PDA

View Full Version : League with "OP" instead of "flex"


sedated
08-30-2011, 05:53 PM
So my new league doesn't do "flex" (QB/WR/TE), it has "OP" (any offensive player). Meaning you can play 2 QBs.

On a scale of 1-10, how retarded is that? (1 = slight speech impediment, 10 = full retard)

How would it affect your draft strategy?



(if we want to get detailed, it is a full PPR)

OnTheWarpath58
08-30-2011, 06:26 PM
It's a 10. Full retard.

Hootie will be here shortly to tell you why it's the best format going.

sedated
08-30-2011, 08:26 PM
poll fail, apparently.

MoreLemonPledge
08-30-2011, 10:02 PM
I wouldn't touch a league like that. How many points for passing TD?

ChiefsCountry
08-30-2011, 10:10 PM
Hooter says its the future of fantasy football.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 07:30 AM
I guess whatever works for a given set of folks. Hell, if your league wants to draft punters and give a point per yard, do 1 point per yard for FGs for kickers, and draft IDPs and make tackles worth 5 points, who am I to say that's stupid? If it works for you, so be it.
Now, if the question is more along the lines of, "Would I play in a league like that?" No, it's retarded.


If I were to though, as far as draft strategy, I would make damn sure I had 3 starting QBs, including one of the "Big 6" if at all possible. It significantly increases the QB value.

Nzoner
08-31-2011, 07:41 AM
I guess whatever works for a given set of folks.

Just to make the draft more interesting I'm in a local money league that drafts coaches.You start 1 per week,if his team wins you get 5 bonus points and 0 for a loss.It's amazing how many of our games come down to that 5 point swing.

sedated
08-31-2011, 07:49 AM
How many points for passing TD?

5

OnTheWarpath58
08-31-2011, 08:17 AM
I guess whatever works for a given set of folks. Hell, if your league wants to draft punters and give a point per yard, do 1 point per yard for FGs for kickers, and draft IDPs and make tackles worth 5 points, who am I to say that's stupid? If it works for you, so be it.
Now, if the question is more along the lines of, "Would I play in a league like that?" No, it's retarded.


If I were to though, as far as draft strategy, I would make damn sure I had 3 starting QBs, including one of the "Big 6" if at all possible. It significantly increases the QB value.

I kinda like the idea for giving placekickers points based on yardage.

Something like .10 per yard.

Would be interesting in a league that uses fractional scoring.

Otherwise, you could just go to a 3-4-5 system.

Nzoner
08-31-2011, 08:30 AM
I kinda like the idea for giving placekickers points based on yardage.

Something like .10 per yard.

Would be interesting in a league that uses fractional scoring.

Otherwise, you could just go to a 3-4-5 system.

My local leagues use fraction scoring for defenses on INT and fumble recovery yardage.Makes it real exciting when your team takes a 60 yd int return to the house.

DJ's left nut
08-31-2011, 08:39 AM
Hooter says its the future of fantasy football.

Only real badasses play OP ball.

If you don't, you're not hardcore.

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 08:58 AM
I look at a flex position as being between a RB, WR and TE. If you want to be able to start 2 QBs....then make starting 2 QBs mandatory.

OnTheWarpath58
08-31-2011, 09:06 AM
I look at a flex position as being between a RB, WR and TE. If you want to be able to start 2 QBs....then make starting 2 QBs mandatory.

Glad you mentioned this. I had accidently set rosters in the CP league for RB/WR instead of a true "flex."

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 09:51 AM
It's a 10. Full retard.

Hootie will be here shortly to tell you why it's the best format going.

I'm disappointed you think that...

I'm trying to get a real answer one time, and I know you can provide one because you're usually a pretty thoughtful dude with insight...

why do you think FFL is better when you only have to start 8, 10 or 12 (depending on league size) of the 32 NFL QB's rather than 16, 20, or 24?

Lets assume we are doing a 12 team league...don't you think it makes more sense and makes the QB position more meaningful when you're starting 75% of the QB's in the NFL every week rather than 30%?

Why is it so offensive that 4 QB's might go in the 1st round rather than 1? and 8 in the first 2 rounds rather than 3?

Isn't the QB position pretty damn important? Wouldn't drafting Cam Newton or having someone reach for him hoping he's the next Vick or McNabb be kind of fun? (Instead of him going undrafted?)

and in my first OP league (non keeper) some dude decided he didn't want QB's and now has Jamaal Charles, Chris Johnson, Darren McFadden and LeGarrette Blount (and with a RB, RB, RB/WR and an OP he can start all 4)...

and my first two picks were Tom Brady (5th) and Tony Romo...

the strategies are endless...rather than traditional 1 QB leagues where you can wait until the very last round (before a K and DEF at least) and just pick sleeper QB's...because you know guys like Cassel won't be drafted...and a Cassel/McNabb tandem can probably produce 80% of the points a Peyton Manning will this year...

I know I'm me and people hate me and like to argue with me...but no one has made 1 good point about why an OP league is a bad league other than the fact they've never tried it and hate change.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 10:53 AM
I know I'm me and people hate me and like to argue with me...but no one has made 1 good point about why an OP league is a bad league other than the fact they've never tried it and hate change.

Like I said, if you and your buddies think it's good, more power to you, but in most leagues (even with 4 points per passing TD) QBs will outpoint RBs or WRs by a huge margin* so it would be asinine to not start a QB in the OP slot. Given that a 12 team league won't allow the 2QBs and a backup QB for each team, I don't like it.
As for the never tried it, I've done it and won at it. Was in a roto league where the settings gave a point per pass attempt (dumber than shit, but those were the rules) and you had 2 offensive player positions (all other scoring was standard). My first six draft picks were QBs and people were making fun of me for it not understanding what I was doing. On a 18 player roster I ended up with 8 starting QBs. During the year I traded three of my crap QBs for top flight WRs and a stud RB. In the end I outpointed everyone else in the league by over 750 points. I've done it, it just wasn't much fun.


*Newton as the 25th ranked QB is projected at 225.7, better than all but the top 7 RBs (Foster, Charles, Rice, CJ, AP, McFadden, MJD) and better than any WR

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 10:56 AM
Dude...all you did there was prove to me you drafted with morons in a shit league...sorry man...that was a terrible example.

Sent from my DROID PRO using Tapatalk

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 10:58 AM
How did you do in the CP "Big Money" league last year?

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 11:03 AM
So in a 2 QB league.....when one of your QBs is on a bye week....you're starting complete trash like Tavaris Jackson or Rex Grossman. Sounds awesome.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 11:06 AM
So in a 2 QB league.....when one of your QBs is on a bye week....you're starting complete trash like Tavaris Jackson or Rex Grossman. Sounds awesome.

Yeah, pretty much. Unless you're going to draft 3 QBs in the first six or seven rounds.
And as I said, any starting QB is going to outpoint more than and handful of RBs and nearly every WR over the course of a season, so a QB/RB/WR/TE flex is essentially another QB slot.

SNR
08-31-2011, 11:06 AM
Okay guys, we're setting up an OP slot this year. Do you want to insert into that position

A. A position whose mediocre-bad players consistently put up 20+ point performances

B. A position whose mediocre-bad players are way inconsistent, but lean towards consistently mediocre outputs, sometimes breaking double digits.

C. A position whose mediocre-bad players consistently put up clunkers but are good for a few double-digit performances depending on the week in which they score one of their whopping 4 TDs for the season.

D. A position whose medicore-bad players are worth piddle shit.

Unless you draft flex in the first 7 rounds or so (meaning you have to draft both RBs/WRs/TEs prior to getting your flex guy) then it's pretty obvious what everybody is going to take.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 11:08 AM
.

Tomato/Tomato


that doesn't work as well when typing does it?
Rep

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 11:09 AM
Was in a roto league where the settings gave a point per pass attempt (dumber than shit, but those were the rules) and you had 2 offensive player positions (all other scoring was standard). My first six draft picks were QBs and people were making fun of me for it not understanding what I was doing. On a 18 player roster I ended up with 8 starting QBs. During the year I traded three of my crap QBs for top flight WRs and a stud RB. In the end I outpointed everyone else in the league by over 750 points. I've done it, it just wasn't much fun.


I wouldn't have traded with you.

I love those type of people in my league. They'll take 4 RBs in the first four rounds and expect people to trade with them. Fuck that....you're stuck now.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 11:12 AM
I wouldn't have traded with you.

I love those type of people in my league. They'll take 4 RBs in the first four rounds and expect people to trade with them. Fuck that....you're stuck now.

You don't understand.I wasn't stuck at all. I was the one offered the trades in all three of them (actually had plenty of other offers as well, just took the best three). My bench QBs were outscoring their "studs" by a wide margin.

Look at it this way: I'll use Cam Newton (ranked #25 QB or so) and say he averages 22 pass attempts for 220 yards, 1TD, and 1.5 picks per game....that's 31 points per game. How many RBs and WRs do that on a consistent basis? My 3 starting QBs could done quite well by themselves.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:12 AM
So in a 2 QB league.....when one of your QBs is on a bye week....you're starting complete trash like Tavaris Jackson or Rex Grossman. Sounds awesome.

it's an OP league for one...so you don't have to start a QB

and for two...

how is that any different than starting Beanie Wells or Robert Meachum, or Willis McGahee, or etc. etc. etc. (any other spot starter at RB/WR or TE)????

People are ok with starting Willis McGahee and praying for a leached TD last year in 12 team leagues but not ok with spot starting a lower tier QB with a good matchup????

Really?

it all goes back to FFL devaluing the QB position...

anyways, I looked up my league last year...

Here are the top scorers in order:

Arian Foster
Peyton Manning
Drew Brees
Aaron Rodgers
Michael Vick
Tom Brady
Philip Rivers
Eli Manning
Roddy White
Matt Schaub
Peyton Hillis
Carson Palmer
Chris Johnson
Brandon Lloyd
LeSean McCoy
Dwayne Bowe
Matt Ryan
Adrian Peterson
Darren McFadden
Jamaal Charles
Greg Jennings
Calvin Johnson
Reggie Wayne

So yes...the top tier QB's are the premiere scorers...but really? Doesn't that make sense?

My 1st round in an OP league a few nights ago went like this:

1. Peterson
2. Rodgers
3. LeSean McCoy (don't ask)
4. Vick
5. Brady (me)
6. Brees
7. Andre Johnson
8. Jamaal Charles
9. Arian Foster
10. Philip Rivers
11. Ray Rice
12. Roddy White

...so really? What's the problem with OP leagues again?

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:15 AM
Yeah, pretty much. Unless you're going to draft 3 QBs in the first six or seven rounds.
And as I said, any starting QB is going to outpoint more than and handful of RBs and nearly every WR over the course of a season, so a QB/RB/WR/TE flex is essentially another QB slot.

essentially it is...no doubt (but it does give you the flexibility to not use a QB there...as I started a WR or RB with a great matchup there several times last year)....

and yes...

the 15-25 tier of QB's will probably score as many points as the 2nd RB and 2nd WR...duh...they are STARTING QB'S!

but at least they are owned and played rather than sitting on waivers...

seriously...Matt Ryan should be a fantasy football starter...so should Joe Flacco...even Matt Cassel...

and in 1 QB leagues those guys sit on benches or waivers...it doesn't make sense that I'm starting Nate Burleson as my 3rd WR but Matt Cassel and Mark Sanchez are on waivers because they aren't necessary.

Will someone please explain to me why Willis McGahee should have fantasy football relevance but Josh Freeman shouldn't?

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:17 AM
yes...there will be an early QB run around the 3rd or 4th round where the 13th-22nd QB's will go...where people will take Stafford, Bradford, Flacco, Sanchez, etc...

but how is that different from the 1 QB leagues with the RB and WR runs? Why is everyone so against QB's in FFL?

I just don't understand...

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:19 AM
why can't David Garrard have fantasy relevance? He's a starting NFL QB...

you're telling me Steve Breaston deserves a roster spot, but Garrard doesn't? will never understand why you start 2 RB's, 2 WR's, a flex...but only 1 QB? I know that's how the creator set it up but can anyone admit that might be flawed?

I have yet to hear one good reason why a 2 QB league is a bad thing?

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 11:25 AM
Jesus Christ.....if that's how your league is...more power to you. If people want to play in leagues with 1 QB.....then more power to them.

Old Dog
08-31-2011, 11:25 AM
We're going to have to agree to disagree here Hootie. There's no way to me that a Ryan Fitzpatrick (#24 QB from ESPNs rankings) should be more relevant than Dez Bryant (#12) or Darren McFadden (#12) in fantasy football.
In a 2QB system he is an every week starter at QB2 while the other two are someones WR1 and RB1 and he's going to outpoint them HUGE over the course of the year.

I'm not going to argue any further, because we're just not going to agree. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just different strokes for different folks. Nothing but the best, Bro.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:36 AM
just because one scores more points doesn't make them more relevant...

but instead of starting Fitzpatrick at OP, he'll be on waivers...and a RB3 or WR4 will be in your flex...

Yes...out of the 12 teams 11 will definitely start 2 QB's...maybe even 12...

but that means 6-8 of those teams will have a Fitzpatrick starting at OP...

BUT AT LEAST THAT MAKES THE QB POSITION RELEVANT

in a 10 team league...1 QB just totally makes the position not worth drafting (unless you get Vick, who doubles as a RB)...

Just wait until everyone takes a QB and grab a McNabb/Freeman/Cassel/Roethlisberger (etc. etc. etc.) and you get an extra pick (basically) to add to your pile of RB's and WR's that'll help win your league...

in a 1 QB league (unless you draft Vick) you aren't winning the league because of QB's (shit you can find a great matchup every week on waivers to spot start guaranteed)...you're winning because you drafted the right sleeper value at RB and hit on 2 week-to-week money receivers...

in OP leagues, AT LEAST QB'S are relevant and there is a different strategy that can be used...

Here's my team in an OP league from Sunday:

http://games.espn.go.com/ffl/clubhouse?leagueId=198128&teamId=3&seasonId=2011

and you're going to say the team sucks, and then we'll revisit this thread again (just like I had to last year) once I end up in the playoffs.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:38 AM
Jesus Christ.....if that's how your league is...more power to you. If people want to play in leagues with 1 QB.....then more power to them.

yes yes yes, I agree

all I wanted was for one person to tell me why 1 QB leagues made sense...and no one has

all I've heard so far is PRETTY MUCH that's how it has been, so that's how it'll be...

if someone explains to me why a QB driven league can spinoff a fantasy phenomenon where you start 3 RB's and 3 WR's but only 1 QB leaving the position completely useless then I'll shut up and understand...

but when QB's 15-32 sit on the waiver wire or on a bench all year for no reason, I'm sorry...that makes no sense to me.

In no league should a Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan, Eli Manning, Jay Cutler, etc...not be starting. That's just crazy if you ask me.

OnTheWarpath58
08-31-2011, 11:39 AM
I'm disappointed you think that...

I'm trying to get a real answer one time, and I know you can provide one because you're usually a pretty thoughtful dude with insight...

why do you think FFL is better when you only have to start 8, 10 or 12 (depending on league size) of the 32 NFL QB's rather than 16, 20, or 24?

Lets assume we are doing a 12 team league...don't you think it makes more sense and makes the QB position more meaningful when you're starting 75% of the QB's in the NFL every week rather than 30%?

Why is it so offensive that 4 QB's might go in the 1st round rather than 1? and 8 in the first 2 rounds rather than 3?

Isn't the QB position pretty damn important? Wouldn't drafting Cam Newton or having someone reach for him hoping he's the next Vick or McNabb be kind of fun? (Instead of him going undrafted?)

and in my first OP league (non keeper) some dude decided he didn't want QB's and now has Jamaal Charles, Chris Johnson, Darren McFadden and LeGarrette Blount (and with a RB, RB, RB/WR and an OP he can start all 4)...

and my first two picks were Tom Brady (5th) and Tony Romo...

the strategies are endless...rather than traditional 1 QB leagues where you can wait until the very last round (before a K and DEF at least) and just pick sleeper QB's...because you know guys like Cassel won't be drafted...and a Cassel/McNabb tandem can probably produce 80% of the points a Peyton Manning will this year...

I know I'm me and people hate me and like to argue with me...but no one has made 1 good point about why an OP league is a bad league other than the fact they've never tried it and hate change.

My biggest issue with it is that it makes it impossible to overcome an injury.

In a 12 team, 2 QB league, it's not necessarily who drafts the best, it's who gets luckiest with injuries.

In a standard league, if I draft Aaron Rodgers, and he's knocked out in Week 1 for the season, it's a huge blow, but can be overcome if you drafted well and make some decent waiver moves. A guy like Orton, Garrard or Fitzpatrick could get you through the season.

In a 2 QB league, unless you pissed away two early picks, you're going to be looking at a very average QB and a piss-poor QB should you suffer an injury.

Hell, even if you DID piss away two early picks, you're looking at a Romo-Tervaris Jackson combination. Or worse.

And if there are several injuries affecting several teams? Ugly.

If a RB or WR gets hurt, he's relatively easy to replace, because there are a ton of them. There's only 32 starting QB's - and there really aren't even 24 good ones, much less enough to go around in a 12 team league - even if there are no injuries at the position.

Sure, FF is part luck. But the only time a single injury could completely derail a season is if it's a QB in a 2 QB league. You can overcome injuries at other positions.

JMO.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:39 AM
but instead all anyone is doing is deflecting...

deflecting

and deflecting

2 QB leagues will be the future of FFL...I'd say within 5 years. People will come around.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:43 AM
My biggest issue with it is that it makes it impossible to overcome an injury.

In a 12 team, 2 QB league, it's not necessarily who drafts the best, it's who gets luckiest with injuries.

In a standard league, if I draft Aaron Rodgers, and he's knocked out in Week 1 for the season, it's a huge blow, but can be overcome if you drafted well and make some decent waiver moves. A guy like Orton, Garrard or Fitzpatrick could get you through the season.

In a 2 QB league, unless you pissed away two early picks, you're going to be looking at a very average QB and a piss-poor QB should you suffer an injury.

Hell, even if you DID piss away two early picks, you're looking at a Romo-Tervaris Jackson combination. Or worse.

And if there are several injuries affecting several teams? Ugly.

If a RB or WR gets hurt, he's relatively easy to replace, because there are a ton of them. There's only 32 starting QB's - and there really aren't even 24 good ones, much less enough to go around in a 12 team league - even if there are no injuries at the position.

Sure, FF is part luck. But the only time a single injury could completely derail a season is if it's a QB in a 2 QB league. You can overcome injuries at other positions.

JMO.

I don't know, perhaps. That's why you hedge Vick with Young. Injuries happen...

I don't think someone taking Adrian Peterson #1 overall is going to win their league if he suffers an injury, either. Just like Marshall Faulk back in the day.

Which is why I only take sleeper RB's to begin with...

why take an injury prone position in the 1st round when I can get a fantasy definite (what I like to call receivers and QB's)...

receivers and QB's don't get hurt NEARLY as often as RB's...and as you said, injuries can cripple your team...

you'll never see Adrian Peterson or Chris Johnson on my team...you will see me with a top tier QB in every league and some top tier receivers...

to answer a different thread's question...I'll go without a RB for the first 3 rounds and I'll do it quite often...because the RB's I like are all 5th round and lower this year (and most years)...so much turnover at that position it's crazy.

Just don't understand FFL that totally devalues the QB position. It's crazy.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:44 AM
but thank you for at least telling me why you don't like 2 QB leagues...

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 11:45 AM
How big are your rosters?

Hedge Vick with Young? So now you're taking backup QBs just incase the starter goes down?

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:53 AM
I'm taking Young in every league...just like we all should have taken Vick in every league last year...

Young in that offense (if he was the starter) would be totally a QB1...

if you have Vick in a 1 QB league, you should have Young, too...

why? because if Vick goes down good luck getting Young on waivers.

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 11:54 AM
and will Vick go down at some point?

Chances are...

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 11:54 AM
Well I understand stashing Young on your roster in a one QB league.

But now you're advocating have 3 QBs on your roster in a two QB league. How big of a bench do you have?

Short Leash Hootie
08-31-2011, 12:28 PM
6

Nzoner
08-31-2011, 03:14 PM
My 1st round in an OP league a few nights ago went like this:

1. Peterson
2. Rodgers
3. LeSean McCoy (don't ask)
4. Vick
5. Brady (me)
6. Brees
7. Andre Johnson
8. Jamaal Charles
9. Arian Foster
10. Philip Rivers
11. Ray Rice
12. Roddy White

...so really? What's the problem with OP leagues again?


all I wanted was for one person to tell me why 1 QB leagues made sense...and no one has



Maybe you missed my post in the other thread but one of my local cash traditional leagues will have a 1st round draft this Friday that will look very similar to your above top 12.

sedated
08-31-2011, 04:07 PM
Well I understand stashing Young on your roster in a one QB league.

But now you're advocating have 3 QBs on your roster in a two QB league. How big of a bench do you have?

I fairness, OF COURSE you should have 3 QBs in a 2QB league. Injuries, sleepers, bye-weeks and grabbing that extra good QB late in the draft is a solid move (I got Fitzpatrick in like the 13th, to go behind Schaub and Stafford).

Is carrying a decent 3rd QB any worse than having Isaac Redman or Jason Snelling on your bench? And in a 2QB league, the 3rd QB should be worth a lot more points.

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 04:17 PM
I fairness, OF COURSE you should have 3 QBs in a 2QB league. Injuries, sleepers, bye-weeks and grabbing that extra good QB late in the draft is a solid move (I got Fitzpatrick in like the 13th, to go behind Schaub and Stafford).

Is carrying a decent 3rd QB any worse than having Isaac Redman or Jason Snelling on your bench? And in a 2QB league, the 3rd QB should be worth a lot more points.

But he's carrying a backup QB.

doomy3
08-31-2011, 05:30 PM
But he's carrying a backup QB.

What's the problem with it? Why is it that carrying 3 backup RBs on your bench is fine, but it is asinine to think about a league where you draft a backup QB? I kind of agree with Hootie on this. In every league, RBs are way too valuable in comparison to real football. Leagues right now have guys like Cadillac Williams, Javon Ringer, Larod Stevens-Howling, etc being drafted. Why is it so crazy to even the field with 2 QB rosters and actually turn the value back to even?

Pestilence
08-31-2011, 07:46 PM
What's the problem with it? Why is it that carrying 3 backup RBs on your bench is fine, but it is asinine to think about a league where you draft a backup QB? I kind of agree with Hootie on this. In every league, RBs are way too valuable in comparison to real football. Leagues right now have guys like Cadillac Williams, Javon Ringer, Larod Stevens-Howling, etc being drafted. Why is it so crazy to even the field with 2 QB rosters and actually turn the value back to even?

Which I could understand if you have a bigger bench. 6 players is kind of small.

ChiefGator
09-01-2011, 04:05 AM
Just posted my team in a 14-teamer with similar rules.

How many teams are in your league sedated? Played in this league before?

Our league has slowly evolved with people realizing QB's are the big money makers (and with the recent expansion to 14 teams, there aren't enough decent QBs to go around). Eight QB's were drafted in round 1 and eight in round 2.

Short Leash Hootie
09-01-2011, 09:33 AM
Leagues right now have guys like Cadillac Williams, Javon Ringer, Larod Stevens-Howling, etc being drafted. Why is it so crazy to even the field with 2 QB rosters and actually turn the value back to even?
THANK you.

Pestilence
09-01-2011, 09:36 AM
I know its early....but if you set a 2 QB league next year.....I'll join. I'm always open to trying out new FF leagues.

MoreLemonPledge
09-01-2011, 11:34 AM
It makes no sense from the perspective that you're creating a fantasy "team". No team starts two quarterbacks. Many play 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 2 TEs, etc.

Short Leash Hootie
09-01-2011, 12:05 PM
It makes no sense from the perspective that you're creating a fantasy "team". No team starts two quarterbacks. Many play 2 RBs, 3 WRs, 2 TEs, etc.

no team starts 2 RB's...

it's fantasy football...

you start a

QB
RB
RB
RB/WR
WR
WR
TE
K
D/ST

lets not start comparing this to real football...

because I doubt a team would ever start Chris Johnson, Ryan Grant and Beanie Wells (like you can in FFL)...

so please, that excuse doesn't work

Old Dog
09-01-2011, 12:07 PM
it's fantasy football...

you start a

QB
RB
RB
RB/WR
WR
WR
TE
K
D/ST


You're right (notice you only listed 1 QB). NOW I agree with you :D



just messing with you, Hoss. I've already said we're just going to have to agree to disagree....there really is no wrong answer

MoreLemonPledge
09-01-2011, 01:02 PM
no team starts 2 RB's...

it's fantasy football...

you start a

QB
RB
RB
RB/WR
WR
WR
TE
K
D/ST

lets not start comparing this to real football...

because I doubt a team would ever start Chris Johnson, Ryan Grant and Beanie Wells (like you can in FFL)...

so please, that excuse doesn't work

No team would have Jamaal Charles listed as a second running back, either...

sedated
09-02-2011, 11:31 AM
Just posted my team in a 14-teamer with similar rules.

How many teams are in your league sedated? Played in this league before?

Our league has slowly evolved with people realizing QB's are the big money makers (and with the recent expansion to 14 teams, there aren't enough decent QBs to go around). Eight QB's were drafted in round 1 and eight in round 2.

my league only has 10 teams. that may factor into the decision - if you have too many teams, the QB selection is too limited (I cna't imagine doing it in a 16-team league). on the other hand, having 2 QBs with only 10 teams leaves lots of other talent out there.

ChiefGator
09-02-2011, 01:49 PM
my league only has 10 teams. that may factor into the decision - if you have too many teams, the QB selection is too limited (I cna't imagine doing it in a 16-team league). on the other hand, having 2 QBs with only 10 teams leaves lots of other talent out there.

Yeah, with a 10 teamer, you are probably a little better, but you still need to go QB one of your first two picks most likely.

Nzoner
09-03-2011, 12:51 PM
My 1st round in an OP league a few nights ago went like this:

1. Peterson
2. Rodgers
3. LeSean McCoy (don't ask)
4. Vick
5. Brady (me)
6. Brees
7. Andre Johnson
8. Jamaal Charles
9. Arian Foster
10. Philip Rivers
11. Ray Rice
12. Roddy White

...so really? What's the problem with OP leagues again?

I don't know if you caught my first reply to this but check it out and then check out our first round of our "traditional league"...

1.Aaron Rodgers
2.Adrian Peterson
3.Jamal Charles
4.Philip Rivers
5.Ray Rice
6.Drew Brees
7.Arian Foster
8.Matthew Stafford :eek:
9.Tom Brady (me)
10.Michael Vick
11.Lesean McCoy
12.Chris Johnson

MoreLemonPledge
09-04-2011, 01:02 AM
I don't know if you caught my first reply to this but check it out and then check out our first round of our "traditional league"...

1.Aaron Rodgers
2.Adrian Peterson
3.Jamal Charles
4.Philip Rivers
5.Ray Rice
6.Drew Brees
7.Arian Foster
8.Matthew Stafford :eek:
9.Tom Brady (me)
10.Michael Vick
11.Lesean McCoy
12.Chris Johnson

facepalm.

cabletech94
09-04-2011, 06:28 AM
i've done 2 qbs in ff for about 6 years now.
completely changes the draft process.
completely.
if you don't draft an elite in the first/second round, you're usually sucking eggs by the end.
lot more strategy.

Short Leash Hootie
09-04-2011, 08:04 AM
I don't know if you caught my first reply to this but check it out and then check out our first round of our "traditional league"...

1.Aaron Rodgers
2.Adrian Peterson
3.Jamal Charles
4.Philip Rivers
5.Ray Rice
6.Drew Brees
7.Arian Foster
8.Matthew Stafford :eek:
9.Tom Brady (me)
10.Michael Vick
11.Lesean McCoy
12.Chris Johnson

all you've proven to me with this...in a 1 QB league is...

you're in a league with retards

sorry man

that's the dumbest fucking shit I've ever seen

Short Leash Hootie
09-04-2011, 08:06 AM
4, 5, (even 6), 7, 8

...

the fact Vick (in a 1 QB league) was a 1st rounder yet the 6th QB to be off the board is REFUCKINGdiculous...

so Nzoner...you're a good dude...but I now take any FFL talk you've said to me with a giant grain of salt...

that has to be the dumbest 1st round I've seen since...you know, I don't know...2001 (when I was 16)

and I'm not kidding...you're drafting with n00b retards, plain and simple

Short Leash Hootie
09-04-2011, 08:08 AM
and I agree with 1, 2 and 3...but 4-12 is just ridiculous...I'd honestly laugh my ass off if I was in this league...

even your pick was unbelievably bad...and I took Brady 5th in 1 league...you can't take Brady over Vick...especially not in a 1 QB league

Nzoner
09-04-2011, 09:14 AM
4, 5, (even 6), 7, 8

...

the fact Vick (in a 1 QB league) was a 1st rounder yet the 6th QB to be off the board is RE****INGdiculous...

so Nzoner...you're a good dude...but I now take any FFL talk you've said to me with a giant grain of salt...

that has to be the dumbest 1st round I've seen since...you know, I don't know...2001 (when I was 16)

and I'm not kidding...you're drafting with n00b retards, plain and simple

Take it however you want Hootie,us n00b retards would love to have you cough up $170 and join our league anytime you feel like backing up your FF acumen.

Short Leash Hootie
09-04-2011, 02:16 PM
Take it however you want Hootie,us n00b retards would love to have you cough up $170 and join our league anytime you feel like backing up your FF acumen.

please give me a spot next year

that 1st round is indefensible.

and I think Stafford will end up being a top 8 QB but still...

you can't take him in the 1st round...and ahead of Vick. That's insane.

Short Leash Hootie
09-04-2011, 02:24 PM
and I just had my crazy, crazy, crazy draft today...

your rosters have to be 4 QB, 5 RB, 6 WR, 2 TE, 2 K and 2 DEF...that's THE roster, and the legal roster...

and starters are...

QB
RB
RB
WR
WR
WR
TE
K
DEF
QB/K (flex)
RB/WR/TE (flex)

and the points are 6, 9 and 12 for TD's (1-9 = 6, 10-39 = 9, 40+ = 12) with double points for a QB receiving or rushing for a TD, a WR/TE throwing or rushing for a TD, or a RB passing or receiving a TD...

so it's very heavily set up for scoring touchdowns...so getting 2 QB's is a must...

our 1st round went like this:

1. Vick
2. Rodgers
3. Peterson
4. Rivers
5. Brady (me)
6. Brees
7. Foster
8. P. Manning
9. Chris Johnson
10. Matt Ryan
11. Matt Schaub
12. Eli Manning

15 QB's out of the first 24 picks...that league is extreme though...it's fun, but I'd hate it if it was my only league...

but it's a $200 entree, 12 teams with 2 leagues in 1 (so 24 total teams) with the winner of each league meeting in week 17 for the overall championship..

Predarat
09-07-2011, 11:30 AM
I put a 5, it might work but probably won't, one of the leagues i am in has two flexes, one WR/RB, the other WR/TE. So WRs are damn hard to come by.

Pestilence
09-07-2011, 11:42 AM
What the fuck is the point of a QB/K flex position?

Short Leash Hootie
09-07-2011, 04:33 PM
What the **** is the point of a QB/K flex position?

because you can either start 2 QB's, or 2 K's...

and like I said...if a QB throws for 249 yards, 0 TD's, 2 INT's...he'd net you -4 points...

same line with no TD's? 0 points.

It's an obscure scoring league (basically a TD league) so the kicker strategy is a good hedge for BYE weeks...

every team has to have 4 QB's at all times so you if get an injury or two you could be fucked, fucked, fucked.

MoreLemonPledge
09-08-2011, 01:28 AM
because you can either start 2 QB's, or 2 K's...

and like I said...if a QB throws for 249 yards, 0 TD's, 2 INT's...he'd net you -4 points...

same line with no TD's? 0 points.

It's an obscure scoring league (basically a TD league) so the kicker strategy is a good hedge for BYE weeks...

every team has to have 4 QB's at all times so you if get an injury or two you could be fucked, fucked, fucked.

This may be the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard. There are at least 48 rostered QBs in that league? (I'm assuming it's 12 teams)

sedated
09-08-2011, 07:37 AM
it seems some people like weird leagues just for the sake of having weird leagues.

Short Leash Hootie
09-08-2011, 01:04 PM
This may be the dumbest ****ing thing I've ever heard. There are at least 48 rostered QBs in that league? (I'm assuming it's 12 teams)

there sure is...

just means if you grab Vick, you better grab Young...

have Brady, hope you have Hoyer...

it's an obscure league, but it has been ran that way since it's inception in 2000...

like I said...if it were my only league, I'd hate it...but being it's 1 of 8, and I've already made enough to pay for 13 years of the league...it's not that bad.

Short Leash Hootie
09-08-2011, 01:05 PM
my 4 QB's are Brady, Stafford, Hill and K. Collins...

ngoc
09-09-2011, 06:52 AM
3 strikes and you are out in my book. I wouldn't even bother contacting him again. I would email the flex league coordinator. You probably could get a default which you don't want, but the coordinator could give him some type of warning.

Nzoner
09-19-2011, 09:05 AM
4, 5, (even 6), 7, 8

...

the fact Vick (in a 1 QB league) was a 1st rounder yet the 6th QB to be off the board is RE****INGdiculous...

so Nzoner...you're a good dude...but I now take any FFL talk you've said to me with a giant grain of salt...

that has to be the dumbest 1st round I've seen since...you know, I don't know...2001 (when I was 16)

and I'm not kidding...you're drafting with n00b retards, plain and simple

and I agree with 1, 2 and 3...but 4-12 is just ridiculous...I'd honestly laugh my ass off if I was in this league...

even your pick was unbelievably bad...and I took Brady 5th in 1 league...you can't take Brady over Vick...especially not in a 1 QB league

Granted we're just 2 weeks in but so far the numbers,well they don't lie....

Brady 79.2

Newton 67.3

Brees 64.1

Stafford 63.1

Fitzpatrick 62.5

Rodgers 56.2

Henne 53.9

Romo 50.4

VICK 49.4

Short Leash Hootie
09-19-2011, 10:54 AM
Yes brady looks like the best pick...id still take Vick over him because when healthy you get a 2 for 1...brady is my QB in 3 leagues so yay for us

Short Leash Hootie
09-19-2011, 10:56 AM
And I did call your pick bad most likely because that was an abortion of a 1st round and it still is...

ChiefGator
09-19-2011, 06:47 PM
Granted we're just 2 weeks in but so far the numbers,well they don't lie....

Brady 79.2

Newton 67.3

Brees 64.1

Stafford 63.1

Fitzpatrick 62.5

Rodgers 56.2

Henne 53.9

Romo 50.4

VICK 49.4

That's kinda wierd. Our scoring provides the following QB list:

Brady 84.2
Newton 69.26
Brees 67.06
Stafford 65.06
Rodgers 62.20
Fitzpatrick
Henne
Romo
Rivers
Campbell
Vick

EDIT: Sorry.. I didn't see STAFFORD on your list the first three times I looked at it somehow.. I see him now.