So what was Shanny's reasoning this time? I guess Tatum was healthy enough to play. Did Shanny just want to check out that new guy from the practice squad, and between Tatum, Cobbs, and the new guy, he didn't need Mike Bell?

good question. I figured Mike to have at least half the carries if not more with the "turf toes" of Tatum. The only dynasty league that I lost in this week, (Z14 Chargers), I had Mike starting over Tatum....and lost by less than 2 points.
I hate Mike Shanahan.

I asked the same thing in the game post. Its not like Shanny to ride a lame horse into the ground. 14 carries and 37 yards for Tatum or something like that. I wonder how close the game has to get before they put Mike back in.

Putting Mike Bell back in this week was not an option with him being deactivated.

For what it's worth, Mike Shanahan did say that Mike Bell will play alot for the Broncos this season. It seems this deactivation was sort of a "lesson" for Mike Bell as Shanahan was disappointed in a couple of his runs vs. Pittsburgh.

From the Denver Post:

__________________
Links of interest at The Sports Outlaw

Player Rankings
QB | RB | RB (PPR) | WR | WR (PPR) | TE | TE (PPR) | K | DEF

Cheatsheets (Updated weekly up until gametime)

Weekly Waiver Wire (A weekly looks at some key waiver wire/free agent grabs)

Key Forums: NFL Talk | Fantasy Football Advice | College Football

Inactive seems a little tough for not breaking some tackles downfield. While T Bell was asking for less of a load because of his turf toe Mike did step up and perform well. It wasn't as if he had a bad game when called upon. It wasn't as if Shanny was really exploring his options very much as the other backs for the week had 6 carries.

__________________
Sports Outlaw Fantasy Football League Champion 2007 - Maelstrom

I have a feeling that this "punishment" is for something much more hanus.....like parking in Shanahans spot.