS are iffy

The reason I'm rolling with Greene and Moore at F3 and F4 is that I don't trust the forwards at their prices past Danger and Heeney, that simple for me.  So that extra cash is being used to strengthen every other line.  If say I left out Moore, moved Greene to F4 and added someone like Mundy, then I might not be able to afford Laird as my D2 or Gawn as my R2.

[GoLions]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

You've gotta risk it to get the biscuit

Yes you have to take some risks. But I feel both those players at F3/F4 is a step too far. Picking Moore also means you kinda have to pick Burgess, whose scoring and JS are iffy

If say you went a premo and rookie then it'd mean fielding an extra rookie, which you said yourself there are slim pickings there.

[PowerBug]

I'm currently rolling Greene at F5 hahaha. Danger, Gray, Dunkley and Billings ahead of him.

[Jalapeno]

I'm currently rolling Greene at F5 hahaha. Danger, Gray, Dunkley and Billings ahead of him.

Why no Heeney?

[ubeaut]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

You've gotta risk it to get the biscuit

Yes you have to take some risks. But I feel both those players at F3/F4 is a step too far. Picking Moore also means you kinda have to pick Burgess, whose scoring and JS are iffy

If say you went a premo and rookie then it'd mean fielding an extra rookie, which you said yourself there are slim pickings there.

That's why I'm going Premo and Greene at F3/4. I just think the scenario where Greene and Moore go down is quite possible and would be very messy in terms of fielding fwd rookies.
I'm starting Setterfield, Drew, Parker and Balta. That leaves Petrucelle as the only other rookie, (presuming Burgess is already in defence) and his JS isn't great with Jamie Cripps looming. So if both go down you're stuck for downgrade options and fielding Parker and Petrucelle.

[quinny88]

I'm probably gonna live to regret this but billings has just made his way into my side at F3 for the first time and I'm not hating it

Nah i really like him. Its either Crisp/Rookie or Billings/Ridley for me... What do you think as a fellow Billings enthusiast?

Just get him in so I know someone else is suffering the anxiety too haha

[jfitty]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

Personally for me, this was the only way I could squeeze Gawn and Grundy in, without sacrificing too much.

I feel this year is different. We have a legit reason to spend a ton on 2 rucks, but means we need to rethink a traditional structure.

[ubeaut]

I'm seeing so many teams with Greene at F3 and Moore at F4. It's really tempting as it allows an extra premo mid, but it just seems like way too much risk.
They are both very injury prone, and Greene is a suspension risk. Add to that the slim rookie pickings and poor scoring of fwd rookies, if one or both break down we'd be fielding rookies at F3/F4 or trading out premos elsewhere to upgrade them.
Can someone convince me otherwise?

Personally for me, this was the only way I could squeeze Gawn and Grundy in, without sacrificing too much.

I feel this year is different. We have a legit reason to spend a ton on 2 rucks, but means we need to rethink a traditional structure.

Yeah I get that. It's not so much the structure (Having a 350k+250k at F3/4)that worries me it's that those two players are extremely injury prone. If say Boak was 350k and Doedee was 250k that would be the same structure but with significantly less risk.

[IntegralX]

I'm very happy with Danger, Heeney, my big big sleeper and Worpel as F1-F4.

[reesbr]

Anyone taking a risk on Tom Lynch?