-jb-
Footballguy
I'm in a start-up dynasty league, drafting tomorrow, with the following scoring system:
QB
1point every 25 yards throwing
1 point every 10 yards rushing
RB
2 points every 25 yards rushing
3 points every 25 yards receiving
WR/TE
2 points every 25 yards receiving
3 points every 10 yards rushing
ALL TDs
1-9 yards 6 points
10-40 yards 9 points
41 up 12 points
I'm sitting in the third slot, staring at Shaun Alexander...and his birthday. Given the implications of this particular scoring system, along with the longevity of QBs vs. RBs and WRs, I'm real tempted to draft Peyton and lock down my QB situation for the next 4-6 years. I could then make a run at guys like DeAngelo, Maroney, etc. Since guys like Dillon could be had on the cheap, I could easily grab the "inverted" handcuff for the younger guys. This may not make for an optimum 2006, but I can't see how it wouldn't give me a heck of a foundation for years immediately following.
Can someone tell me if this concept is mad, or does it have some merit?
QB
1point every 25 yards throwing
1 point every 10 yards rushing
RB
2 points every 25 yards rushing
3 points every 25 yards receiving
WR/TE
2 points every 25 yards receiving
3 points every 10 yards rushing
ALL TDs
1-9 yards 6 points
10-40 yards 9 points
41 up 12 points
I'm sitting in the third slot, staring at Shaun Alexander...and his birthday. Given the implications of this particular scoring system, along with the longevity of QBs vs. RBs and WRs, I'm real tempted to draft Peyton and lock down my QB situation for the next 4-6 years. I could then make a run at guys like DeAngelo, Maroney, etc. Since guys like Dillon could be had on the cheap, I could easily grab the "inverted" handcuff for the younger guys. This may not make for an optimum 2006, but I can't see how it wouldn't give me a heck of a foundation for years immediately following.
Can someone tell me if this concept is mad, or does it have some merit?
Last edited by a moderator: