Roster Limitations & Flex Position

[PoolMan]

I am trying to get my league to expand roster size and limit how many of a particular position can be held. Then I wanted to see a flex position added to the starting lineup. My suggestion would make rosters look like this.

 

Total Roster = 2 QB, 5 RB, 5 WR, 2 TE, 2 PK, 2 DEF

Starters = QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, TE, PK, DEF, Flex

 

Any articles that argue for this setup? Or are there any good arguements for this setup? Right now we just have a 14 man roster that is usually stacked with RBs.

 

Thanks.

[Big Country]

I will never argue for fixed position limits. I think that is stupid. LEt teams build their teams the way they see fit. If that menas stacking up on backup RBs, then so be it, they are hurting at the other positions. If it means stacking at WR, so be it, they are short elsewhere.

 

14 man roster with 9 starting spots seems really shallow, should be at least 16-18 players with 9 starters. I prefer a flex spot as it lets owners have some "maneuverability" in their starting lineups and lets teams build an identity.. are they a run n shoo type team, a wishbone, a pro set. Things that no one but us fantasy geeks care about.

[SLGRAF]

I agree with the first person to reply. In my money league, we used to keep strictly to a 2 QB/4 RB/4 WR/2 TE/2 Def/2 PK roster, but a couple of years ago, made it a rule that you only needed enough players at a position to field a starter each week. I like that I can have six RBs on my team, because that means I can have three NFL starters, and their real world backups if I want to. This lessens the effect that injuries have on fantasy teams, and rewards the people who really prepared for their draft.

[steeler]

Why are you asking us for argument for a rule that you want to implement?

 

Don't you know why you want this new rule

[Egret]

Roster limits blow. If I am weak in one area and I can't improve through FA, load up in another area and try to trade.