roster limits (1 Viewer)

[Follows Closely]

I am in a start 2-3 RB league. We currently have a roster limit that is I am wanting to change, but getting push back from my league mates. What's the pools thoughts on roster limits?

 

[Jerry Lawler]

In my opinion, the number of RB's on your roster should be limited only by your interest in acquiring players to help at other positions. If the rest of the league feels people are hoarding RB's too much, they can always vote to add PPR next year or increase the number of starting WR's, or allow QB's in the flex spot.

 

[TD5150]

I am in a start 2-3 RB league. We currently have a roster limit that is I am wanting to change, but getting push back from my league mates. What's the pools thoughts on roster limits?

Leagues that limit the number of players from each positions you can draft stink! Part of the fun of FF is to draft for value even if it overloads one position on your roster. This also makes trading a lot more necessary and frequent.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Leagues that limit the number of players from each positions you can draft stink!

Yep.Why lessen the strategy potential that is available?

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Why should there ever be a roster limit?

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

I'll play Devil's Advocate.

If this is a PPR league I would LOVE a RB cap.

This would let me grab 3 RBs early on like everyone else but then hammer all the other positions since I'd know that I would have no worse than the 45th-48th guy as my final RB (4x12).

However, yes, I agree - this really defeats the purpose of knowing who the better backups in the league are. This is more of a casual league rule.

 

[KellysHeroes]

In every league I manage... I place Roster Position Limits. Usually 5 to 7 RBs. It brings some tough decisions to the table...

I do give a couple of extra spaces to the Taxi so teams could load up if they so choose to.

 

[Follows Closely]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

 

[Tybeeman]

IMO, no limits is the way to go.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

In every league I manage... I place Roster Position Limits. Usually 5 to 7 RBs. It brings some tough decisions to the table.

I think this would be the opposite. If there are no limits, you have no idea if an owner will load up at a position.

 

[whitem0nkey]

this is how we do it with the limits

start 1 QB - 3 max

start 2 rb - 5 max

start 3 wr - 7 max

start 1 TE - 3 max

start 1 K - 3 max

start 1 Def - 3 max

the basic rule is

you have 1 back up for each starter and 1 extra position

 

[pollardsvision]

with the growing RBBC trend in the league, RB roster limits are even more pointless than before. more RBBC means even more RBs that will get touches. one or a few teams loading up on RBs will not have the same negative effect on the league as it used to.

it's virtually impossible (in a typical league) to get completely squeezed out and literally have no way of finding a RB who can score you "some" points in a given week.

i've never liked roster limits. i hate them even more now.

 

[Buckeyedawgs]

One thing I try and maintain in my leagues is to keep a resonable amount of talent in the waiver pool! 1. It allows the weaker teams a better chance to catch up and 2. It makes the annual rookie draft much more fun and tatical!

20 player limit with one IR spot IMO is best to acheive this.

As for RB'S go for what you want as long as you maintain a starting line-up at other positions.

You have 11 or 12 extra spots to play with what you want! Obviously you have to think byes, injuries, suspensions ect. and can;t stack all RB;S.

My leagues are Dynasty by the way! Even with the 20 limit the waivers have a way of getting dull in mid season! I have flirted with idea to expand to 22 but 20 makes it much more management required which is the best part of fantasy!

 

[Hugonel]

I firmly believe roster limits are simply a way to limit a shark's ability to maximize his team strength. It levels the playing field for those who don't want to think too hard about why it would be better to overload at one position.

Limits stink.