Capt. Stanky Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 Which do you prefer? 1 QB leagues seem to be the norm, but I started out with a 2 QB league, and truly think they are much more challenging. In a league where you only start 1, you can typically wait on QB and grab 2 mid-level guys with upside, at least this is what I have success with. In a league where you start 2 QB's, it really makes QB the most important position, completely changing the dynamic of the draft. One draw back to 2 QB leagues is that you really can't have more than 10 teams in the league. 10 is even pushing it. Now that I've stated my case it's time to hear what you think. Sound off! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Waffle Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 Damn You!!!!!!!!! I'm on the QB ledge as it is for the first time in my fantasy life.....now 2 you say , still that would be 20 decent or better QB's in a 10 team league, heck I hate 8 team leagues, but if it were 2 QB's, I'd say an 8 team league.....man, my head hurts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Waffle Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 16-team leagues. Yep, start'em all......would make drafting a blast though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 I've got no issues with 2 QB starters for smaller leagues, though, even in 8 teamers, if you go to 2 QBs and don;t adjust the other positions at all, you usually see a major imbalance towards QB value. So, instead of a "typical" 1QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1 TE setup, in an 8 teamer maybe consider going to 2 QBs, 3 RBs, 5 WRs and 2 TEs, expanding roster sizes accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 I've got no issues with 2 QB starters for smaller leagues, though, even in 8 teamers, if you go to 2 QBs and don;t adjust the other positions at all, you usually see a major imbalance towards QB value. So, instead of a "typical" 1QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1 TE setup, in an 8 teamer maybe consider going to 2 QBs, 3 RBs, 5 WRs and 2 TEs, expanding roster sizes accordingly. + a million... The artificial run on QBs is ridiculous in this format (and don't even get me started on QB in the flex... what RB2/3 or WR3/4 is gonna outplay a QB, unless you severely deflate the QB's value)... Only other issue for me is that actual teams don't ever start more than 1 QB at a time (wildcat aside), but to each his own.... Other than that, it does seem a pretty competitive way to play... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Stanky Posted June 23, 2010 Author Share Posted June 23, 2010 I've got no issues with 2 QB starters for smaller leagues, though, even in 8 teamers, if you go to 2 QBs and don;t adjust the other positions at all, you usually see a major imbalance towards QB value. Exactly, it makes QB the most important position, for obvious reasons. I guess it's really more a matter of what you are used to. Great QB's like Manning, Brees, and even Rodgers, Brady, Romo, Rivers and Schaub are in the first round discussion with CJ, AP, MJD and RR. I just enjoy it far more and find it more challenging in general. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 Only other issue for me is that actual teams don't ever start more than 1 QB at a time (wildcat aside), but to each his own.... Other than that, it does seem a pretty competitive way to play... Agreed. In the NFL, teams with great qbs have an advantage of those without, but it's no guarantee of a championship. If there's a great one in the draft, you grab him, but there isn't really a need to have two great ones at the same time. And, if you don't have a great one, you can get through with two upsiders and some hope. Sounds to me like a 1QB league mirrors the pro game pretty well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Stanky Posted June 23, 2010 Author Share Posted June 23, 2010 (edited) Agreed. In the NFL, teams with great qbs have an advantage of those without, but it's no guarantee of a championship. If there's a great one in the draft, you grab him, but there isn't really a need to have two great ones at the same time. And, if you don't have a great one, you can get through with two upsiders and some hope. Sounds to me like a 1QB league mirrors the pro game pretty well. To me the pro game and the Fantasy game are completely seperate. I'm just looking for what format gives me the best fantasy experience. I'm not looking for my fantasy roster to mirror the starting roster of an NFL team. If that were the case wouldn't we start a RB and FB, not 2 RB's? I just think 2 QB leagues are more fun. I suggest you try and get into one this year if you've never tried one. Edited June 23, 2010 by Capt. Stanky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gandalas Posted June 23, 2010 Share Posted June 23, 2010 2 QB or more all the way... My main league is 12-team, 2 QB start, and my newest is 10-team, up to THREE QB start. 1 QB is just not challenging at all. With the increased scoring coming from the position, basically everyone has a stud. So they just all cancel each other out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby's Hubby Posted June 24, 2010 Share Posted June 24, 2010 by starting more at the QB position you dilute the coaching/managing. i like having to make a decision and living with it. maybe when coaches in the NFL really start 2 QBs the same formation or backfield (I am open to the concept) then I would do it. But I like to mimic what you get in reality. Its called a QB controversy. Just google Gary Hogeboom. 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.