Customizing roster positions/ additional flex(es)?

[McTastic]

Hey guys, as commissioner of a very typical 12-team, ppr league, I’ve been thinking of switching things up from our usual 9 starter/6 bench setup to…

 

1qb

1rb

1wr

1te

2 flex (rb, wr, te)

kr & def

 

or maybe even a 3 flex (rb, wr) (rb, te) (wr, te) with 5 bench. The thing is I’ve never played in or even seen a league laid out this way so I was wandering if some of you thought there might be something I was overlooking. Perhaps I’m in over my head. Any other ideas? I’m not really interested in a 2qb league but I am looking for ideas to make it fun.

[Big Country]

Add a second required WR to your first approach and it is close to the way many flex leagues are going - rather than have 2 required RBs and 3 WRs, you put two flexes in there.

 

It keeps the starting lineup fairly balanced, keeps the league deep enough so everyone isn't loaded at every position, and maximizes the flexibility owners have in building their teams - ie trying to load up on RBs could be just as effective as loading up on WRs

 

[McTastic]

You mean like 1 qb, rb, te, 2 wr and 2 flex?

[Big Country]

8 hours ago, McTastic said:

You mean like 1 qb, rb, te, 2 wr and 2 flex?

 

Yes - and the flexes are RB/WR/TE, so essentially it is

1 QB

1-3 RB

2-4 WR

1-3 TE

 

[McTastic]

6 hours ago, Big Country said:

 

Yes - and the flexes are RB/WR/TE, so essentially it is

1 QB

1-3 RB

2-4 WR

1-3 TE

 

That's an interesting setup. Haven't thought of that before. Is that the way you play in your leagues?

[Bonedaddies]

I do NOT like the idea of only 1 RB required to start, but understand why many leagues are going this direction.  IMO it give a slight advantage to those at the top of the board selecting 1 of the top 3 RB's and building WR's from there.  I like to force teams to have at least 2 RB's to make an impact, not easy to do in today's NFL, but makes managing rosters much more fun and challenging throughout the year.

[Big Country]

On 8/19/2017 at 1:38 PM, McTastic said:

That's an interesting setup. Haven't thought of that before. Is that the way you play in your leagues?

 

One of the long time Huddle leagues uses this setup (we also have a graduated PPR, so RBs get 0.5 PPR, WRs get 0.75 PPR and TEs get 1 PPR) and I think it has the opposite effect of what Bonedaddies suggests - because there is only one required RB, it gives a lot of flexibility in how you build your team, as if you do skip RB early and build WRs early (or any other position really), you only need to hit on one RB later to field a lineup.

 

Contrary to what Bonedaddies dais, I have found that the two required RBs is what helps those guys that get one of the top 2-3 picks out the most as then the owners picking after them are more compelled to draft lesser RBs early to fill the greater number of required RB positions, thus allowing stronger WRs to come to them at the 2/3 turn. By only requiring 1 RB, but requiring two WRs, a multitude of draft strategies are more viable at creating strong teams - start out RB/WR or WR/RB, start out WR/WR, or, because of the two flex spots, even start out RB/RB and still have flexibility in the 3rd and later rounds to grab another RB for the 2nd flex if that is where the value lies.

 

We just started our draft this year, but through the first two rounds, 5 teams went RB/WR or WR/RB, 2 teams went RB/RB, 3 teams went WR/WR, 1 team went WR/TE and one team went RB/QB. As mentioned above, we utilize graduated PPR and have a QB friendly scoring system - 6 point passing TDs and 1 point per 20 passing yards, but we do -2 per interception.