Are 2 RBs still the best lineup? (1 Viewer)

[King of the Wolfies]

Seems like more and more teams are using goalline RBs or just passing it into the end zone. So except for a few elite backs, RBs seem to me to be just as inconsistent as WR but more and more WRs are putting up huge numbers. Is the day of must start 2 RB over? The rest of the way I'll be using Chester, and juggling CJ, Chambers, Evans, Caldwell and Colston. Figure its worth the try once I lost Portis.

 

[nightshift]

Not only that, but RBs tend to get more dinged up during the season than other positions. In a new dynasty league, we went to a 1 RB, 1 WR, 1 TE, 3 flex (RB, WR, or TE) format. It allows teams to be competitive even when injuries occur or players are not producing up to expected levels.

Provided that team owners staff their team right, of course.

 

[The Funk Bud]

Seems like more and more teams are using goalline RBs or just passing it into the end zone. So except for a few elite backs, RBs seem to me to be just as inconsistent as WR but more and more WRs are putting up huge numbers. Is the day of must start 2 RB over? The rest of the way I'll be using Chester, and juggling CJ, Chambers, Evans, Caldwell and Colston. Figure its worth the try once I lost Portis.

Everyone's situation is different, but in general, starting two RBs is still the correct call. For example, let's assume you're in a 10-team league where the talent is split up equally such that each team has:1 top 10 RB1 top 20 RB1 top 10 WR1 top 20 WR1 top 30 WRStarting three WRs would mean you're using a top 30 WR instead of a top 20 RB. In my league, the avg. points scored by RBs 11-20 is 11.1 pts/wk. The avg. points scored by WRs 21-30 is 7.8 pts/week. So, on average, you're leaving 3.3 points on your bench each week.That said, each league isn't divided equally so YMMV. If you've got three stud WRs and a weak RB2, then go three-wide.