What's new
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.

Requiring a Starting TE is Stoopid (1 Viewer)

drunken slob

Footballguy
Please tell me why any league would require a starting TE position. I'm not going to bash you either way. 

Just seeking justification for a lineup requirement for such a crappy position in today's magic football leagues. Maybe one of you smart guys can convince me otherwise. TIA   :banned:  

 
Please tell me why any league would require a starting TE position. I'm not going to bash you either way. 

Just seeking justification for a lineup requirement for such a crappy position in today's magic football leagues. Maybe one of you smart guys can convince me otherwise. TIA   :banned:  
Cause starting guys who don't score alot and block is fun bro

 
For the same reason you are required to start any position. What do you want free rein to start 9 QBs?

 
Please tell me why any league would require a starting TE position. I'm not going to bash you either way. 

Just seeking justification for a lineup requirement for such a crappy position in today's magic football leagues. Maybe one of you smart guys can convince me otherwise. TIA   :banned:  


Because it's a position whose job in part is to recieve the football, acquire yards, and score TDs when the opportunity arises?

You tell me.  It's got to be a trick question or a fishing expedition, right?

 
Because TEs are an intricate part of fantasy football and even though only about two seem to be relevant each week it takes a really smart owner to know which blah, blah, blah, blah....

I hate the position too.  I stressed over who to start all morning and just stuck with Clay after he laid a turd last week.  Luckily it paid off. 

 
The most valid argument is you're required because the NFL classifies them as a skill group so in turn fantasy does as well.  Unless you'd rather choose collectively the X team offense, and choose only IDP in a reverse type of league.  Don't blame the league you're in because you picked up or drafted a bad TE.  Everyone has their woes.  

 
I have been thinking the same thing about this TE position. You take your top 10 ranked TEs each week and 50% of them score 4 points or less. Some leagues have decided to forget about using kickers for that same kind of ridiculous inconsistency.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd rather just group them in with WRs since the only TEs that are fantasy relevant get used as WRs on their team most times.

 
I like it. Most people blow off the position during the draft and just don't realize how much an advantage you get by having a top TE.

 
Everyone is free to make whatever rules they like. In my league you get 20 points for standing for the national athem.  

 
I love the Hunter Henry line. In general I like having TEs but this year I started a new Ottoneu Dynasty League and bought Henry, thinking I'd struck Gold. Now I'm looking at 1-2 (guess which 2 weeks I'm losing?)

Just doesn't seem to be in the Gameplan!  :wall:

 
Nothing is stopping you from being creative with it either. If you wanted, you could double the points per reception or give points for TE targets. 

Most teams use one as a red zone receiver at least. They’re a TD dependent standard scoring position even in PPR except for a select few. I like them in there as all positions are volatile (Russell Wilson anyone? How many points did David Johnson score you guys who picked first?)

 
I've always thought of the ways you could incorporate punter points into leagues. Total yards? Net yards? Pins inside the 20, 10, 5? Lot of ways to get creative and add another element of strategy.
 We do.  They can score for anything any other player does (pass, run, fumble, tackle) but get most of their pts from punt yardage (.02 ppy) and 1 additional pt for each kick downed or tackled inside the 20.

.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is dumb, especially in standard.
Even in ppr--TE production from week to week is mainly td dependent.   I'm not a huge fan of the TE position in fantasy--but I am glad that it is a requirement.  It's basically a weekly wild card in head to head matchups.  Their production tends to be flukey and inconsistent from week to week--and predicting it is next to impossible.  It's just like blindly throwing a dart at a dartboard.  It adds both drama and frustration.  

 
Having to start a TE is practically the only possibility for position scarcity in fantasy football -it’s the one huge advantage fantasy baseball has over football. 

If you drop the TE, it’s a bunch of QBs that all score about the same amount of points and then just grabs RBs and WRs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
:no:  10 targets, 8 rec, 55 yds and a TD. Where do you get your news from? CNN?
Ended today = will not continue. I mean, he does get two more games against the Skins and Giants. So he’ll have two more good games, but that’s about it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd rather just group them in with WRs since the only TEs that are fantasy relevant get used as WRs on their team most times.
Exactly.

Most of the top "TE's" really play WR.

WR's and fantasy relevant TE's are the same so my league treats them as such.

 
Ended today = will not continue. I mean, he does get two more games against the Skins and Giants. So he’ll have two more good games, but that’s about it. 
Ok, I'll make note that you are Nostradamus and not to argue with you on the basis of logic and reason. Or, in fantasy football terms, opportunity, pedigree, talent, extrapolation of 16 games in 2016 and target share in the current offense.

 
Ended today = will not continue. I mean, he does get two more games against the Skins and Giants. So he’ll have two more good games, but that’s about it. 
Because that Skins D looked so bad tonight against the Raiders.

 
Please tell me why any league would require a starting TE position. I'm not going to bash you either way. 

Just seeking justification for a lineup requirement for such a crappy position in today's magic football leagues. Maybe one of you smart guys can convince me otherwise. TIA   :banned:  
Same reason a league might require 2 RB or start more than 5 non QBs. 

 
I've always thought of the ways you could incorporate punter points into leagues. Total yards? Net yards? Pins inside the 20, 10, 5? Lot of ways to get creative and add another element of strategy.
I don't care about yards so much but when you pin your opponent inside the 10 or 5 yard line.... or on the 1 for that matter, those are big plays. I would have no problem having the position of punter and participate in leagues now that use the punter.

 
Exactly.

Most of the top "TE's" really play WR.

WR's and fantasy relevant TE's are the same so my league treats them as such.
There are also RB's in the NFL that have very little to do with running the football. Should they be listed with the WR/TE position as well?

 
Ended today = will not continue. I mean, he does get two more games against the Skins and Giants. So he’ll have two more good games, but that’s about it. 
You realize he's had 5 rec or more in 9 of the past 12 games, right? In those 12 games he has 114 targets for 84/911/5 (7/76/0.4 per game). Kelce finished TE1 last year with 117 targets for 85/1125/4 over 16 games (5.3/70/0.25). 

The Wentz-Ertz connection is real.

 
BoltBacker said:
There are also RB's in the NFL that have very little to do with running the football. Should they be listed with the WR/TE position as well?
Do they line up at WR the vast majority of the time like the top "TE's" do?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top