Quick Roster Limit Question (1 Viewer)

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

1 QB

2 RB

3 WR

1 TE

1 K

1 D

FLEX: QB, RB, WR

Scoring for QB's is quite high at 1 pt for 20 yds passing, 6 pt TDs, and 2 pt bonus at 300. The reason for this is we actually consider this a 2 QB League now. The only reason flex is even being allowed is in the event a team can't field a 2nd starter (like bye weeks or injuries), which can happen in a 12 team league.

Anyway, what would you suggest roster limits be set at? More specifically, what should the limits be for QB, RB and WR? With 18 roster spots, how's this:

4

5

6

2

2

2

Or should QB's be limited to 3, allowing more for the WW? RB's 4, maybe? WR's 5? Not sure here.

THANKS!

 

[barndog]

Initial reaction is limit QBs to 3.

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

Initial reaction is limit QBs to 3.

Yeah, that's what I would prefer, but curious as to any reasons NOT to.I actually listed each limit (QB,RB,WR) 1 higher than I would prefer.

So a better question might be: is there any reason to raise the following limits?

3

4

5

 

[u999spf]

I am actually against roster limits of any kind but we also do the 2 QB thing for a 12 team league and needed to put in a roster limit of 3QB's and we use the flex.

I for one would liked to tweak that a bit and make it 3QB's can be drafted but after week 1 you can add a 4th QB to your roster.

This means that most or all the starting QB's would continue to be drafted during the draft, so all but 2 teams would have 3 starters, but you could then also try to pickup a backup to your best or riskiest starter in case something happens and you dont have to waste a roster spot all season carrying a backup who may never play.

So for example lets say in the draft I was able to pick McNabb, Favre and JP Losman, and use these guys all season. Since McNabb is an injury risk, during the week 1 waivers I reach out and pick up AJ feely, if he is still available. If not I could pickup another starters backup, as a just in case type guy or even as a future keeper (maybe a rookie qb)

 

[Anthony Borbely]

There should never be roster limits in my opinion. That eliminates a lot of strategy. Restrictions benefit poor drafters IMO.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

There should never be roster limits in my opinion. That eliminates a lot of strategy. Restrictions benefit poor drafters IMO.

In general I agree with this, but this can also create value.For example, if you don't care who your 4th RB is, you can let him slide all the way to the last pick if your fellow owners can only take 4. That leaves you with RB48 on your list with your final pick, which should be quite a value.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Initial reaction is limit QBs to 3.

Yeah, that's what I would prefer, but curious as to any reasons NOT to.I actually listed each limit (QB,RB,WR) 1 higher than I would prefer.

So a better question might be: is there any reason to raise the following limits?

3

4

5

With 18 picks I'd want 6 RBs, even in a smaller league.4-6-6 limits would be a preference, but at that point you're really not even setting limits.

I'd get rid of the limits.

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

Thanks for the input.

So limit the QB's for certain, that's what I'm getting here (3). We don't want people hoarding QB's. I actually think I'm going to limit all three positions. Shouldn't that keep more talent on the WW, and spur more trading?

 

[NYGus]

There should never be roster limits in my opinion. That eliminates a lot of strategy. Restrictions benefit poor drafters IMO.

I think just the opposite-If you're restricted to say only 4 RB, then you have to make smarter choices during the draft whereas the bad drafter can just stockpile and hope that a decent player emerges from the 8 RB's (or whatever) that he has on the bench.

 

[Sweet Love]

Maybe limit the QBs to three and then do a combo limitation for the RBs/WRs/TEs to like thirteen total (any combination), leaving two spots total for a mimimum of one kicker and one defense. That way you still have the room to be creative, yet there would still be a chance for those that do not have the best or many starting QBs.

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

Maybe limit the QBs to three and then do a combo limitation for the RBs/WRs/TEs to like thirteen total (any combination), leaving two spots total for a mimimum of one kicker and one defense. That way you still have the room to be creative, yet there would still be a chance for those that do not have the best or many starting QBs.

Good idea, thanks. My intent, however, was to keep TE's, K's, and D's at 2 at all times. The more talent on the WW the better, imo. We don't want people scratchin. We want them to have fun, and if there is ZERO on the wire, that's not much fun.So 3 QB's, we've established that. The question becomes how many RB's and WR's should be allowed. I'm torn there.

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I wouldn't put limits on positions at all.

This makes matching up for trading much more difficult.

I'm pro-deal making.

 

[Squinting Cyclops]

these are my settings for my ESPN league

Ten Team League

Total Starters: 12

Bench (BE) 6

Quarterback (QB) 2 : 3 max

Running Back (RB) 1 : 5 max

Running Back/Wide Receiver (RB/WR) 2

Wide Receiver (WR) 2 : 7 max

Tight End (TE) 1 : 2 max

Team Defense/Special Teams (D/ST) 2 : 3 max

Place Kicker (K) 1 : 2 max

Head Coach (HC) 1 : 2 max

you can go 1 RB and 4 WR, 2 RB 3 WR, 3 RB 2 WR : it gives you lots of combinations to choose from on game day

the bench is ony 6 deep and we start 2 QB's and 2 D/ST, so there are lots of ways to play this league

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

I wouldn't put limits on positions at all.This makes matching up for trading much more difficult.I'm pro-deal making.

Then how about 3 QB's (this is a must I think), 5 RB's, and 6 WR's. Is that sensible?

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

Interesting, thanks weevol.

 

[turnit643]

I'm in the "no-limits" camp. Let someone hoard QB's if that's what they want to do. If they think they can build a surplus at QB (or any other position) for use in trades during the year, that should be an option. That would promote trading and add some strategy.

 

[Monkeyface Prickleback]

I'm in the "no-limits" camp. Let someone hoard QB's if that's what they want to do. If they think they can build a surplus at QB (or any other position) for use in trades during the year, that should be an option. That would promote trading and add some strategy.

I never really liked the idea of some guy trying to hold 8 QBs or RBs hostage. While it could make for some interesting scenarios, I don't see it bettering the league really. If it works for him, some are bound to be pissed, or maybe hold resentment. Hell, even if it doesn't, people probably won't dig it. I could be wrong, though. Wish I could just implement a tried and true method here.

 

[tulane]

No roster limits.... They are stupid and pointless.