2 QB start league (1 Viewer)

[gbill2004]

My 12 team league is drafting today, not sure where I'm drafting yet.. We start 2 QB, 2 RB, 4 WR, and 2 TE. We get 6 pts for all TDs (QBs, WR, and RB), 1 pt for every 10 receiving and rushing yards, and 1 pt for every 25 passing yards.

Some say that in a start 2 QB league, you have to draft QBs earlier. Your thoughts on this theory, and can someone explain why this is a good strategy?

 

[Jello_Biafra]

My 12 team league is drafting today, not sure where I'm drafting yet.. We start 2 QB, 2 RB, 4 WR, and 2 TE. We get 6 pts for all TDs (QBs, WR, and RB), 1 pt for every 10 receiving and rushing yards, and 1 pt for every 25 passing yards. Some say that in a start 2 QB league, you have to draft QBs earlier. Your thoughts on this theory, and can someone explain why this is a good strategy?

The first time I drafted in a start 2 QB league, I couldn't believe all the value available at RB and couldn't help myself but to draft RB heavy early on. What a disaster that turned out to be as not only did injuries kill me, but the QBs got scooped up so fast, I was left with mediocre QBs. The next year I drafted 2 QBs in the 1st 4 rounds and made the finals. You have to treat QBs as if they were RBs and draft them early and often. The trade value of QBs goes through the roof when a couple go down.

 

[gbill2004]

My 12 team league is drafting today, not sure where I'm drafting yet.. We start 2 QB, 2 RB, 4 WR, and 2 TE. We get 6 pts for all TDs (QBs, WR, and RB), 1 pt for every 10 receiving and rushing yards, and 1 pt for every 25 passing yards. Some say that in a start 2 QB league, you have to draft QBs earlier. Your thoughts on this theory, and can someone explain why this is a good strategy?

The first time I drafted in a start 2 QB league, I couldn't believe all the value available at RB and couldn't help myself but to draft RB heavy early on. What a disaster that turned out to be as not only did injuries kill me, but the QBs got scooped up so fast, I was left with mediocre QBs. The next year I drafted 2 QBs in the 1st 4 rounds and made the finals. You have to treat QBs as if they were RBs and draft them early and often. The trade value of QBs goes through the roof when a couple go down.

Yes, but with the RBBC now becomming more common, does this not give more value to RBs in good situations (i.e. non RBBC situations)??

 

[Keys Myaths]

Yes, but with the RBBC now becomming more common,

I need a standard reply to this.Just suffice it to say, many, many studies have been done on this board about this, and it's never, ever true. It's only true in the preseason because we hear coachspeak all the time. We thought it last year--Betts and Portis, Peterson and Taylor, etc.Most of the time, the RB1 gets 65-75% of the carries, and the rest go to the backups. It actually gets less common each year to have RBBC. MJD and Fred Taylor are really the poster child right now, and that's such a special, special situation (which honestly, I think ends this year and MJD is terribly underrated).The problem is, coaches spew RBBC in the preseason, and how the backup is going to get so many carries, etc. Go look at last year's threads on the same topic. You'll hear it replayed over and over and over again.When the chips are down, coaches go with their best backs. Period.ETA: By the looks of your sig, QBs aren't the value. The elite TEs are. You start two? I'd LOVE to be in that draft and go TE/TE on the 3rd/4th round turn with Witten and Winslow. Talk about value. That would be a fun league--great setup.

 

[southeastjerome]

My 12 team league is drafting today, not sure where I'm drafting yet.. We start 2 QB, 2 RB, 4 WR, and 2 TE. We get 6 pts for all TDs (QBs, WR, and RB), 1 pt for every 10 receiving and rushing yards, and 1 pt for every 25 passing yards. Some say that in a start 2 QB league, you have to draft QBs earlier. Your thoughts on this theory, and can someone explain why this is a good strategy?

In my 2 QB league qb's usually go early and often. Usually about 4-6 QB's go in the top 25. I still don't think its worth it to use a 1st rounder on a QB unless its Brady. The most important thing is to try to get a guy who is durable. They are all that much more valuable in 2 QB leagues. With all the guys who go down, you don't want to depend on your waiver wire to secure backups. Guys like Peyton, Brady, Favre and even a guy like Eli all get a bump in value in my book

 

[Keys Myaths]

My 12 team league is drafting today, not sure where I'm drafting yet.. We start 2 QB, 2 RB, 4 WR, and 2 TE. We get 6 pts for all TDs (QBs, WR, and RB), 1 pt for every 10 receiving and rushing yards, and 1 pt for every 25 passing yards. Some say that in a start 2 QB league, you have to draft QBs earlier. Your thoughts on this theory, and can someone explain why this is a good strategy?

In my 2 QB league qb's usually go early and often. Usually about 4-6 QB's go in the top 25. I still don't think its worth it to use a 1st rounder on a QB unless its Brady. The most important thing is to try to get a guy who is durable. They are all that much more valuable in 2 QB leagues. With all the guys who go down, you don't want to depend on your waiver wire to secure backups. Guys like Peyton, Brady, Favre and even a guy like Eli all get a bump in value in my book

A very interesting way to look at this.

 

[jonboltz]

I played in 2 QB dynasty leagues for 5-6 years. But in these leagues, QBs only got 4pts per TD.

In this format, I could see the top 3-4 QBs all be gone by the 15th pick, and without this league being PPR I would have no problem taking Brady in the top 3; Peyton/Romo/Brees in the first. I would definitely like to have my QB2 be ranked in the 10-12 range as well.

 

[burd]

i think a "safe" thing to do is to come out of round 4 with 2QBs and 2RBs .. any combo.

at the very least, you should want to use either your 1st or 2nd pick on a QB and hope that you can find someone servicable a few rounds later. A lot of people in 2QB leagues underestimate the importance ... and scarcity of a good QB.

 

[Festivus]

"Yes, but with the RBBC now becomming more common, does this not give more value to RBs in good situations (i.e. non RBBC situations)??"

I've played in a 2 QB league for years and I've come to the conclusion that RBBC situations actually make QBs more valuable relative to RB.

Think of it this way.

When all 32 starting QBs are drafted (and they will be), you are left with backups that don't play barring injury.

When all 32 starting RBs are gone, you still have a bunch of 3rd down, goal line, and change of pace RBs who will score some points each week.

I feel that the fact that QBs don't share snaps (barring injury) makes them more scarce than RBs. Depending on draft position, I would not shy away from going QB/QB any more than going RB/RB.

 

[Bl Deep]

"Yes, but with the RBBC now becomming more common, does this not give more value to RBs in good situations (i.e. non RBBC situations)??"I've played in a 2 QB league for years and I've come to the conclusion that RBBC situations actually make QBs more valuable relative to RB. Think of it this way. When all 32 starting QBs are drafted (and they will be), you are left with backups that don't play barring injury.When all 32 starting RBs are gone, you still have a bunch of 3rd down, goal line, and change of pace RBs who will score some points each week.I feel that the fact that QBs don't share snaps (barring injury) makes them more scarce than RBs. Depending on draft position, I would not shy away from going QB/QB any more than going RB/RB.

This is true, and not true.... Scarcity wise, they are similar to RB's, but instead of figuring out where on the RBBC spectrum middle to late starting RBs fall, you can lock up the backup QB and be guaranteed to have the starter... That devalues them to RBs in a way... If the league is >10teams w/start 2QB it is a COMPLETELY different story, my thoughts are for a 10 teamer which i have participated in for 8+ years in a serious league...Usually see top 3 QBs gone by middle rd 2... with a giant run in rd 4-5. ...plan accordingly. its funny that as years go by, and people get more knowledgable concerning meshing their generic cheatsheet recommendations to the nuances of the scoring system, that QBs go earlier and earlier.

 

[Chaka]

Yes, have some.

 

[Festivus]

"Yes, but with the RBBC now becomming more common, does this not give more value to RBs in good situations (i.e. non RBBC situations)??"I've played in a 2 QB league for years and I've come to the conclusion that RBBC situations actually make QBs more valuable relative to RB. Think of it this way. When all 32 starting QBs are drafted (and they will be), you are left with backups that don't play barring injury.When all 32 starting RBs are gone, you still have a bunch of 3rd down, goal line, and change of pace RBs who will score some points each week.I feel that the fact that QBs don't share snaps (barring injury) makes them more scarce than RBs. Depending on draft position, I would not shy away from going QB/QB any more than going RB/RB.

This is true, and not true.... Scarcity wise, they are similar to RB's, but instead of figuring out where on the RBBC spectrum middle to late starting RBs fall, you can lock up the backup QB and be guaranteed to have the starter... That devalues them to RBs in a way... If the league is >10teams w/start 2QB it is a COMPLETELY different story, my thoughts are for a 10 teamer which i have participated in for 8+ years in a serious league...Usually see top 3 QBs gone by middle rd 2... with a giant run in rd 4-5. ...plan accordingly. its funny that as years go by, and people get more knowledgable concerning meshing their generic cheatsheet recommendations to the nuances of the scoring system, that QBs go earlier and earlier.

I think the dynamic would be a lot different (as you describe) in a 10 teamer. We have between 12-14 teams depending on the season, and the rosters are too small for many handcuffs. Last year, 14 QBs were gone in the the first three rounds...