They rethink the most fundamental ideas, weigh options never meant to apply to them, and gorge themselves on contradictory opinion after contradictory opinion to the point they end up even more confused than when they began.
It's a side effect of the Internet age: an oversaturation of information drowning out that which can go unsaid.
These people do things like start Matt Hasselbeck over Peyton Manning because we here at CBSSports.com declared him the Start of the Week, and then don't understand why their daring gambit backfired. They missed the point entirely.
Fantasy Football - Dear Mr. Fantasy: Not the time to get cute : FantasyNews.CBSSports.com
All these clever suggestions -- the sleeper picks, the starts, the sits -- exist because people with needs need them. Some people don't have clear-cut starting lineups. They have to fill holes with under-the-radar types and want to know which under-the-radar types make for the best gambles each week. But other people don't have to gamble at all. They don't have any needs, but they get so caught up in the pursuit of victory they feel like they have to make it happen, refusing to believe they already have it made in the shade.
Look, I don't mean to promote a hands-off approach to Fantasy. Even the most dominant teams hit bumps in the road and need minor adjustments here and there. But at some point, every Fantasy owner needs to realize how to distinguish between decisions and non-decisions.
So if you find yourself struggling to get that one-week sleeper into your starting lineup, stop and ask yourself if it's a struggle you really need to have. Maybe you should just get with the holiday spirit and be thankful you don't have to go to such lengths.
I have a dilemma this week. I have two stud running backs in Chris Johnson and Ray Rice and have started them all year. But then I muddled everything up by adding Jason Snelling off the waiver wire. Now I'm not sure if I should start Rice or Snelling this week. I'm in contention for a wild-card spot and really need a win this week. Please help me make this tough choice! -- Raymond Jennings
SW: I should hope you've started Johnson and Rice all season. They only rank first and fourth in Fantasy points among running backs, so anyone who got cute and benched them at any point this season probably got burned.
Which is why I can't help but scratch my head over your sudden lack of faith. You've resisted the temptation to sit them this long. Why change now?
Because of that Snelling guy? Yeah, he ran for two touchdowns in his first start for Michael Turner last week and now gets to face a Buccaneers defense that should allow him the opportunity for more -- perhaps a 100-yard effort with two or three touchdowns. Yup, all the signs point to a good week for Snelling, which is why he's an excellent, excellent sleeper.
But he's still just a sleeper.
Come on, Raymond. Let's not make this game any harder than it needs to be. If you own Johnson and Rice and can start only two running backs, you don't have any decision to make. Just sit back and watch them pile up points every week, regardless of opponent. Sure, Rice's matchup against the Steelers looks tough, but you could have said the same thing just before he turned in his best performance of the season Week 6 at Minnesota. With the way quarterback Joe Flacco has played lately, the Ravens have no other choice but to put the ball in Rice's hands over and over again.
Again, Snelling is a good sleeper. Under most circumstances, I'd love to start him, but none of those circumstances include both Johnson and Rice. The more you need a win, the more you should trust the guys who got you there. Let's say your decision -- whichever way you go -- ends up the wrong one. Would you rather miss the playoffs because Rice came up a little short or because you made the boneheaded decision to start Snelling over him?
Do yourself a favor, Raymond, and stop thinking so much. Save the sleepers for the people who actually need them.
SW: I don't see how I still get questions about Sims-Walker week after week. I could understand everyone's skepticism when he first broke out as a relative unknown with an unestablished quarterback on a run-first offense -- yeah, it seemed a little too good to be true. But by now, you should have every reason to trust him. Only twice since emerging in Week 2 has he scored less than 10 Fantasy points. You can't ask for better consistency than that.
The second half of your decision is the tough part, and quite frankly, none of your remaining options excites me. Manningham just had his second 100-yard game last week but he has no more than 58 yards in any of his other seven games. Doesn't seem too trustworthy to me. And Walter, even with the loss of tight end Owen Daniels, hasn't played a critical role in the Texans' passing game. Both will at least give you something, but probably not anything worthwhile.
If you'd prefer to cross your fingers and hope for a big performance, Meachem and Chambers seem like safer bets to give you one, though they do have concerns of their own. Meachem is just a secondary receiving option in a crowded passing attack, and Chambers plays for a bad team. I'd probably start Meachem and hope he keeps his touchdown streak alive in what might become a shootout against the Patriots, but Chambers might be the safer option since the Chiefs have to throw to somebody with Dwayne Bowe out.
Then again, how safe is anyone who plays for the Chiefs?
SW: Well, Fitzgerald is obviously a must-start, and you already know I feel the same way about Sims-Walker. Colston falls into that same category even though he can be a little more inconsistent than the other two. As long as Brian Westbrook remains sidelined, I think McCoy qualifies as a must-start as well, especially in a game against the Redskins. I actually like him more now than I liked Westbrook at any point this season.
I think you can immediately dismiss Forsett as a starter. That matchup against the Rams looks enticing, but Seahawks coach Jim Mora has already indicated Julius Jones will return as the starter this week. And even though Forsett could still get decent numbers if Jones' bruised lung bothers him or if the Seahawks build up a big lead early, you have enough reliable alternatives that you don't need to take that chance.
So your decision comes down to Scott or Maroney, and unless Cedric Benson returns from his hip injury this week, I'd go with Scott. He just ran for 119 yards against the Raiders defense, and the Browns shouldn't offer much more resistance. Maroney just had a strong performance himself, scoring two touchdowns against the Jets, but the pass-happy Patriots rarely give him the carries he needs to rush for 70-80 yards. I don't see that changing this week against the Saints. Both sides will have too much scoring to do.
Sounds reasonable, right? Just to clarify, I wouldn't consider either Forsett or Maroney a bad start, but when you have so many options, somebody has to take a back seat.
What do you think of Chris Jennings? You think he'll take over in Cleveland in a few weeks? The Browns have great matchups in Weeks 15 and 16. I only ask because I've had both Leon Washington and Ronnie Brown go down, and it's slim pickings right now off the waiver wire. -- Gerry Capko
SW: You could give him a look, sure. Jamal Lewis isn't getting any younger, and Jerome Harrison has gone missing, so if the Browns decide to play for the future, they'll turn to Jennings. Adding him now isn't the worst preemptive move you could make, especially since the Browns have such a favorable schedule ahead.
But you have to realize it's a complete shot in the dark. You can't expect any immediate returns from Jennings. In fact, you should consider yourself lucky if you get anything at all from him. Based on what you've lost at running back, I have a feeling you need someone who can help you now, in which case Rock Cartwright or even Correll Buckhalter would serve you better than Jennings.
I don't know exactly how little you have available to you on the waiver wire, but I feel like most people in your situation could do better than Jennings. Still, speaking in general terms, he's not a bad desperation grab.
Which wide receiver should I sit this week? I'm starting Vincent Jackson and Sidney Rice for sure, but I have to choose one more out of Jerricho Cotchery, Nate Burleson, and Robert Meachem. My quarterback is Drew Brees, so it's tempting to sit Cotchery and go with the Saints combo. Is that wise? -- Ron Green, Long Beach, Calif.
SW: It's not dumb, Ron, but I think the wisest choice is the one you didn't even mention: Burleson.
He's another guy who hasn't gotten the credit he deserves in Fantasy. Sure, he went without a catch at Arizona in Week 10. Maybe that turned people off. But as ugly as that performance was, it was an aberration for one of the most consistent receivers to start in less than 50 percent of Fantasy leagues.
Burleson has at least six catches and 75 yards receiving in four of his last six games. Randy Moss can't say that. Neither can Andre Johnson. Burleson could stand to score a few touchdowns, but if he continues to play such a big role in the passing game, he will eventually. He has a good chance this week with the Seahawks facing the Rams, a team Burleson burned for 74 yards and a touchdown in Week 1.
Even if he doesn't score a touchdown, at least you know he'll give you 6-8 points. Meachem might not give you anything, and Cotchery could always take a back seat to Braylon Edwards or disappear entirely if rookie quarterback Mark Sanchez continues to struggle.
I'm in a 14-team league and don't know what to do with Joe Flacco. He started off great but has recently started to scare me. I've tried to play matchups off the waiver wire, but now I'd like to have someone I can ride through the playoffs. My lineup has been solid enough that as long as I get 10-15 points from my quarterback, I can usually win. What should I do? -- Josh Vivian, Royal Oak, Mich.
SW: Kind of an open-ended question there, Josh, but I do have some suggestions for people desperate for quarterback help this time of year.
First of all, if you need a quarterback, we can pretty much assume you play in a deep league. No fewer than 12 starting-caliber quarterbacks exist in Fantasy this season, and that's not even counting Jay Cutler, Matt Ryan, Donovan McNabb or Matt Hasselbeck -- perfectly legitimate options even if they have disappointed to some degree.
But if you play in such a league, you can still get what you need without dismantling your roster. Try trading for someone like Kyle Orton, who you can get for cheap given his recent performance. The Broncos visit the Chiefs in Week 13 and host the Raiders in Week 15. Considering you already have Flacco, who faces the Lions in Week 14, that's three games you'll have covered.
Can you still get Alex Smith off the waiver wire? He has multiple touchdown passes in three of his five games this season, so in the right matchups, you can trust him. He has exactly those kinds of matchups Week 12 against the Jaguars, Week 16 against the Lions and Week 17 at the Rams, which means between Orton, Flacco and Smith, you'd have every game covered for the price of maybe a No. 3 wide receiver.
But let's say your trade deadline has passed or someone else has claimed Smith. In that case, someone like Vince Young, who remains unowned in 65 percent of Fantasy leagues, might give you exactly what you need. He doesn't seem like much since he rarely throws for more than 200 yards, but all those rushing yards add up. They count 2 1/2 times as much as passing yards, so don't underestimate their impact.
If you can't get that discount trifecta of Orton, Flacco and Smith, Young is the ultimate fallback option. He won't single-handedly win you any games, but his rushing yards will help keep you in contention.
SW: You better believe Rice is a must-start. He has at least 135 yards receiving in three of his last five games, and he scored two touchdowns in one of the other two. If he isn't a no-brainer by now, nobody is.
Your second choice wouldn't be so hard if your league didn't count tight ends as wide receivers. Remove Davis from this list, and nobody else would matter but Boldin. Manningham is too inconsistent, having topped 60 yards only twice this season, and Driver, while useful, has begun to take a back seat to Greg Jennings again, averaging just 56 yards over his last four games.
Boldin, meanwhile, has trended in the opposite direction, his best two games coming in the last two weeks. A must-start coming into the season, he didn't record his first 100-yard game until Week 10, but he followed it with another in Week 11, catching eight passes each time. He and quarterback Kurt Warner have clearly gotten back on the same page, so you can count on him for consistent numbers going forward.
Unfortunately, you can also count on Davis for big numbers. He's one of the few tight ends capable of performing like a wide receiver, and he's a better red-zone target than Boldin, who has to contend with Larry Fitzgerald. Then again, sometimes the 49ers can't muster much of anything through the air, causing Davis to disappear entirely.
So if you want safe numbers, go Boldin. If you'd rather roll the dice on a knockout game, go Davis. The threat of Warner missing this week with concussion-like symptoms might just sway me in the direction of Davis.
You can e-mail your Fantasy Football questions to DMFantasyFootball@cbs.com. Be sure to put Attn: Dear Mr. Fantasy in the subject field. Please include your full name, hometown and state and we'll get to as many as we can.
