QB, QB
RB, RB
WR, WR, WR
WR/TE (Start one or the other)
K
DEF (Team defense)
BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN (7 Total Bench)
Updated on Draft Day 2007
Thursday, August 16, 2007
Roster Size and Starting Positions
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
So far the comments from Brian and Baxter (via email) are to stick with the current format.
I make the following suggestion:
QB
RB, RB
WR, WR, WR
WR/TE (Start one or the other)
K
DEF (Team defense)
BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN, BN (8 Total Bench)
As this will reduce the number of total players drafted (keeping it reasonable), but more importantly, this will bring down scoring and make for more parity in the league.
The talent will be thinned with 6 teams, and thus, to keep it interesting I suggest such moves. Another thought is that by limiting QBs and RBs, you create situations closer to the game—where you live or die by your coaching decision as to who should start. It favors a closer look at your roster week to week, and could support more trades and moves during the season.
Thoughts?
Ben's proposal looks good to me.
Has this been decided yet? It seems we have 2 in favor of the old way (Baxter and Grafton), 2 in favor of changing (Ben and Brian M.), and 2 abstaining (Chris and me).
I'm fine with either way, though I tend to lean towards Ben's proposal since it limits the quantity while hopefully increasing the quality of players drafted. However, coming out of a 10+ year retirement from the world of fantasy coaching, I do worry a bit about the whole "living and dying by your decision as to who to play each week" thing.
I'd make one minor adjustment to Ben's proposal: make that WR/TE starting spot a WR/TE/RB spot to give us a bit more freedom with who we draft and start.
Whatever we decide, let's finalize it soon - draft day is approaching fast.
Chris, I think that makes you the tie-breaker, unless you are also fine with either choice. If that's the case, I will change my vote to align with Baxter and Brian if only to get us over the hump.
What do you think? We should try to nail this down tonight, allowing the planners among us to scheme for tomorrow.
I'm back from vacation. So here's how I weigh in...
I'll go with Ben, Brian M., and J-Rod. So we'll have just one QB. I think that is the most critical decision going into draft day.
J-Rod, Yahoo will not allow the position to be WR/TE/RB.
For now, I will switch the settings to 1 QB, but I will leave both the WR/TE and WR/RB positions active. This is sort of a compromise between the two camps. We can debate this point on draft day. It shouldn't affect draft strategy dramatically.
I continue to support the original roster size, with 2 QBs, for several reasons. Ben wants one QB to encourage coaching decisions. I think 1 QB eliminates the decision since there are basically 6 elite QBs and a bunch of good ones. Is there really a coaching decision if the QBs on your roster are, say, Tom Brady and Philip Rivers? If you had 3 QBs and picked 2, there would be a decision. Always start Brady, then choose Rivers vs Cutler.
Also, RBs score more than WR so you almost always use the RB/WR for a RB. Therefore we will have 18 starting RBs and only 6 QBs. The talent pool is not so thin at QB that this is necessary. If we got up to 10 teams I would say definitely 1 QB, but not for 6.
Sorry for the late post. I thought comments were emailed too. Since I didn't get an email, I did not realize this was being discussed.
Post a Comment