Donutrun Jellies Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 Anybody have any experience with a "short bench" format for a league? We're mulling creating a "something new to us" league for next year ... 10 teams, 8 starters (QB, RB1, RB2, WR1, WR2, TE, K, DEF), and 2 bench players. That would mean 100 players would be rostered each week -- so there would be (nearly bizarro) quality depth on the waiver wire each week ... Man crushes, bye weeks, injuries, and the "can't waive" list would certainly complicate life ... There'd be no handcuffing and no hording players ... There might be a crazy scramble on the wire the first six minutes they open each week ... Thoughts on this kind of set up? Would it tend to keep owners more active? Stir things up? Turn out to be stupid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 Anybody have any experience with a "short bench" format for a league? We're mulling creating a "something new to us" league for next year ... 10 teams, 8 starters (QB, RB1, RB2, WR1, WR2, TE, K, DEF), and 2 bench players. That would mean 100 players would be rostered each week -- so there would be (nearly bizarro) quality depth on the waiver wire each week ... Man crushes, bye weeks, injuries, and the "can't waive" list would certainly complicate life ... There'd be no handcuffing and no hording players ... There might be a crazy scramble on the wire the first six minutes they open each week ... Thoughts on this kind of set up? Would it tend to keep owners more active? Stir things up? Turn out to be stupid? i wouldnt like it at all...if anything i think it penalizes the guy that does a ton of research and rewards owners that get to see what the flavor of the week ends up being...sorta reminds me of when i see people in the IDP forum ask if they should pick up Patrick Willis or London Fletcher or stand pat with DeMeco Ryans...instantly you know that they only need to start 1DL, 1LB, 1DB....leaving to much depth on the wire IMO isnt a good thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 To be honest, I don't much like it. It makes the draft way less important and bails out bad teams. If you did do it, I think it would be super important to deal with waivers in some manner besides last place guy goes first. Guys who drop the first two games will be given prime position to gobble up what could be an amazing free agency crop and set themselves up for the year. I could see going with a somewhat short bench but not that short. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchico Posted December 29, 2007 Share Posted December 29, 2007 I play in a limited bench league but not as tight as your proposing. Start 1qb, 2rb, 2wr, 1te, 1k, 1d and you can't have more than 2 bu's at any position except qb(only 1) and only a 14 man roster. It does leave some decent fa's on the wire. Short term Injuries would certainly become a factor as you could see major studs having to be dropped just to field a team. And when they come back in a week or 2 it could create some antimosity amongst the crew. Maybe a small IR (1-3 players) for players declared out would help. It does sound interesting and would definately keep the owners on their toes. Biggest drawback would be some owners have no life and would be rewarded greatly in this system and the other owners could get discouraged and lose interest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted December 30, 2007 Share Posted December 30, 2007 The smallest league I have ever played in was 15 players and 9 starters in a league of 12. Means there are players on the WW but not like anyone golden or anything. I would never want to go smaller than that. For one, you cann grab a player "pre-breakout" and see if he develops. Also it makes the waiver wire order (or salary cap implications) really skewing what people can do. It would likely lead to a slightly more balanced league (assuming worst to first waivers) but I also like to pack on at least one backup in every position so that right before the game starts and someone pulls a hammy I can replace him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 I joined a league with some neighbors last night as a liast minute fill-in. I didn't know the rules till I got there; 8 starters, 5 bench. I didn't pick a backup QB, but went for RB depth. Anyone with FA advise for a league like this? McNabb has week 4 bye and I'm thinking about dropping my K that week instead of one of my players (Ted Ginn is probably my weakest player). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 (edited) 1 real RB and my old TE was Vernon Davis. It didn't end well. Anbother league had 12 teams and 15 man rosters(start8). It was tough. Edited August 30, 2009 by Randall Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCMB Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 1 real RB and my old TE was Vernon Davis. It didn't end well. Anbother league had 12 teams and 15 man rosters(start8). It was tough. My league is the same format - start 8 with 15 man rosters. I think the rationale is it makes for more action on the waiver-wires, which adds to the pot. But I would prefer bigger rosters so I could then stockpile more sleepers, so I agree the smaller roster size penalizes the guys that do the most research. Also, not a big deal, but technically it would be more fair to have 16 man rosters (or some even number). That way, whoever picks 1st in the 1st round has to pick last in the last round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 Anyone with FA advise for a league like this? McNabb has week 4 bye and I'm thinking about dropping my K that week instead of one of my players (Ted Ginn is probably my weakest player). It'll shake out by week 4....someone will get hurt or not live up to expectations. Hijacker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roustabout Posted August 30, 2009 Share Posted August 30, 2009 We went from 16 players per team to 12. I thought I would hate it. I love it. People don't hoard players so it is more fun and profitable to wisely play the free agent market. Defenses and kickers become less important because most people keep only one. It spices things up and makes the bye weeks more dicey and interesting. I definitely recommend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.