Does It Take A Tight End To Tango? (1 Viewer)

[Jersey35]

Despite the title, I've got a serious question here.

My dynasty league is considering implementing a flex position this offseason. Our current roster requirements are as follows:

1QB | 2RB | 2WR | 1TE | 1PK | 1DT

As commissioner, I've been trying to come up with the best option(s) for the league to vote on. One of my goals during this process was to NOT eliminate the required TE. My rationale for this is that removing a required position altogether can eliminate a great deal of the strategy involved in drafting and building a team - it's one less "factor" that you need to worry about.

However, as I'm going through all of this, I start thinking that maybe a flex TE can actually *add* some strategy, as an individual might find it easier to obtain an elite TE or two and dominate that way. A Gates/Witten combo would be pretty formidable. In addition, from a realism standpoint, allowing a team to start 1RB | 4WR or 2RB | 3WR are legitimate options in the NFL, and since I do think realism is an important consideration, this is a compelling argument.

Essentially, I'm now considering one of these two options:

1RB | 1WR | 1TE | 1RB/WR/TE | 1WR/TE (required TE)

1RB | 1WR | 1RB/WR/TE | 2WR/TE (no TE required)

I'm curious what those of you who play or have played in a league without a required TE think of it and whether having no required TE adds to the fun and strategy of the league. I'd also be curious if anyone has used or recommends some unique rules in this circumstance - such as giving TE's slightly different scoring than WR's to even them out, etc.

 

[Modog814]

I play in a league with your first option although I can tell you I don't think I've ever seen someone start 2 TE's. You might need to up the TE specific scoring to get someone to do it (unless they as you mentioned happen to land a two of Gates/Witten/Winslow type players).

This wasn't a dynasty so maybe it might occur more in that type of league.

I think without requiring a TE you'll end up with the majority (maybe half?) of teams just not starting one. Unless you had a top one I'd imagine someone would prefer going with 2 RB, 3 WR set. In most cases a lower end TE1 probably doesn't have as much upside as some teams WR3.

I like the required TE. And I like the optional start 2 TE set as it adds strategy as well as increase the trading in your league (a 2nd good Te is not useless any more to a person who has Gates).

 

[Jersey35]

I think without requiring a TE you'll end up with the majority (maybe half?) of teams just not starting one. Unless you had a top one I'd imagine someone would prefer going with 2 RB, 3 WR set. In most cases a lower end TE1 probably doesn't have as much upside as some teams WR3.

Agree 100% on this, and it's one of the biggest reasons I'm hesitant to remove the required TE. However, with this being the case, it's possible that the value of TE's would possibly decrease to a point where an individual *could* grab themselves more than one very talented TE and use them to great success. At one point in this past season, I had both Gonzo and Shockey on my team (not to mention Scheffler and Owen Daniels). While Shockey had a down year, it shows that it's not inconceivable that an owner *could* accumulate 2 solid TE's and use them to good effect in a league where no TE was required. Which could ultimately ADD to the fun and strategy... which is really the whole point.

 

[comfortably numb]

Play in 3 leagues with

TE/RB flex

1RB

2TE

2RB

1TE

3WR always

Love it.

 

[Jersey35]

Play in 3 leagues withTE/RB flex1RB2TE2RB1TE3WR alwaysLove it.

So no required TE? Does anyone ever start 2TE in this league? I would think it would be difficult to justify starting a 2nd TE over a 2nd RB.

 

[comfortably numb]

Play in 3 leagues with

TE/RB flex

1RB

2TE

2RB

1TE

3WR always

Love it.

So no required TE? Does anyone ever start 2TE in this league? I would think it would be difficult to justify starting a 2nd TE over a 2nd RB.

TE required (1 at least)Many people do 2TE set.

I had Heap and Gonzo at 1 point, another owner does Gates/Vernon and so forth.

Red Dog

Above is the site, check the scoring.

TE is very valuable.

I didn't think I would like this, but the scoring systems finds a great way to even out the talent, now I love it.

 

[Jersey35]

Play in 3 leagues with

TE/RB flex

1RB

2TE

2RB

1TE

3WR always

Love it.

So no required TE? Does anyone ever start 2TE in this league? I would think it would be difficult to justify starting a 2nd TE over a 2nd RB.

TE required (1 at least)Many people do 2TE set.

I had Heap and Gonzo at 1 point, another owner does Gates/Vernon and so forth.

Red Dog

Above is the site, check the scoring.

TE is very valuable.

I didn't think I would like this, but the scoring systems finds a great way to even out the talent, now I love it.

Interesting. Thanks for the valuable information. Worth noting that receptions are worth 1.5 for TE's and only .5 for RB's. Also interesting to note that there are as many TE's (2) in your top 10 overall as RB's.It's more like my first option (with RB/TE flex replacing WR/TE flex). Any idea what the rationale was for setting up the flex that way - why flex the RB with the TE instead of the more commonly used WR/TE flex?

 

[comfortably numb]

Play in 3 leagues with

TE/RB flex

1RB

2TE

2RB

1TE

3WR always

Love it.

So no required TE? Does anyone ever start 2TE in this league? I would think it would be difficult to justify starting a 2nd TE over a 2nd RB.

TE required (1 at least)Many people do 2TE set.

I had Heap and Gonzo at 1 point, another owner does Gates/Vernon and so forth.

Red Dog

Above is the site, check the scoring.

TE is very valuable.

I didn't think I would like this, but the scoring systems finds a great way to even out the talent, now I love it.

Interesting. Thanks for the valuable information. Worth noting that receptions are worth 1.5 for TE's and only .5 for RB's. Also interesting to note that there are as many TE's (2) in your top 10 overall as RB's.It's more like my first option (with RB/TE flex replacing WR/TE flex). Any idea what the rationale was for setting up the flex that way - why flex the RB with the TE instead of the more commonly used WR/TE flex?

I didn't make the scoring rules, but i think the common thought was to devalue the RB and bring more value to the TE, thus making TE/RB/WR as close as possible.

 

[Jersey35]

I didn't make the scoring rules, but i think the common thought was to devalue the RB and bring more value to the TE, thus making TE/RB/WR as close as possible.

Yea, this explains the scoring system - but does it really explain why the choice was made to flex the RB/TE rather than WR/TE? It just seems an odd decision, that's all.

 

[QuizGuy66]

i like required TE - it involves more stragery (even though I took Gates over ADP at 4.01)

I actually ran a 3 TE lineup (Clark and Gates were two of 'em) at one point this year but that didn't go so well

-QG

 

[anakin]

I play in a dynasty league that has the following starting requirements: 1 qb 1 rb 2 wr 1 te and 2 flex (rb/wr/te).

I own Winslow/Cooley/Z Miller and I always started at least 2 tes. The scoring helped as tes get 1.5 ppr and bonus pts at 75 yards and 5 recepts.

 

[Pictus Cat]

Last year I was in a league with starting requirements

QB

RB

WR

WR

WR/RB

WR/TE

TE

I had Gates/Heap/Witten. The draft strategy was interesting.

Every time an available TE fell to near the same expectations I had for an available WR, I took the TE.

It was fun watching teams scramble for TE all year.

Depending on matchups, a few teams started two TE vs a WR3.

Everyone pretty much went 2 RBs.

Hope that helps. It was a fun league.