loaf Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 2 QBs 4 WRs 2 RBs TE WR/TE WR/RB K 2 DEF 6 Bench positions seems like an excessive amount of WRs and QBs to me. I voted no. Anyone ever play in a 2 QB League before? Or 4-6 WRs? 14 Teams are in this performace League... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunysteelfly76 Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 I've never done it but I don't like the idea of two starting QB's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Furley Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 Looks a little crazy to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 (edited) We made the switch to 2 QBs this year (10 team league). There's solid arguments for and against. But for you in a 14 team league, I would not recommend it. That guy is going overboard and needs to do the math. You figure each team needs 2 QBS and then a back up for bye weeks/injuries. 14 X 3 is 42. There are not 42 starting QBs in the NFL. You will have teams often playing with a 1 man handicap, which is really bad form in my opinion. Nevermind that most teams will be starting at least 5 WRs, and own 6-7. Edited July 24, 2005 by Roo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Venus Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 I agree that with 10 teams, maybe, but not with 14. Byes and injuries could leave someone with nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 I'm not for any gimmicky type of starting lineups. I always thought a starting fantasy lineup should try and mirror a starting NFL lineup (skill positions of course). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 Since it's a 14 team league, this sounds even crazier. 28 Qbs starting every week. Hope that the commish has an injured QB on his roster this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted July 24, 2005 Author Share Posted July 24, 2005 and two Defenses. 10 teams will be without a bye week fill in... all points I brought up in my rebuttal...but some idiots are going for it and so far my position is losing out 6-4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 (edited) If they aren't close friends, I'd jump ship. If you made that argument, and they understand that it's mathmatically very likely that teams will often enter a week without a full team of starters, yet they want to do it anyway.....adios. Edited July 24, 2005 by Roo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 i think the idea is appealing to those who think they have superior accumen, figuring they know the 119th WR in the league better than anybody else, and have good projections on JP Losman and Alex Smith. And the only reason they don't win every year is the dumb luck of their opponents. Or put another way, the more choices you have to make the more your knowledge rather than luck is reflected in those choices. However I still do enjoy the idea that you are creating a team, even if it does not reflect a real NFL set up you still got to go with the notion that you can only have 1 QB playing. It shouldn't be upsetting, because as stated above it's not like you are drafting a player in every position, but for some strange reason, it just feels wrong. Of course as someone said earlier, for a 14 team league it's a non-starter stupid idea anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted July 24, 2005 Author Share Posted July 24, 2005 of course 32 Homers gives me great insight to those 3rd and 4th string WRs and TEs...and I'm not really worried about teams not sporting whole lineups, they just have to make sure to put off that 4th RB in lieu of their backup D or QB...if not, it's their choice to wait out the IR and pick up an injury fill in. QBs go down quite a bit and if they were smart, they would pick up some shaky starter's backup to begin with...now the Defense, I have no defense for. Just git-r-done during the Draft... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Love Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 My first league I commished had this sort of lineup, but we only had 6 or 8 guys. It made sense in that setting, no way in a 14-team league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PantherDave Posted July 24, 2005 Share Posted July 24, 2005 As pointed out, with 14 teams it's just not possible, plus as a commish of my local for 7 years, I would not want to keep up with the extra flax and just don't see where it would add to the competition level of the leauge itself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muck Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Bad idea for a 14 team league on many levels. You've already pointed out the problem with QBs and DEFs ... also, if a team is starting 5 WRs, there will be 70 WRs started each week ... some teams, due to bye weeks, may be forced to start players that are 5th or 6th string on their NFL teams! Also, the waiver wires will not exist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 I suppose it is too late to shoot the guy that proposed this isn't it? Wonder if he thought it all out and did the math before opening his mouth? Kinda doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ts Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 Can't wait for the day that I start D. Ragone or J. Palmer as my QB2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 (edited) My first league I commished had this sort of lineup, but we only had 6 or 8 guys. It made sense in that setting, no way in a 14-team league. 892987[/snapback] I'm in a local 10 man league, very low stakes, that starts 2 QBs and has a very similar roster to the one Loaf outlined above. It's fun enough, but it's definitely my 6th and final league in terms of priority. Edit: But like everybody else thinks, in a 14 man league, it's crazy. Edited July 25, 2005 by Ursa Majoris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 I also agree that with a 14 team league that this would be hard to do and put a full roster out there each week. 280 players would get selected in this draft. That makes for a long draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunther Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 That sounds very weird. I would have voted no as well. On my trip into Michigan on Saturday listening to the Sirius Fantasy Football Preview show, one caller came in and said they had to start one player at all offensive postions plus a DEF and then had three flex positions to use as they please. They could start four QBs, or four RBs, or four WRs...you get the idea...if they wanted. I have definitely never heard of that before. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whipdancer Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 ...then had three flex positions to use as they please. They could start four QBs, or four RBs, or four WRs...you get the idea...if they wanted. I have definitely never heard of that before. 893397[/snapback] Never heard of that before either. But it's actually kinda intriguing. Depending on the scoring - starting C'Pep and Manning? And... Bulger/McNabb/whoever? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 I played in a 2qb league last year for the first time that gave 6 pts for a passing td. I hated it. It made teams with good position players practically useless because a guy with 2 good qbs was to hard to overcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolv Posted July 25, 2005 Share Posted July 25, 2005 But for you in a 14 team league, I would not recommend it. That guy is going overboard and needs to do the math. You figure each team needs 2 QBS and then a back up for bye weeks/injuries. 14 X 3 is 42. There are not 42 starting QBs in the NFL. You will have teams often playing with a 1 man handicap, which is really bad form in my opinion. Nevermind that most teams will be starting at least 5 WRs, and own 6-7. 892860[/snapback] Exactly. Thats a ridiculous format for a 14 team league 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.