Super King
Footballguy
QB: $45 (3)
RB: $58 (7)
WR: $86 (7)
TE: $40 (3)
PK: $10 (3)
TD: $10 (3)
Totals: 26 players; $249
RB: $58 (7)
WR: $86 (7)
TE: $40 (3)
PK: $10 (3)
TD: $10 (3)
Totals: 26 players; $249
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
***Official*** 2012 FBG Subscriber Contest Thread (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Ignoratio Elenchi
- Start date
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
Interesting. The lower prices should change up the small roster / large roster debate a bit.
butcher boy
Footballguy
I don't think my team's going to go through as many changes as previous years. This year more than ever, the obvious choices for cheap guys really stand out. Even after having to replace Ocho, there was another obvious choice to take his place.
Ignoratio Elenchi
Footballguy
'wollac said:Welcome to the contest newb! You shouldn't be asking such serious questions, just trust the experts. Let me break it down for you. Just about every week, there is at least one kicker who goes off to the tune of 20+ points. The problem is, if you only draft 1-2 kickers, you're probably going to miss out on this 20 point bonus every week. And since these kickers are only $3 to $4 each, you can load up cheaply, and easily outscore everyone by that said 20+ points per week. If you don't draft 15-16 kickers, you are doing yourself a disservice.'Leeroy Jenkins said:
butcher boy
Footballguy
I think he's talking about me and the team I posted on the last page. Of course, I've changed it extensively since posting that one.
northwoods
Footballguy
I think JDog is on to something here...I'm re-thinking my large roster bias and will probably opt for something around the mid-20's roster size this year.For example: You could select the top priced player from every category and only spend a little more than half your cap. I don't have last years page handy but i'm willing to guess that wasn't possible. A team with Rodgers at QB, Foster at RB, Megatron at WR, Graham at TE and Akers and the 49's D would be a beast IF it could make it to the finals. Tempting.Granted, you'd have to fill the rest of your roster with sub-$10 players which might be a fun exercise. Might just have to give that a try...'jdoggydogg said:
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
The more team iterations I submit, the more it becomes apparent that the major difference in this year's contest is large roster teams can still afford some big salary players.
So does this give even more advantage to large rosters? The main argument for smaller rosters was the ability to buy studs who, it was assumed, would give you a greater chance of winning the whole shebang if you made it to the top 250. Is some of this negated by the ability of larger rosters to purchase some of the same players?On the other hand, the smaller rosters idealists now will have more money to play with making them more likely to add 1 or 2 more players thus giving them a better chance to make that top 250. And the 18 man purists now will have a more studly lineup.
jdoggydogg
Footballguy
I would assume that lower player values would give the advantage to larger rosters, but I have no evidence to back that up.
butcher boy
Footballguy
It means you can have every kicker and still afford other high dollar players. 
thanks to everyone posting rosters and pointing out the hidden gems.
People if you're going to post your rosters, at least have the decency to black out your kicker selections.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Cutoff scores are going to be higher this year IMO -- maybe a lot higher.
JoePlumber
Footballguy
Is there a link to last years final standings & teams?
thanks,
J
thanks,
J
rustycolts
Footballguy
Thanks for that just changed my roster again for the umpteenth time.Left off Graham and Akers though.Love this thread look forward to it every year.Really enjoy reading the posts from Iggy,Quiz Guys and all the other regular posters.
Worm
slimy ninja
Where is Russell Wilson?
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
OK, I'm back for another year of this. Consider me a tentative convert to the big roster way of thinking, especially since it seems that I can afford some top-flight talent AND roster a big number. For the newbies, the proper way to fill your roster is to select the players who don't cost much but produce big numbers. It's really pretty simple.
My first stab, spending precious little time on it at this point. I haven't addressed my TE's appropriately at all. Need to spend a bit more money there methinks. Need to add 1 or 2 more PK and Def too. It's a starting point though.
QB -- 3 ($37)
RB -- 7 ($87)
WR -- 10 ($86)
TE -- 3 ($25)
PK -- 2 ($7)
Def -- 2 ($7)
My first stab, spending precious little time on it at this point. I haven't addressed my TE's appropriately at all. Need to spend a bit more money there methinks. Need to add 1 or 2 more PK and Def too. It's a starting point though.
QB -- 3 ($37)
RB -- 7 ($87)
WR -- 10 ($86)
TE -- 3 ($25)
PK -- 2 ($7)
Def -- 2 ($7)
Why do you think that?
rustycolts
Footballguy
I think the chances are better that they will be higher the reason being you can roster more top tier players on larger rosters.
That and the additional .5 ppr for RBs will drive it up
northwoods
Footballguy
Here is an example of what you could do this year re: having all of the top $$$ players on your roster...If a team like this did make the top 250, it would be a serious contender.Obviously you could mix and match the lower $$ players to your preferences. Your team has been successfully entered. QB - Aaron Rodgers - GB/10 - $31QB - Ryan Tannehill - MIA/7 - $4RB - Arian Foster - HOU/8 - $34RB - LeSean McCoy - PHI/7 - $32RB - Chris Wells - ARI/10 - $13RB - Evan Royster - WAS/10 - $3WR - Calvin Johnson - DET/5 - $29WR - Julio Jones - ATL/7 - $23WR - Reggie Wayne - IND/4 - $15WR - Jeremy Kerley - NYJ/9 - $3WR - Deion Branch - NE/9 - $3WR - Donald Driver - GB/10 - $2TE - Jimmy Graham - NO/6 - $29TE - Ben Watson - CLE/10 - $4TE - Evan Moore - CLE/10 - $3PK - David Akers - SF/9 - $6PK - Dan Carpenter - MIA/7 - $3PK - Shaun Suisham - PIT/4 - $3TD - San Francisco 49ers - SF/9 - $6TD - Oakland Raiders - OAK/5 - $4Total value: 250
northwoods
Footballguy
The beauty of a contest like this is that there is no blueprint for success.
Jed
Footballguy
Especially with the new salary direction and RB rule.
wollac
Footballguy
Will never work...not enough kickers...
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
Or enough QB, RB, WR, TE or Def. This is a boom or bust team. Even without injuries, this team has a slim chance of moving on. A down week from a couple of the studs and this team is out. If you have an injury or two, this teem has no chance.
Mr. Soup Nazi
Footballguy
And the fact that the majority of the rosters posted are jokes.
flc735
Footballguy
i disagree with this. i think the risk with this kind of team is less than what it would be with a deeper team. just because you have five $15 rb's doesn't mean 2 of them will have good weeks every timei am disappointed to see how similar your team is to mine. i have the same top 6 players as you do. i am even spending a lot on K's and a little on D's like you are. i'd bet we will see a lot of versions of this kind of team
wollac
Footballguy
Add about 12 more kickers, and MAYBE you stand a chance.
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
I agree that a roster full of $15 guys isn't going to get it done either. A bunch of $15 guys will you get you through a couple of injuries and/or bad performances though. In the end, I think going with a few studs (not as many as listed as this example), a few of the $15 dollar guys, and a few flyers is going to win it this year....not a team that has 20 total players filled with studs and flyers.
I wish the roster limit was larger. I could easily stretch this to 35, maybe 40. The concept of studs vs. $15 guys doesn't hold true in reality. If you want to win, you need to hit on quite a few players - be they studs, overlooked guys, or flyers. Personally, I'd love to have a roster full of Blounts, Vereens, Powells, and Roysters. Guys you have faith in the talent level but they just need the situation to fall in place late in the season...
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
I analyzed the drafting stats on the top 30 teams from 2011. There are a few differences in this contest from last year, so I don't know how much of this information is relevant. Average number of players on each team was lower than I thought it would be.
On average
QBs drafted: 2.3
Variance: 2-3
QB's $ spent: 44.9
Variance: 31-72
RBs drafted: 5.8
Variance: 3-10
RB's $ spent: 76.2
Variance: 47-102
WRs drafted: 7.1
Variance: 4-11
WR's $ spent: 81.0
Variance: 49-116
TEs drafted: 2.9
Variance: 2-5
TE's $ spent: 27.2
Variance: 16-44
Ks drafted: 2.8
Variance: 2-5
K's $ spent: 8.8
Variance: 6-15
DEFs drafted: 2.8
Variance: 2-4
DEF's $ spent: 11.8
Variance: 5-21
On average
QBs drafted: 2.3
Variance: 2-3
QB's $ spent: 44.9
Variance: 31-72
RBs drafted: 5.8
Variance: 3-10
RB's $ spent: 76.2
Variance: 47-102
WRs drafted: 7.1
Variance: 4-11
WR's $ spent: 81.0
Variance: 49-116
TEs drafted: 2.9
Variance: 2-5
TE's $ spent: 27.2
Variance: 16-44
Ks drafted: 2.8
Variance: 2-5
K's $ spent: 8.8
Variance: 6-15
DEFs drafted: 2.8
Variance: 2-4
DEF's $ spent: 11.8
Variance: 5-21
urbanhack
Fight The Power!
Kind of similar to the way I broke mine down except I think I spent a touch more for QB and a litte less at RB/WR. But my core team has pretty much settled and now it's just tinkering with the "lesser" players.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
flc735
Footballguy
and no backup? you might get away with it if you take stafford with his early bye week. if you want to do something like that, you may as well just spend $4 on tannehil
flc735
Footballguy
i dont know about that. the 4 guys you mentioned equals $30. why not get forte and benson instead? that combo will score more than the 4 you mentioned. the forte combo also has a higher floor since we know forte will always be a huge part of the gameplan. the risk with forte is injury. if he gets hurt, your screwed. the risk with those 4 guys is the chance you don't hit on any of them. if you dont hit on any, your screwed. if you hit on one, than you are even with the forte+benson combo. blount, vereen and powell will each require their other teams rb to get hurt in order for them to break out and even if that happens, they will still need to preform well. i think these low end guys are too expensive to be worth it. price wise, if you could get blount+vereen+williams+royster for $24, which equals fjax+benson then ya, i would agree with you. but thats not the case. you are giving up a top 5 runningback in order to get a bunch of guys in which you hope 1 will become the same kind of player that you gave up. why not just take the sure thing?this is true with just about every position. rodgers+tannehill will out score rg3+peyton. calvin+mike thomas will out score wallace and wayne. graham and bennet will out score pettigrew+finley and so on...you can say an all-stud team is screwed with 1 injury, which is true. but with 10,000 entrants, i think the same would apply to you. if ryan williams gets hurt, you will likely be out within the next few weeks. a team like yours needs to stay health AND needs to find a few breakout guys. a stud team only needs to stay healthy.for that reason, i don't think the injury argument is worth considering (outside of obvious injury risks like dmac and vick)the only position that i would recommend you grab a bunch of sleepers is at WR. thats because the WR position is the most volatile'FF Ninja said:
BassNBrew
Footballguy
A little disappointed with the contest this year, especially the pricing. I suspect we'll see more similiar teams than different teams this year with the new pricing. Studs are almost too affordable.
While I realize this contest is a ploy to motivate subsribers, I'd still love to see it 1) released later with more accurate pricing/players 2) or prices modified on a weekly basis, if you revised your roster you get the new pricing
While I realize this contest is a ploy to motivate subsribers, I'd still love to see it 1) released later with more accurate pricing/players 2) or prices modified on a weekly basis, if you revised your roster you get the new pricing
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
Every time I change my roster, I find myself getting a smaller roster with more studs. Started this process with 28 and now I'm down to 22.
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
the only position that i would recommend you grab a bunch of sleepers is at WR. thats because the WR position is the most volatile
I agree with you that WR is volatile...that's why I'm grabbing the studs from there. I'm trying to eliminate that. The place I'm looking for sleepers is with back up RBs. They are cheap and you can hit a home run if the starter gets hurt. Just as long as you can make it long enough in this contest to get there.
I agree with you that WR is volatile...that's why I'm grabbing the studs from there. I'm trying to eliminate that. The place I'm looking for sleepers is with back up RBs. They are cheap and you can hit a home run if the starter gets hurt. Just as long as you can make it long enough in this contest to get there.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Pretty much the same here. Started with 29 and am now down to around 22.You choose; Megatron or Holmes + Rice. Wouldn't surprise me if 75% of the rosters had Megatron. I remember in years gone by debating taking a stud v. three mid-tier players in this best ball format. That's not really an option this year.
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
I think the more realistic comparison is more like Megatron 29 or one of (J. Jones 23, Marshall 22, Cruz 22, or Green 22) and one of (Blackman 7, Wright 6, or Amendola 6) Could one of those 4 put up Megatron numbers? Yes...and you get a bonus guy.
HairySasquatch
Footballguy
Or would you rather have Rdgers 31 and Tannehill 4 or Ryan 19 and Cutler 17?
Similar threads
