Writing on Substack, College Fantasy Football, & More
I’m pulling back the curtain, I want to meet the wizard.
- Michael Douglas, The Game (1997)
Almost every day this week, I’ve woken up to a Substack notification alerting me that this publication has landed somewhere within the top-100 risers in the sports category. This is cool, and seems to be a new(ish) feature unveiled this year.
I noticed it a few times in March as well—though I can’t really say I understand how the algorithm works; because there have been periods of larger growth over the past few months without landing on that list as well.
Still, I appreciate these notifications. They tend to prompt little moments of reflection—about this publication, and about how I talk to others about what I do. I’ll set the scene for you:
Somewhere between passing the potatoes and dodging unsolicited advice, someone always asks: So what do you do? You know the deal—dinner parties, family gatherings etc.
Playing it safe, I lead my answer with boring day job details—something something <insert detail here> something something <insert other detail here>—by about the fourth word, the vocalizations feel automated and I’m mostly just thinking about what they’re thinking as they pretend to listen to this nonsense.
Small talk formalities that are simply unavoidable. But once we get past that ruse, I unveil my trap card: “Actually, what I really love doing is writing. I run a side-business online.”
This is usually where the conversation takes a turn. Different people have different follow-up questions. I could categorize them into groups based on what sort of questions they ask and where the conversation steers from there but, they all end up in the same place eventually: “How much money do you make with that?”
However, I should note that several steps before the inevitable question arises, the conversation usually runs into a number of other obstacles. The first is that I—despite having had this conversation multiple times—still don’t know how to answer what it is I’m really writing about.
Shocking as this may be to some, the average person is (unfortunately) blissfully unaware of the game of college fantasy football.
Though to be fair, I’ve made efforts to broaden the scope of this publication to continue its growth. CFF is (and will always be) the core subject covered, but it remains a niche hobby for the time being.
I joke to the people I meet who are self-described NFL watchers that the best thing that could happen to me is if NFL players go on strike this upcoming season.
It would likely lead to a massive crowd trying CFF for the first time to get their fantasy football fix—and most of them would never look back. “The day the NFL goes on strike will be the day I get to quit my day job,” I quip.
For context, there are now nearly 2000 of you in total, and hundreds of you are paid subscribers (and thank you very much for your support, your pledges help immensely; if only to justify the amount of time I spend on this).
I became a Substack “bestseller” last year in August, right before I got married. In fact, I think I hit 1000 subs, and then became a bestseller a few days later in the same week. That was a good week.
When I try to explain my role and the value I offer to prospective subscribers—whether they're into college fantasy football or just general CFB betting—I usually compare myself to an investment analyst. From there, I rely on a series of financial analogies to help bridge any remaining gaps in understanding.
I may even liken myself to an investment banker at Goldman Sachs to make myself sound cool; and add more supposed legitimacy to what it is I’m doing.
“You see, I’m like the analyst who does the research, packages it into a nice, digestible format, and sends it out to a subscriber base—people who want the returns but may not have the time to do all the groundwork, or who are simply interested in the game and want to see what folks like me are saying.
You can think of individual player production as stock prices. Conferences / teams / coaching staffs can be likened to specific industries. You may be an expert in one specific industry as an analyst, just as someone may be well-versed in the SEC, or maybe you have an inside source with the Minnesota Gophers, but not much beyond that.
As an investor, you may have certain industries that you like looking for investment ideas. Areas where you consider yourself a knowledge expert. As a CFF-investor, you might have a preference for certain conferences, or certain coaching staffs.”
This publication, which is my first, was founded in February of 2023. Shortly after publishing the first article, I introduced the monthly round up series, which was a departure from what I had previously been doing. This article series was strictly a capture of relevant news within CFB: spring camp quotes, transfer news, injury and suspension updates, etc.
When I started that series, it was pretty much the first of its kind in the CFF world. As far as I know, I was the only CFF writer on Substack at the time. I’m glad to see so many new voices join the platform since then, whether it be the guys at
, , , or even with his news updates.Then, shortly after that I was approached by the guys at Campus2Canton. Specifically, the founders Austin, Felix, and Matthew. It was a strange feeling being on a zoom call with these guys after having watched them for a few years. I kept forgetting that when they stopped talking, I actually had to respond. They weren’t just floating heads on my screen anymore, I was in this conversation now!
On that group call with C2C, I was asked if I had any formal training in writing. I answered no, but that I did a lot of writing in my day job, which at the time was at the Bank of Canada.
By the way, this is where I met current Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. When I worked at BoC, he had already moved on to the Bank of England, but Carney served as the Governor of the BoC a decade earlier and would sometimes return during bank-wide calls.
And when I say I met him, what I mean is: I was on the same MS Teams call with him (and a few hundred others) while he and current governor Tiff Macklem traded war stories from their hockey playing days.
I got the idea for the monthly round up series through a monthly deliverable I was responsible for while at the bank. This article was a capture of relevant central banking news within the digital currency sector. I couldn’t stand writing it and actually began writing these CFF articles as a way to ‘cleanse me palette’ so to speak. I found it necessary to repair my relationship with writing.
That’s how the frequency of publishing became crystallized—I was writing so often in a therapeutic manner that it at least offered the positive externality of publishing a large amount of content. You know—the VolumePigs mantra doesn’t just apply to CFB players—the publication embodies this trait as well! That schedule became habit and now two years later he we are.
To my surprise, well before I had ever published a paid article, I accumulated a few paid subscribers (shoutout to the one and only @CFFJared, who was my first supporter and still remains a supporter to this day).
It’s cool to see more and more people are starting Substacks now, but with that comes more questions about how to build a successful following. I don’t have all the answers but I can speak to a few things that helped me:
Content focused on a niche space (CFF). With that, it is easier to gain market share in a given space and there are more opportunities for topics that you can cover that nobody else has. I see a lot of people starting personal blogs these days on Substack. That’s cool and all, but if gaining an audience is a primary goal, one should always ask “what do I offer that readers can’t get somewhere else?”.
Content that appeals to other content creators in the space. At the end of the week when I published my first couple of articles, I probably had about a dozen subs (and only a few more twitter followers), but maybe eight of those subs were some of the biggest content creators in the space (i.e. Austin, Jared, Nate Marchese…), so that meant that when they liked an article and decided to quote tweet it, or repost it, my network became very large, because these kind souls effectively lended me their audiences. That helped grow my audience fast early on.
Individuality is your super power in the creator economy. In most aspects of society, you’re graded by how well you ‘fit in’. This has its benefits; it helps you make friends, conduct yourself appropriately in social settings and work etc. but it doesn’t do you any favours when you’re creating.
Familiarity and genericity are two things you want to avoid when attempting to make something interesting, in my opinion. I believe that your work should be so personalized and identifiable to you that if you published an anonymous article, your readers would either suspect that it was you behind the article, or accuse whoever published said article of copying your style.
And I'm not even saying that you have to achieve that, or that I have achieved that, but it should be a guiding force in how you create your work. There are all sorts of subtle hints—telltale breadcrumbs—that you can layer into your articles to remind the readers that its really you behind the words; you could maybe even start each article off with a random quote? Or maybe even refuse to acquiesce to the American spelling of ‘offence’ and ‘defence’ despite the fact that your audience is 80% from the US (sorry @EricFroton).
Consistency and volume is king. No, I’m not talking about CFF here, this rule holds true as a content creator as well. Whether you’re publishing articles or making videos, one of the traits that I’ve consistently seen linking those who are successful online content creators is that they always show up. They make lots of content. Regardless of how silly it is. They are feeding their audiences all the time. Regarding consistency, I don’t necessarily think you need to broadcast a schedule (as you may find that it applies needless pressure), but you should have that schedule in your own mind and follow it as best you can.
By the way, it’s been a long time since I did a poll in an article. I must admit (embarrassingly), I simply forgot this was even an option. I’d appreciate your feedback on this one in particular:
On the topic of authenticity in writing; one of the busier debates among writers over the last two years has been the role of AI—specifically the use of ChatGPT in writing.
Understandably, fears abound that eventually (perhaps in the not-so-distant future) human readers will no longer be able to distinguish between the two. A scary thought, indeed—but it only takes five minutes or so with the engine of one’s choosing to verify that we are decidedly not there yet.
In my ‘offline’ conversations about writing, next to revenue figures the other most frequently queried topic is whether I use ChatGPT.
I am aware that for many writers, the mere question of AI usage is anxiety inducing. Mostly because there is probably no greater shame than admitting that you use AI to write your articles—a revelation that would undo any adulations one had acquired up to that point. And when you answer, and you deny it, you’re still thinking in your head “do they believe me? Did I deny it convincingly enough?”.
I choose a different approach. Rather than being embarrassed about it, I answer honestly: “I would if I could. But simply put, the machine can’t do what I do.”
But I do use AI all the time—for basic tasks like spotting grammar errors, typos, wrong word usage etc (sometimes I get lazy and don’t even do this!). It’s a very useful tool as a proofreader (in fact, this article will likely be run through Grammar AI before publishing), but it can’t write to the level that I can. Not yet at least.
And believe me, I’ve tried. It would be great for the times when I just can’t be bothered to write something interesting, to simply pop in a few prompts and out comes an article of the quality that I expect my writing to be. Perhaps this is a hot take, but I don’t know that it will ever be able to do this.
Because the machine trains on all kinds of writing—all kinds of data—instead of just training on my writing, it will never (at least, so I think) be able to fully match the tone, the sense of humour, or the common errors a writer makes.
Errors such as: always writing listed heights as 6’1 instead of 6’1”, or using the British spelling for offense/defense, or using words that sound appropriate in a sentence but actually aren’t i.e. “cataclysmic” when describing a large amount, or using this symbol “—” way too often…
While I generally strive to output the cleanest articles that I can with regards to grammar and structure, sometimes I notice these so-called errors that the AI points out, and instead see them as idiosyncrasies. Fingerprints to remind the reader that it’s really me.
That being said, I was rather impressed by ChatGPT’s answer to this very basic prompt. I was reminded that while it is training on billions of data points, it is, in fact, acutely aware of what I’m writing as well:
Core Tenets of the "volumepigs" Strategy:
Target Market Share Monsters: WRs and RBs who command a massive percentage of their team’s offense. Even if the team is mediocre, if a player gets 30–40% of the usage, that's bankable fantasy gold.
Ignore Helmet Bias: Big-name programs often rotate or have too much talent depth. Instead, go after mid-majors or G5 teams where the top guy is the offense.
Start with Running Back Pigs: RBs who get 25+ touches per game are like high-yield REITs—they give you consistent return with minimal downside, especially in CFF’s PPR or half-PPR formats.
QB Volume = Cheat Code: Dual-threat QBs who run 10–15 times a game and throw 30+ are worth their weight in platinum. They're often undervalued if they play for less flashy teams.
Don’t Overreact to Schedule: A "volumepig" might score less against a P5 opponent one week, but the long-term return evens out. You're investing in high-usage assets with consistent opportunity.
You could think of it as a "cash flow" fantasy strategy—you’re not relying on upside boom-or-bust guys. You're locking in weekly points based on touch volume and involvement. Just like managing your condo's monthly expenses and income with precision, this strategy thrives on consistency and data-driven projections.
Want help identifying this year’s "volumepigs"? I can help you break them down by position or conference.
It even weaved in some financial investing analogies into its explanation. Feeling incredibly seen and mildly intimidated—wondering “is GPT about to start its own Substack: GPTPigs.com?”—I responded to the prompt it provided at the end to see what specific ideas it could come up with. Here’s what it gave me:
🐗 Quarterbacks – Dual-Threat Dynamos & Volume Slingers
Kaidon Salter (Liberty) – High play volume offense, dual-threat ability, and weak schedule. A cheat code in G5.
Jalen Milroe (Alabama) – If the rushing usage sticks and the new OC lets him cook, the ceiling is immense.
Preston Stone (SMU) – Air Raid lean, efficient, and no fear slinging it 40+ times.
🐗 Running Backs – Bellcows or Bust
Rasheen Ali (Marshall) – If healthy, he's a certified workhorse in a system that wants to feed him.
RJ Harvey (UCF) – Dual-use weapon who gets touches on the ground and through the air.
Ashton Jeanty (Boise State) – Legit 25+ touches per game potential, especially with Helani gone.
🐗 Wide Receivers – Target Monsters
Tory Horton (Colorado State) – A route-and-volume god in a system that’s basically backyard football.
Jamari Thrash (Louisville) – Could push 30% target share in an up-tempo attack.
Javon Antonio (North Texas) – Classic CFF “nobody knows him, but he eats” kind of guy.
Suffice it to say, some work is still needed. I don’t think I’ve even heard of this Javon Antonio guy. I had to verify it was a real person—turns out he last played CFB in 2023 (for Colorado) and has been in the UFL since.
I give GPT an ‘A’ for creativity here. I particularly appreciated the hog emoji replacing the basic run-of-the-mill bullet points. Unfortunately, you’re going to be waiting for a long time before your league owner adds Javon Antonio in as a placeholder when you draft him. Ditto for every other name on the list not named Salter or Stone.
So, at least for now, you’re stuck with me.
Finally—regarding the aforementioned question that always comes up when I talk about writing ($$$)—in the interest of consistency and transparency with my audience, I’ll reveal to you what I say to them (usually with a smug look on my face like I’m about to say something original at last):
“I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you…”
It’s usually met with a disappointed look. 🤷♂️ ◾
If you enjoyed this content and would like to read more, I recommend joining the Pigpen, a community of thousands of degenerate college football fans:
Go vp go vp go
Great read! There’s some major irony in the fact that my favorite CFF content creator (VP), my favorite NFL FF content creators (Fantasy Stock Exchange, Corey and Danny), and my favorite (and only!) wife (Marcie from Windsor, ON) are all Canadian… 🇨🇦
Maybe growing up in southeast Michigan and going to college there (Go Blue!) made this inevitable? 🤷♂️