Big Country Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Can you please just post the top 24 QBs and RBs for each of the past 3 years. It may well prove that QBs indeed are more valuable than RBs, or it may show that they are not..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLGRAF Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 So what was the purpose of your post? Â Â Â Great question. Obviously, the original poster was not looking for advice. He was looking for a pat on the back for having the brilliance to draft Manning at #1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Waffle Posted August 9, 2007 Share Posted August 9, 2007 Yes, it would seem the decesion was made before this post, however, he did provide his point system to back his iron wrought decision. Peyton Manning at #1. Now, go forth and conquer young man.....to the victor.....the spoils. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 Can you please just post the top 24 QBs and RBs for each of the past 3 years. It may well prove that QBs indeed are more valuable than RBs, or it may show that they are not..... Â Guess this was too much to ask for Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 Guess this was too much to ask for  It wouldn't matter, BC. I'm positive that you couldn't talk him down anyhow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 10, 2007 Share Posted August 10, 2007 I'm more interested out of curiosity. It may well show that given the limit of 2 QBs and 2 RBs (no mention of flex there) and the unique scoring system that the top scoring QB is the #1 value pick. Of course, I think Manning has only been the top scoring QB in most systems once in the last 4-5 years. Culpepper outscored him in most leagues the year Manning had the 49 TDs. The posted top 25 overalls don't indicate that QB is the top value, but, you never know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 [/size][/size]Your league is no better or no worse than ours. My only point is that is some leagues, taking a QB at #1 should be considered. Â Yes, a Bush league, if you run 2 QB's in a league it's rather amatuerish and IMO signifies inability to properly function in a traditionaly FF league. To each his own.....enjoy your 2 starting QB league. Now give the man the top 24 RB's and QB's of your minor league operation-that is all, carry on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 11, 2007 Author Share Posted August 11, 2007 Yes, a Bush league, if you run 2 QB's in a league it's rather amatuerish and IMO signifies inability to properly function in a traditionaly FF league. To each his own.....enjoy your 2 starting QB league. Now give the man the top 24 RB's and QB's of your minor league operation-that is all, carry on. Â Â I see no need to be critical of our league structure. Starting 2 QB's is not much diifferent than starting 2 RB's. 50% of the RB'sin the NFL are involved in a RBBC. For those teams that don't use a RBBc, the full back is basicaly worthless from a fantasy perspective. I don't know many NFL teams that use a QBBC sytem. Â I will post the stats on Monday. i do not have acces to them untl then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 Yes, a Bush league, if you run 2 QB's in a league it's rather amatuerish and IMO signifies inability to properly function in a traditionaly FF league. To each his own.....enjoy your 2 starting QB league. Now give the man the top 24 RB's and QB's of your minor league operation-that is all, carry on. Actually, I've been in some leagues that started 2 QBs and thought it quite interesting. I don't like the 6 pts for passing element but he has a fine point about the 2RBs being just as odd as 2 QBs. Even in RBBC, the vast majority of formations run by teams assume that there is one guy who is going to get the vast majority of the carries. You might have 2 guys back there, but one is pretty much a blocker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tradeanator Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 never played with 2 Qb's but IMO...no way 1st pick. We use a 1RB-3WR or 2rb-2wr option. The 1-3 is the closest thing to the real NFL today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qball86 Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 (edited) Here are the top scorers from 2006Â Player FPTS Tomlinson, LaDa 267 Manning, Peyton QB 248 Brees, Drew QB NOÂ 196 Jackson, Steven RB STL 189 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Johnson, Larry RB KCÂ 183 Vick, Michael QB ATLÂ 180 Bulger, Marc QB STLÂ 164 Kitna, Jon QB DETÂ 156 Brady, Tom QB NEÂ 148 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Parker, Willie RB PITÂ 141 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GBÂ 132 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 McNabb, Donovan 120 Â In our league QB's rule. You can not wait to get a QB to pick #24 Â I think there is something fundamentally wrong when, considering their seasons, Eli and Grossman outscore Gore by 21 and 15 respectively. When you actually consider watching them all play, even people who have no clue what fantasy football is would say Gore must have outscored Eli or Rex. He had 9 games over 100, 8 over 125. 3 over 150! and he put up 212 on SEA. Thats a season for the ages and he got outscored by Eli and Rex? Â For the definition of bushleague...re-read the previous paragraph. Edited August 11, 2007 by Qball86 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 11, 2007 Author Share Posted August 11, 2007 your arrogance makes you look like a fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qball86 Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 your arrogance makes you look like a fool It's not arrogance if you're always right.... Â I'll continue with my player comparisons for before... Â Grossman only had 1 game over 300 and actually had 7 games under 200. Let's not forget the 2 games he threw for 33 and 34 yds, wow I want him. He had 1 game with 6 turnovers, and 2 more with 4. He threw interceptions like parade candy. 1 game with 4 INTs and 4 games with 3 INTs. Now unless he gets points because his team has an incredible DST, how can he outscore Gore? And don't tell me because QBs get 6 for this and 6 for that, I mean, how can you ALLOW that to happen? Â Eli obviously gets 6 pts per half because his last name is Manning. He had 1 300 yds game but 9 games under 200!. He had 24 TDs but 27 turnovers. I'm glad to see Eli outscored Rex, albeit only by 6 pts, but how can you have a scoring system in which mediocre QBs, still out-produce a top 5 RBs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 11, 2007 Share Posted August 11, 2007 I miss the days when there were idiots in my league and 3 to 5 QBs were taken in the first 2 rounds. Â You can change the QB scoring as much as you want but the relative scoring between the QBs will not change much. So what you have the player in the leauge that scores the most points ... he'll be the only guy on your roster performing, presuming of course that the rest of your league understands the relative value of players. Â Of course if everybody in your league drafts like a 3rd grader you may do fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 You asked for it  2006 2005 2004 Manning, Peyton QB IND 248 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 218 Manning, Peyton QB IND 339 Brees, Drew QB NO 196 Manning, Peyton QB IND 186 Culpepper, Daunte QB  297 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Brady, Tom QB NE 180 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 222 Vick, Michael QB ATL 180 Manning, Eli QB NYG 170 Green, Trent QB MIA 209 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Bledsoe, Drew QB DAL 152 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 202 Kitna, Jon QB DET 156 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 150 Favre, Brett QB GB 202 Brady, Tom QB NE 148 Brees, Drew QB NO 150 Plummer, Jake QB TB 186 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 150 Brady, Tom QB NE 186 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 144 Brees, Drew QB NO 174 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GB 142 Brooks, Aaron QB OAK 170 Favre, Brett QB GB 132 Brunell, Mark QB WAS 140 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Losman, J.P. QB BUF 120 Vick, Michael QB ATL 128 Vick, Michael QB ATL 150 Roethlisberger, Ben  120 Plummer, Jake QB TB 122 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 142 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 120 Green, Trent QB MIA 122 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 126   2006 2005 2004 Tomlinson, LaDainian 267 Johnson, Larry RB KC 195 Alexander, Shaun RB 189 Jackson, Steven RB 189 Tomlinson, LaDainian 183 Martin, Curtis RB NYJ 153 Johnson, Larry RB KC 183 Alexander, Shaun RB 154 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB 153 Parker, Willie RB PIT 141 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 137 Dillon, Corey RB NE 149 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 James, Edgerrin RB 129 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 135 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Portis, Clinton RB 119 Williams, Domanick RB 120 Westbrook, Brian RB PHI 102 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 99 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 99 McGahee, Willis RB BAL 114 Barber, Marion RB DAL 96 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 James, Edgerrin RB ARI 101 Jones-Drew, Maurice 90 Anderson, Mike RB 78 Portis, Clinton RB WAS 93 Lewis, Jamal RB CLE 90 Davis, Stephen RB 72 Green, Ahman RB HOU 90 Henry, Travis RB DEN 80 Williams, Cadillac 72 Holmes, Priest RB KC 90 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 Dunn, Warrick RB ATL 69 Bettis, Jerome RB PIT 84 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 72 Taylor, Fred RB JAC 72 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 You asked for it 2006 2005 2004 Manning, Peyton QB IND 248 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 218 Manning, Peyton QB IND 339 Brees, Drew QB NO 196 Manning, Peyton QB IND 186 Culpepper, Daunte QB  297 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Brady, Tom QB NE 180 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 222 Vick, Michael QB ATL 180 Manning, Eli QB NYG 170 Green, Trent QB MIA 209 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Bledsoe, Drew QB DAL 152 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 202 Kitna, Jon QB DET 156 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 150 Favre, Brett QB GB 202 Brady, Tom QB NE 148 Brees, Drew QB NO 150 Plummer, Jake QB TB 186 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 150 Brady, Tom QB NE 186 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 144 Brees, Drew QB NO 174 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GB 142 Brooks, Aaron QB OAK 170 Favre, Brett QB GB 132 Brunell, Mark QB WAS 140 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Losman, J.P. QB BUF 120 Vick, Michael QB ATL 128 Vick, Michael QB ATL 150 Roethlisberger, Ben  120 Plummer, Jake QB TB 122 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 142 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 120 Green, Trent QB MIA 122 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 126   2006 2005 2004 Tomlinson, LaDainian 267 Johnson, Larry RB KC 195 Alexander, Shaun RB 189 Jackson, Steven RB 189 Tomlinson, LaDainian 183 Martin, Curtis RB NYJ 153 Johnson, Larry RB KC 183 Alexander, Shaun RB 154 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB 153 Parker, Willie RB PIT 141 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 137 Dillon, Corey RB NE 149 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 James, Edgerrin RB 129 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 135 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Portis, Clinton RB 119 Williams, Domanick RB 120 Westbrook, Brian RB PHI 102 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 99 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 99 McGahee, Willis RB BAL 114 Barber, Marion RB DAL 96 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 James, Edgerrin RB ARI 101 Jones-Drew, Maurice 90 Anderson, Mike RB 78 Portis, Clinton RB WAS 93 Lewis, Jamal RB CLE 90 Davis, Stephen RB 72 Green, Ahman RB HOU 90 Henry, Travis RB DEN 80 Williams, Cadillac 72 Holmes, Priest RB KC 90 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 Dunn, Warrick RB ATL 69 Bettis, Jerome RB PIT 84 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 72 Taylor, Fred RB JAC 72  Is there a reason you won't go 24 deep at each position as asked?  Nevermind - even without doing that, it's plain to me that you screwed the pooch by taking Manning #1. That most of the rest of your league is making the same blunder also and doesn't understand value either, which allows you to make this mistake & still win the league, doesn't make your choice the correct one.  Manning looks like a reasonable mid-1st round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 You are ignoring 2 things. The 339 points Manning put up in 2004 & the fact that there is no consistency as to who will be the top RB. Â If you were in our league, you would be lucky to male the playoffs. If you can't see that there is a strong reason to taking Manning based on our line-up requirments and scoring sytem, you are an ignorant fool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 You asked for it 2006 2005 2004 Manning, Peyton QB IND 248 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 218 Manning, Peyton QB IND 339 Brees, Drew QB NO 196 Manning, Peyton QB IND 186 Culpepper, Daunte QB 297 Palmer, Carson QB CIN 186 Brady, Tom QB NE 180 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 222 Vick, Michael QB ATL 180 Manning, Eli QB NYG 170 Green, Trent QB MIA 209 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Bledsoe, Drew QB DAL 152 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 202 Kitna, Jon QB DET 156 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 150 Favre, Brett QB GB 202 Brady, Tom QB NE 148 Brees, Drew QB NO 150 Plummer, Jake QB TB 186 Manning, Eli QB NYG 144 Delhomme, Jake QB CAR 150 Brady, Tom QB NE 186 Grossman, Rex QB CHI 138 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 144 Brees, Drew QB NO 174 Rivers, Philip QB SD 134 Favre, Brett QB GB 142 Brooks, Aaron QB OAK 170 Favre, Brett QB GB 132 Brunell, Mark QB WAS 140 Bulger, Marc QB STL 164 Losman, J.P. QB BUF 120 Vick, Michael QB ATL 128 Vick, Michael QB ATL 150 Roethlisberger, Ben 120 Plummer, Jake QB TB 122 Hasselbeck, Matt QB SEA 142 McNabb, Donovan QB PHI 120 Green, Trent QB MIA 122 Collins, Kerry QB TEN 126   2006 2005 2004 Tomlinson, LaDainian 267 Johnson, Larry RB KC 195 Alexander, Shaun RB 189 Jackson, Steven RB 189 Tomlinson, LaDainian 183 Martin, Curtis RB NYJ 153 Johnson, Larry RB KC 183 Alexander, Shaun RB 154 Tomlinson, LaDainian RB 153 Parker, Willie RB PIT 141 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 137 Dillon, Corey RB NE 149 Gore, Frank RB SF 123 James, Edgerrin RB 129 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 135 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Portis, Clinton RB 119 Williams, Domanick RB 120 Westbrook, Brian RB PHI 102 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Johnson, Rudi RB CIN 117 Barber, Tiki RB NYG 99 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 99 McGahee, Willis RB BAL 114 Barber, Marion RB DAL 96 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 James, Edgerrin RB ARI 101 Jones-Drew, Maurice 90 Anderson, Mike RB 78 Portis, Clinton RB WAS 93 Lewis, Jamal RB CLE 90 Davis, Stephen RB 72 Green, Ahman RB HOU 90 Henry, Travis RB DEN 80 Williams, Cadillac 72 Holmes, Priest RB KC 90 Dillon, Corey RB NE 78 Dunn, Warrick RB ATL 69 Bettis, Jerome RB PIT 84 Jones, Thomas RB NYJ 72 Taylor, Fred RB JAC 72 Well, the only year among the last three where the top QB compared to the 12-15th best QB was as severe (in terms of %) was 2004. So, based on what you showed us your strategy is flawed. As Bronco says, the fact that everyone else employs the same tactic saves you. However, that doesn't make your choice any better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) You are ignoring 2 things. The 339 points Manning put up in 2004 & the fact that there is no consistency as to who will be the top RB.  If you were in our league, you would be lucky to male the playoffs. If you can't see that there is a strong reason to taking Manning based on our line-up requirments and scoring sytem, you are an ignorant fool  If I were in your league, you wouldn't be winning it. That you call me an ignorant fool despite the facts & your own posted scoring showing how wrong you are despite not understanding why shows that you are no more than an arrogant ass.  and at using a NFL record year as the standard for Manning's value as a QB. When you find yourself in a hole - stop digging. And you are in a hole, my friend. Edited August 13, 2007 by Bronco Billy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 :NOD: Â The only way you can be successful drafting Peyton Manning with the 1st overall pick is if the rest of the league over values QBs and drafts them too early allowing you to build out the rest of your team with good RBs and WRs. Â Were I in your league I'd happily let you take Peyton Manning and I'd score on the top RBs and WRs. So you could have the top QB in the league with mediocre RBs and WRs ... while I have top notch RBs and WRs with mediocre QBs. The fall off from top QB to mediocre QBs is far far far less than the fall off from top postion players to mediocre position players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 This has to be a fishing expedition of some type. Â Doesn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) Throw out LT 2006 year and PM 2005 year totals as the were abnormal  Top QB average 233 top RB average 189 based on other two years  Your strategy Top RB 189 Pick #1 12-18 QB 90 #24 Total 279   my strategy Top QB 233 Pick #1 7 - 10 RB 104 #24 Total 337  This does not even take into account the consistency factor for Manning over LT  I will let you know if we have an opening in our league Edited August 13, 2007 by jjwbean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjwbean Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 I did throw out Manning & Culpepper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 I will let you know if we have an opening in our league  Please do. I can always use easy money.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 Throw out LT 2006 year and PM 2005 year totals as the were abnormal  Top QB average 233 top RB average 189 based on other two years  Your strategy Top RB 189 Pick #1 12-18 QB 90 #24 Total 279 my strategy Top QB 233 Pick #1 7 - 10 RB 104 #24 Total 337  This does not even take into account the consistency factor for Manning over LT  I will let you know if we have an opening in our league   So when I get the top QB it is presumed that the best QB I can get is 12th? But when you get the top QB the best RB you can get is 7th?  That is polluted logic. 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.