We have a 12-team league, with 14 total roster spots. We start 1-QB, 1-2 RB, 3-4 RECs (WR or TEs) (either 1 RB and 4 RECs or 2 RB and 3 RECs), 1 K, and 1 DEF.

What about this setup:

RB: 5 recpt = 0.5, 8 recpt = 1.0, 11 recpt = 1.5 (or 0.5 for every 3 after the

initial 5 recpt)

WR: 4 recpt = 0.5, 7 recpt = 1.0, 10 recpt = 1.5 (or 0.5 for every 3 after the

initial 4 recpt)

TE: 3 recpt = 0.5, 6 recpt = 1.0, 9 recpt =1.5 (or 0.5 for every 3 after the

initial 3 recpt)

If you look at game files (available on NFL.com), this scenario would work very very well I think. I think it's pretty equitable across the board by position. Yes, Gates and Shockey become pretty important (or more important and a little more valuable than they already are), but look at their overall contribution to the team...They represent a huge percentage of the passing game for their clubs, so that should be rewarded, or reflective in their scoring individually. Also, in the odd case that a back gets more than 5 receptions in a game (in looking at game results, that happens very few times), RBs who catch the ball well (Jordan, Westbrook) aren't getting exactly the same treatment as a top flight reciever, but rather, more like a possession receiver. But RBs still are getting a small reward for their receiving afforts as well. In giving all position 0.5 points for combined yardage, we have to break it out a little more heavily in favor of RECs because that's ultimately what we are trying to achieve, more viable starting options, especially from the mid-tier level REC areas.

In relating it against our yardage component:

every 10 yards (rushing and receiving yards combined for RBs, RECs) = 0.5 points

VS.

RB: 5 receptions = 0.5 points (after initial 5, then 0.5 after every 3 after that)

WR: 4 receptions = 0.5 points (after initial 4, then 0.5 after every 3 after that)

TE's: 3 receptions = 0.5 points (after initial 3, then 0.5 after every 3 after that)

These milestones work very well I think, and they are fairly easy to remember if you are trying to figure your own score out without having to look on the 'net.

Thoughts?