Over the years do you feel the stance on having an elite QB has changed? (1 Viewer)

[Savatage79]

So as a long time player i always find it interesting the trends that shape fantasy and I think one of the most interesting has been the need for elite QBs as opposed to waiting and getting your mid to later round QBs and stacking up on talent early.

Personally I'd say most of my championships had an elite QB but I spent many years stacking RB/WR early and I absolutely get the strategies behind it.

However with the likes of Hurts, allen, mahomes etc... It seems to kick it up a notch, and my question is how do most still feel about waiting or are you into these types of elites earlier than in years past?

 

[zed2283]

I think the times I've waited to take a QB I usually have regretted it. It's worth a lot to have someone you can count on week in and week out, regardless of position. It seems like RB strategies can quickly unravel due to injury. I don't think I'll let any of those 3 past the 3rd if they're there.

 

[Savatage79]

I think the times I've waited to take a QB I usually have regretted it. It's worth a lot to have someone you can count on week in and week out, regardless of position. It seems like RB strategies can quickly unravel due to injury. I don't think I'll let any of those 3 past the 3rd if they're there.

Yea Im sorta in same boat. I always felt that tbh and was a guy that went after manning, Brees, etc back in the day because those b and c tier QBs I felt always had one or two blow up games that inflated their end season point percentage when the elites are going to steadily average week to week that constant 25 to 30 points and have the monster games sprinkled in as well.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I was always a "wait on QB" guy even when my redraft went from 12 to 14 teams. A lot of times that lead to a md-season trade for a QB. Last year, the second year we went to 14, I still planned to wait on QB but when Mahomes was still there for my early third round pick and I wasn't terribly excited by the players left I grabbed him - and led my league in scoring all season (not just because of Mahomes of course, but he sure helped).

This season I'm still thinking to wait - but maybe not as late as usual and I'll grab a guy like Burrow or Jackson in round 5 or 6 after Mahomes, Allen and Hurts are off the board.

 

[sheerterror]

So as a long time player i always find it interesting the trends that shape fantasy and I think one of the most interesting has been the need for elite QBs as opposed to waiting and getting your mid to later round QBs and stacking up on talent early.

Personally I'd say most of my championships had an elite QB but I spent many years stacking RB/WR early and I absolutely get the strategies behind it.

However with the likes of Hurts, allen, mahomes etc... It seems to kick it up a notch, and my question is how do most still feel about waiting or are you into these types of elites earlier than in years past?

In my 2 long term dynasties, I never won jack until I traded for Mahomes during his rookie year in 1, and drafted Burrow at 1.8 (start 1qb) in the other. 4 total championships since then.

 

[zed2283]

So as a long time player i always find it interesting the trends that shape fantasy and I think one of the most interesting has been the need for elite QBs as opposed to waiting and getting your mid to later round QBs and stacking up on talent early.

Personally I'd say most of my championships had an elite QB but I spent many years stacking RB/WR early and I absolutely get the strategies behind it.

However with the likes of Hurts, allen, mahomes etc... It seems to kick it up a notch, and my question is how do most still feel about waiting or are you into these types of elites earlier than in years past?

In my 2 long term dynasties, I never won jack until I traded for Mahomes during his rookie year in 1, and drafted Burrow at 1.8 (start 1qb) in the other. 4 total championships since then.

I don't think there's any question that it's worth it in dynasty leagues. The most successful team in my 25-year old dynasty league went from Peyton Manning to Mahomes. His only down years were in between the two.

 

[TVT 0 N S T A]

The largest change is the per game margin between Elite Level Fantasy QB's and the field from 2022 to 10 years ago.

If you just look back 10 years ago, the per game margin between tiers was like 3 points and now it is nearly 10 points for the top 3 or 4 guys. That is a pretty large drop-off. When considering the scarcity of elite RB play, it's pretty easy to understand some of those midlevel talent RB's have now taken a backseat to Elite QB's. You have TE's creeping into the early rounds too. In the 3rd or 4th round are you facing a decision between Pat Mahomes or Devonta Smith - but you could very well find Devonta Smith numbers out of a rookie or 2nd year receiver, so you chase the numbers.

 

[Savatage79]

The largest change is the per game margin between Elite Level Fantasy QB's and the field from 2022 to 10 years ago.

If you just look back 10 years ago, the per game margin between tiers was like 3 points and now it is nearly 10 points for the top 3 or 4 guys. That is a pretty large drop-off. When considering the scarcity of elite RB play, it's pretty easy to understand some of those midlevel talent RB's have now taken a backseat to Elite QB's. You have TE's creeping into the early rounds too. In the 3rd or 4th round are you facing a decision between Pat Mahomes or Devonta Smith - but you could very well find Devonta Smith numbers out of a rookie or 2nd year receiver, so you chase the numbers.

Yea I also think something that has to be said about all them and I mean current and years last, mahomes, Brady, Brees, manning, Rodgers, allen etc... They have such little missed time. I mean that for me was always the biggest sell is not only are they more consistent pointwise but they were the most healthy players on any team.

 

[travdogg]

This isn't really a strategy per se, but I have always felt like its never a good idea to be the 1st person to take a QB, but its just as bad to be the last. Looking at my 3 redraft teams last year, I had Josh Allen (2nd QB taken) Kyler Murray (6th QB taken) and Jalen Hurts (5th QB taken) so it panned out pretty well, and even the Murray team, I had backed him up with Fields, and picked up Geno a couple weeks in.

I've found myself taking QB in mocks around round 4-6, with the one actual league I picked in so far getting Lamar Jackson whom I've very high on this season.

ETA: In dynasty leagues I think QB is a much bigger asset than redraft.

 

[Sweet Love]

25+ year player, and you are right, the pendulum is swinging. I used to giggle to myself at drafts as I waited until the 13th-15th rounds to take my QB, and for over a decade, it worked. However, this past year it came clear to me. In my most competitive league, I drafted poorly, lost Breece Hall and another early RB, had an underperforming TE and decent WRs - but man, Joe Burrow was automatic. I "reached" in my mind and got him in the the 8th. And that was hard for me. But going forward, I have no qualms of taking a low-hanging QB early.

 

[TVT 0 N S T A]

The largest change is the per game margin between Elite Level Fantasy QB's and the field from 2022 to 10 years ago.

If you just look back 10 years ago, the per game margin between tiers was like 3 points and now it is nearly 10 points for the top 3 or 4 guys. That is a pretty large drop-off. When considering the scarcity of elite RB play, it's pretty easy to understand some of those midlevel talent RB's have now taken a backseat to Elite QB's. You have TE's creeping into the early rounds too. In the 3rd or 4th round are you facing a decision between Pat Mahomes or Devonta Smith - but you could very well find Devonta Smith numbers out of a rookie or 2nd year receiver, so you chase the numbers.

Yea I also think something that has to be said about all them and I mean current and years last, mahomes, Brady, Brees, manning, Rodgers, allen etc... They have such little missed time. I mean that for me was always the biggest sell is not only are they more consistent pointwise but they were the most healthy players on any team.

That's true... if you take a middling QB in round 7-9, it's safe to assume you're taking another one in rounds 9-11. Whereas you pick the top 4 and have a greater chance of grabbing rookies or flyer 2nd round picks.

Rookie players used to have a more difficult time breaking through in Year 1 but that has definitely changed in recent years.

 

[-OZ-]

I’d prefer to take one solid QB I can count on to be a low QB1 and a QB who has the upside to be a top QB.
Unless I’m misremembering, hurts wasn’t taken super high on average last year. But he had significant upside. If you paired him with a guy like Brady you did quite well.
Fields as the 7th QB has top 3 upside and risk. Richardson is probably taken too high for a rookie but he’s one of the few outside the top 12 with top 5 upside. maybe Dak, Love and Tua have similar upside. Pairing them with a player like Trevor or cousins might be a great move.

In my two leagues last year, both dynasty, the champ in the 32 team league (players available twice) had Burrow. The champ in my super flex started Brady and Tannehill most of the year - Brady and Mike white in the SB (was loaded at RB). But not having stud QBs definitely made it more challenging.

 

[Chaka]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

 

[DeaLerZ]

All the years that I have won championships I have always had a top 3 QB. It’s so important to Atleast get 20 pts a week from that spot with an upside to get over 30 any given week. I think consensus is finally catching on.

The only outlier was last year when I won with Geno Smith and had a very well balanced roster ..

All other championships were Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Michael Vick, Matt Ryan (completion league, he was #1 that year), Cam Newton

with that being said I am targeting Hurts/Fields this year in auction. Fields more likely will be the guy I take paired with DJ Moore as they both have very good values currently and I think they will outperform. I view Fields as having the potential to be the top QB this year based on his numbers from last year, and improved offense. I view DJ Moore as this year's AJ Brown type potential. Jalen Hurts was my guy last year as I felt having AJ Brown would vault him into that top echelon, and that you could get him at a great price.

 

[Insein]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

12 teams or more is too many for 2qb leagues. I know people do superflex but the competitive balance is disrupted to me when some teams can have multiple QBs and others just don't have that option.

 

[LionOfGosforth]

I draft in a 10-teamer and it has always been a league where the top QBs get drafted early, and I mean really early. Last year, Allen and Mahomes went in the second. I got extremely lucky in waiting and got Hurts in the 6th as the last QB drafted, people took the likes of Wilson and Rodgers before him. I screwed up really, but got lucky. Point being, you need to know your league's tendencies more than anything. Trends come and go but that's one thing that's a constant in mine anyway.

 

[jm192]

No hard stance on it.

I'll take Mahommes/Allen/Hurts in the 3rd if things fall the rigiht way.
I'll wait and take someone of Burrow/Lamar/Herbert/Fields/Lawrence if the first 3 go too quickly.

I've had best ball drafts where the 2nd group gets gobbled up too quickly and I wind up with some combination of Tua/Daniel Jones/Kirk Cousins.

 

[fightingillini]

I play in Superflex leagues, so top QBs go in round 1.

And I have won Superflex leagues with a stud QB and without a stud QB. But it's hard to win without at least good QB play.

In start 1 QB leagues, I can see having the stud QB. There aren't as many bellcow RBs to why take a marginal RB when you can get the elite QB. Also, getting an elite QB frees up draft capital since you don't have to take a backup QB, or you just take a backup really late.

 

[travdogg]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

If the goal is to attempt to emulate real football, we should be playing in 1RB leagues.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I’d prefer to take one solid QB I can count on to be a low QB1 and a QB who has the upside to be a top QB.
Unless I’m misremembering, hurts wasn’t taken super high on average last year. But he had significant upside. If you paired him with a guy like Brady you did quite well.
Fields as the 7th QB has top 3 upside and risk. Richardson is probably taken too high for a rookie but he’s one of the few outside the top 12 with top 5 upside. maybe Dak, Love and Tua have similar upside. Pairing them with a player like Trevor or cousins might be a great move.

In my two leagues last year, both dynasty, the champ in the 32 team league (players available twice) had Burrow. The champ in my super flex started Brady and Tannehill most of the year - Brady and Mike white in the SB (was loaded at RB). But not having stud QBs definitely made it more challenging.

I think the downside of that is that you’re now taking your #2 QB with a lot more draft capital than someone taking a top 3 QB higher who likely will then wait. And yes, the guy who took a top 3 QB obviously used way more draft capital to take their #1 QB, but with your 2 QBs, one of them is guaranteed to not be playing each week and is a complete zero.

That’s opposed to taking a #3 RB or #3/4 earlier because you maybe waited to take a #1 at that position and want to take a RB/WR with upside earlier. A backup RB/WR on your roster taken for upside has a much higher chance of actually playing because there are more starting spots that they can fill each week. The chance of 1 of 2 guys getting injured and slotting in the #3 guy in your roster is higher than one specific QB getting injured. The chance of a #3 RB outperforming either one of two starting RBs is higher than if there was just one.

I’m not sure if any of that makes sense, but it does in my head.

 

[Ilov80s]

Not really, I’m still approaching QB the same. I try to ID the top 3 or so tiers and find who of them can I get the latest and shoot for that. I’ve had a lot of success platooning 2 guys based on matchup or finding guys who outperform a little later.

 

[Tivoli]

So as a long time player i always find it interesting the trends that shape fantasy and I think one of the most interesting has been the need for elite QBs as opposed to waiting and getting your mid to later round QBs and stacking up on talent early.

Personally I'd say most of my championships had an elite QB but I spent many years stacking RB/WR early and I absolutely get the strategies behind it.

However with the likes of Hurts, allen, mahomes etc... It seems to kick it up a notch, and my question is how do most still feel about waiting or are you into these types of elites earlier than in years past?

These elite QBs are offering 400 fantasy points for the year. Its really hard to turn that down. Ironically, Jalen Hurts got injured down the stretch last year and because of that, I won my league against my opponent.

 

[Chaka]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

12 teams or more is too many for 2qb leagues. I know people do superflex but the competitive balance is disrupted to me when some teams can have multiple QBs and others just don't have that option.

I get it but that seems more like a scoring problem than a scarcity problem. In any league, 1QB, 2QB, SF, IDP, etc if a particular position has a scoring imbalance that favors them you simply modify the scoring to correct the imbalance. Many people feel PPR creates an unfair advantage to 3 down RBs like McCaffrey so those leagues modified scoring to 1/2 PPR for the RB position.

It's no different with SF & 2QB leagues (btw I am not big on mandatory 2QB leagues with over 10 teams), if your scoring gives the teams that choose to draft QBs early a competitive advantage then modify the QB scoring to create a system that doesn't favor that strategy.

Most standard leagues offer 1 point per 10 yards rush/rec and 1 point per 20 yards passing. So, for example, change it to 1 point per 40 yards passing (we do 1 per 15 rush/rec and 1 per 50 yards passing).

But, yes, you most likely cannot switch from a 1QB league to a SF league without modifying scoring in some way.

 

[Chaka]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

If the goal is to attempt to emulate real football, we should be playing in 1RB leagues.

And you should have 32 teams with full IDP etc.

 

[Insein]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

12 teams or more is too many for 2qb leagues. I know people do superflex but the competitive balance is disrupted to me when some teams can have multiple QBs and others just don't have that option.

I get it but that seems more like a scoring problem than a scarcity problem. In any league, 1QB, 2QB, SF, IDP, etc if a particular position has a scoring imbalance that favors them you simply modify the scoring to correct the imbalance. Many people feel PPR creates an unfair advantage to 3 down RBs like McCaffrey so those leagues modified scoring to 1/2 PPR for the RB position.

It's no different with SF & 2QB leagues (btw I am not big on mandatory 2QB leagues with over 10 teams), if your scoring gives the teams that choose to draft QBs early a competitive advantage then modify the QB scoring to create a system that doesn't favor that strategy.

Most standard leagues offer 1 point per 10 yards rush/rec and 1 point per 20 yards passing. So, for example, change it to 1 point per 40 yards passing (we do 1 per 15 rush/rec and 1 per 50 yards passing).

But, yes, you most likely cannot switch from a 1QB league to a SF league without modifying scoring in some way.

We do 1 pt per 25 yards and 4 pt TDs. QBs are still the highest scorers in our league overall but the replacement level isn't as drastic as RB and WR.

 

[travdogg]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

If the goal is to attempt to emulate real football, we should be playing in 1RB leagues.

And you should have 32 teams with full IDP etc.

Its probably a hot take, but I kind of think IDP leagues are bad. I think using sacks, tackles, and INT's as a scoring system basis, isn't a good representation of defensive play, especially INTs and tackles.

To answer the original question, I think 2 QB leagues need to be no more than 10, and often 8 team leagues, otherwise the supply/demand becomes untenable. So I think 1 QB leagues make more sense because a fantasy team often can't find a starter in larger 2 QB leagues, where as an NFL team (other than the 2020 Broncos) would never have that problem.

I sometimes think an ideal league would be a 10 team league that starts 2 QBs, 1 RB, 2 WRs, and 1 TE, with no K and D, and only 12 roster spots. Makes QB as valuable as real life, but also makes it so injury luck isn't as prevalent as to who wins, because waivers would be very deep.

 

[Chaka]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

12 teams or more is too many for 2qb leagues. I know people do superflex but the competitive balance is disrupted to me when some teams can have multiple QBs and others just don't have that option.

I get it but that seems more like a scoring problem than a scarcity problem. In any league, 1QB, 2QB, SF, IDP, etc if a particular position has a scoring imbalance that favors them you simply modify the scoring to correct the imbalance. Many people feel PPR creates an unfair advantage to 3 down RBs like McCaffrey so those leagues modified scoring to 1/2 PPR for the RB position.

It's no different with SF & 2QB leagues (btw I am not big on mandatory 2QB leagues with over 10 teams), if your scoring gives the teams that choose to draft QBs early a competitive advantage then modify the QB scoring to create a system that doesn't favor that strategy.

Most standard leagues offer 1 point per 10 yards rush/rec and 1 point per 20 yards passing. So, for example, change it to 1 point per 40 yards passing (we do 1 per 15 rush/rec and 1 per 50 yards passing).

But, yes, you most likely cannot switch from a 1QB league to a SF league without modifying scoring in some way.

We do 1 pt per 25 yards and 4 pt TDs. QBs are still the highest scorers in our league overall but the replacement level isn't as drastic as RB and WR.

Hey, whatever works for your league us great.

But changing that to 1 pt/50 yards turns a 4,000 yard season from 160 points to 80. I imagine that would bring QBs closer to the pack.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I have come around, but fwiw there is definitely some correlation vs. causation going around. I see a lot of people mentioning their championships with elite QBs last year. But the elite QBs were actually pretty poor overall in the playoffs last year. Only Mahomes was good.

Top 10 QBs in the playoffs last year

1. Mahomes
2. Brady
3. Cousins
4. Jones
5. Prescott
6. Goff
7. Darnold
8. Allen
9. Purdy
10. Lawrence

Also important to note the elite QBs aren't always the ones who are drafted early. Justin Herbert was drafted early last year. Jalen Hurts was not.

In general I still think it's a good idea to go after them, especially a guy like Mahomes. Just worth noting.

 

[Tanner9919]

when Ive had Rodgers as a qb in a keeper league I won multiple championships including two back 2 back seasons in the keeper AND scratch draft leagues. I won a title with Scott Mitchell at qb during his few-years as a stud qb. won another with philip rivers in 06 also had lj and gis 1789 yard season. you NEED an elite qb to win. if tou dont have one but rather a top 12-17 qb youre giving up about 12ppg or more. so when the game begins youre down 15 pts to begin on average. the only way to overcome this is to have the current yeqr's no. 1 rb who goes for nearly 2k yards and 17+ tds. if you dont get that elite qb u must get an elite rb or wr. how many times has the team with the no. q rb won your league or no.1 wb?? give u another nugget ...and anyone with kelce or gronk or witten or other high falutin te's win titles period theyre mawt haves but the greatest equalizer is the top elite qb

 

[Savatage79]

Yea we do 25 yd per point and 6 pt tds so I always felt that was a given, plus we have some bonuses in there for yardage.

 

[Insein]

Yea we do 25 yd per point and 6 pt tds so I always felt that was a given, plus we have some bonuses in there for yardage.

Same on the bonuses.

 

[pinkstapler]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

This is less an answer to your question of what is the appeal of 1QB leagues, but more the question "why aren't 1QB leagues switching over". A lot of owners feel it's way more complicated than it really is. In my experience there seems to be a stigma like dynasty leagues, that SF is more for "experts" or "serious fantasy players". And while I don't think that's the case at all; I will also say from experience in more casual leagues I've transitioned to SF, it can come off that way just because people don't care to recognize QBs are more important. So leagues that typically have a lot of parity will suddenly be pretty split because you'll still have owners thinking they can wait on QB, or who only draft 2 QBs. That all typically works itself out by year two, but some people get turned off by that first year. And that is all from a redraft perspective.

Dynasty leagues there is no real good/fair way to transition. Done a few of those as well, and we do the best we can, but never have I had one where every owner was satisfied. Really the only good way to do it is just start a new dynasty league that is in SF format. And even then, I've had to deal with the split between league members who say 2 dynasty leagues is "too much for them" so they wanna leave the 1QB if starting a new one, and then the owners who are at the top of the 1QB league don't want to lose all their progress and throw away solid teams they've spent years building to reroll a new league. Meanwhile I'm over here every year trying to find new dynasty leagues to join where I don't have to pay a ridiculous 25%+ commission to a host site, and people are willing to put up more than $50 for a buy in because 2 DLs just isn't enough for me lol.

 

[RIP Rotoworld]

The traditionalist in me just likes that a one QB league spreads out the scoring amongst positions, and I'm from the time when the league didn't have a dozen 4,000 yard passers plus another half dozen super awesome rushing QB's. Your QB2 back then was like, David Garrard if you were lucky. I do one 2 QB league at least, and honestly enjoy both options for their differences.

 

[Truebluey]

QB has always been my #1 weakness in FF, for 25 years, I hate it. I usually wait, but I rarely strike gold. The one year I won my league, I started Brady Quinn in the Championship game - my waiver wire qbs sucked all year.

One year I took Rodgers early and he was out for the season by week 6. I took Mahomes in the second 3 years ago and it crippled my roster (should have taken Kelce). Waited last year and took Russ. Cooked.

So, yeah, definitely gonna take a hard look at one of the Big 6 this year.

 

[Truebluey]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

It's hard enough to find one decent QB in FF. The thought of having to draft two makes me shudder.

 

[Savatage79]

I just personally see no reason to have 2 QBs going at once. It's totally a preference thing nothing more, I like the lineup to mimic an offensive nfl lineup best it can.

 

[Chaka]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

It's hard enough to find one decent QB in FF. The thought of having to draft two makes me shudder.

I guess but at least there are 24 locked in starting QBs in the NFL.

It's hard enough to find a locked in RB1 nowadays let alone a RB2.

You would think with the rise of RBBCs IRL fantasy players would be looking for ways to change the RB focused paradigm.

 

[Chaka]

I just personally see no reason to have 2 QBs going at once. It's totally a preference thing nothing more, I like the lineup to mimic an offensive nfl lineup best it can.

Yup. This is the most common refrain.

Nothing wrong with it either.

 

[Savatage79]

I just personally see no reason to have 2 QBs going at once. It's totally a preference thing nothing more, I like the lineup to mimic an offensive nfl lineup best it can.

Yup. This is the most common refrain.

Nothing wrong with it either.

Yea I mean it's the same as anyone having an extra flex or two I'd say, we did a league last year with 2 QB and every time I do it I never feel I want it permanent. But yea enjoy what you like I say

 

[Truebluey]

I have asked this question in probably a dozen threads similar to this one but am always interested if there is a new take:

What is the appeal of 1QB leagues?

The most common answer is: "It attempts to emulate real football."

What else?

It's hard enough to find one decent QB in FF. The thought of having to draft two makes me shudder.

I guess but at least there are 24 locked in starting QBs in the NFL.

It's hard enough to find a locked in RB1 nowadays let alone a RB2.

You would think with the rise of RBBCs IRL fantasy players would be looking for ways to change the RB focused paradigm.

Our league de-emphasized RBs by switching to this format:
1 QB
1 RB
1 RB/WR
2 WR
1FLEX
1 TE

I've liked playing under this scheme.

 

[Savatage79]

So since we're finally in full draft swing, 6pt passing leagues... Where 10 or 12 mans, how early are you going for the top 3 elites? Love hearing more opinions on this aspect of fanrasy.

 

[Ilov80s]

So since we're finally in full draft swing, 6pt passing leagues... Where 10 or 12 mans, how early are you going for the top 3 elites? Love hearing more opinions on this aspect of fanrasy.

I think early to mid 3rd is where, if available, I will look at Allen/Hurts/Mahomes. I still probably take Higgins, D. Smith, Gibbs, ETN ahead of them. I prefer the QB to Breece, Andrews, Najee, Metcalf.

 

[Savatage79]

So since we're finally in full draft swing, 6pt passing leagues... Where 10 or 12 mans, how early are you going for the top 3 elites? Love hearing more opinions on this aspect of fanrasy.

I think early to mid 3rd is where, if available, I will look at Allen/Hurts/Mahomes. I still probably take Higgins, D. Smith, Gibbs, ETN ahead of them. I prefer the QB to Breece, Andrews, Najee, Metcalf.

Heres a question, if you have a keeper already that's solid like Olave perhaps... Do you feel stronger taking one in the 2nd round? So you take let's say ekeler at 4 or 5 maybe, the wrap turns and on way back you take it still there one of the elites... Plus already having then a wr like Olave.. Does that make more sense you feel? Or are you still holding to 3rd if they were still available?

 

[Ilov80s]

So since we're finally in full draft swing, 6pt passing leagues... Where 10 or 12 mans, how early are you going for the top 3 elites? Love hearing more opinions on this aspect of fanrasy.

I think early to mid 3rd is where, if available, I will look at Allen/Hurts/Mahomes. I still probably take Higgins, D. Smith, Gibbs, ETN ahead of them. I prefer the QB to Breece, Andrews, Najee, Metcalf.

Heres a question, if you have a keeper already that's solid like Olave perhaps... Do you feel stronger taking one in the 2nd round? So you take let's say ekeler at 4 or 5 maybe, the wrap turns and on way back you take it still there one of the elites... Plus already having then a wr like Olave.. Does that make more sense you feel? Or are you still holding to 3rd if they were still available?

I would probably still hold because the only thing better than 1 solid WR like Olave would be having a second solid WR like Smith or Higgins or Waddle.

 

[J Giles Band]

Its probably a hot take, but I kind of think IDP leagues are bad. I think using sacks, tackles, and INT's as a scoring system basis, isn't a good representation of defensive play, especially INTs and tackles.

With apologies to everyone for the brief hijack...

To each their own obviously... but I think most who play in IDP leagues would strongly disagree here. I'm going to assume you've tried IDP and it wasn't your thing. If so, I completely respect it. Again, whatever YOU like is what matters. But if you have not played IDP... I would suggest you try it first before you label it. And that is taking into consideration your premise of empty stats. There are empty stats on offense too.

IDP causes you to care about both sides of the ball... that alone is a separator for me. I get just as much satisfaction when my LB makes a tackle for a loss as I do when my RB breaks off a 20-yard run. Not trying to sell you on it... if you've tried it and don't like it, you're probably not going to. But just a different perspective to consider if you have not.

To your point... conversely, I think team defenses are a joke.

 

[Biabreakable]

In regards to the original title question I do think the fantasy community has changed and drafters are much more willing to take QB high than they were even say 5 years ago.

I remember a time where if someone picked a QB before the 5th round they would get laughed out of the room, even if their pick turned out to be right.

It was pretty ridiculous how long everyone would wait to draft a QB. You would have speculative RB 3s and WR 4s being drafted by teams before they would take their 1st QB, and this incuded experts in the industry as well. JJ made a brand for himself based on this concept of the late round QB.

And with good reason as well because in 12 team start 1 QB leagues roster construction often included not having a back up QB which was considered a waste of a roster spot and so with so many starting QB available on the waiver wire teams could get by with streaming QBs based on match ups and practically ignore the position altogether.

You also had many instances of people drafting the 10th or later QB but still getting a top 6 performer at the QB position. In part due to luck but also due to almost all drafters kind of ignoring the position compared to other players.

I think the rise in popularity of 2 QB and Superflex leagues has put a big spotlight on the position. People had to pay attention to QBs more and making discrete decisions between QB 17 and QB 24 matters a lot more.

So in effect ff player knowlege of all of the QBs and their differences has increased since then. Experts pay more attention to that and share that information with the community at large, whether your in a 1 QB league or not.

My guess is that APD at the position has risen for QB compared to years past because of this.

 

[travdogg]

Its probably a hot take, but I kind of think IDP leagues are bad. I think using sacks, tackles, and INT's as a scoring system basis, isn't a good representation of defensive play, especially INTs and tackles.

With apologies to everyone for the brief hijack...

To each their own obviously... but I think most who play in IDP leagues would strongly disagree here. I'm going to assume you've tried IDP and it wasn't your thing. If so, I completely respect it. Again, whatever YOU like is what matters. But if you have not played IDP... I would suggest you try it first before you label it. And that is taking into consideration your premise of empty stats. There are empty stats on offense too.

IDP causes you to care about both sides of the ball... that alone is a separator for me. I get just as much satisfaction when my LB makes a tackle for a loss as I do when my RB breaks off a 20-yard run. Not trying to sell you on it... if you've tried it and don't like it, you're probably not going to. But just a different perspective to consider if you have not.

To your point... conversely, I think team defenses are a joke.

I tried IDP for 2 years, didn't like it at all, but I thought maybe after a year it'd grow on me, liked it even less. I fully agree with you about team defenses though. Most leagues I play in don't have K or D. To be honest, I don't like PPR either. I can tolerate it, but I think non-PPR is a lot better, especially as workhorse RBs have mostly gone away.

 

[Tanner9919]

taking an elite QB is still a necessity. I see some of the top 5-ish QBs scoring 80-100 pts more, per yr, than the #6-10 QBs. it's pretty significant on a week to week basis.
I'm more concerned with fully eliminating the kickers altogether, wtf are we drafting kickers for anyways? I mean, it's ALWAYS the last two rounds, grab the best available, hurry up because uber is on the way bc I'm too drunk to drive lemme get that guy who kicks for that team in tampa, and the dude from that team in houston. lol
I'd MUCH rather draft IDPs

 

[Biabreakable]

As far as 2 QB leagues I have been playing in those for a long time including dynasty 2 QB leagues and the scarcity issue is very real.

Some say that starting 2 QB does not feel like the real game of football where only 32 are starting each and every week.

However the scarcity of quality QB in start 2 dynasty leagues is very much like it is for teams in the NFL. Only a few teams have elite QBs and when they do they are perrenial contenders. Trading multiple 1st round picks to have a chance at such a player gets mirrored in these 2 QB leagues the way it is in the NFL and having 1st round start up drafts dominated by QBs also mirrors how this is in the NFL.

Having quality back up QBs and developmental QB prospects becomes more important, similar to the NFL.

Yes your team will be hurting if you dont have 2 or more decent QBs on your roster compared to teams that do. There are no waiver wire QB available you can just pick up and insert into your lineup and this is also like the NFL.

Its harder. I get that and it may not be everyones cup of tea. QBs are hard to evaluate for NFL teams and that much harder for one of us to find the good college QB prospects to help your team.

I think this difficulty is a turn off, but it does mirror the challenges a NFL GM has to deal with to build a successful NFL team.

 

[J Giles Band]

I tried IDP for 2 years, didn't like it at all, but I thought maybe after a year it'd grow on me, liked it even less. I fully agree with you about team defenses though. Most leagues I play in don't have K or D. To be honest, I don't like PPR either. I can tolerate it, but I think non-PPR is a lot better, especially as workhorse RBs have mostly gone away.

Respect it...

And agree with you on full PPR. We've used half PPR for 16 years now (long before it became popular... heck PPR was sort of new then) and it seems to be the sweet spot.