What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Running Backs - they don't matter (1 Viewer)

Cyclones

Footballguy
Through 3 weeks, the top 3 teams in our league in both record and points have started the following RBs (number of starts in parentheses;)

J Charles (3)

T Richardson (3)

R. Mathews (3)

A Morris (3)

R Bush (2)

R Mendenhall

D Wilson (2)

I Redman

B Tate

E Lacy

F Jackson

P Thomas

Outside of Charles and one good week out of Bush, that is a very mediocre list. With the emergence of the passing game and more and more RBBC, running backs are no longer the key to winning fantasy football games. If we redrafted today, I believe Calvin, AJ Green, Julio Jones would all go in the first round, Graham might be, and guys like Welker, D Thomas, Rodgers, Brees, Manning would all go very early as well. You could make a case that only AP, Charles and Shady should be taken in the first round based on performance so far.

Next year I'm going 3 WR and a QB in the first round. We may never see seasons again like the ones Faulk, Holmes, Tomlinson and Edge used to put up.

 
I guess neither do QBs. In both leagues I am in, 1 dynasty, 1 redraft, the Manning owner is 1-2. The current #1 team in one league has Roethlsiberger and Pryor. Of course he gets his ### kicked week 5 when he faces the LOD.

 
Overall team matters whether you get the points from RBs Wrs Qbs ect ect..... Plus 3 weeks is far too early to declare running backs useless. The team with Charles and Forte is doing quite well in my league ....as well as the team that has both Mccoy and Chris Johnson. Just because the Mccoy owner in your league either drafted poorly or has gotten unlucky so far doesnt make rbs useless.

 
Wait...one league where elite RBs didn't result in automatic wins in weeks 1-3 for their owners?

THIS CHANGES EVERYTHING

 
Through 3 weeks....in our league....
Well, with that vast amount of data, I don't see how anyone can deny it.
I think we have seen it coming for a few years. 10 years ago, a huge season from a QB was 4000/30. That's pretty standard now. With passing numbers going up, receiving numbers are climbing as well. On draft day if you told me I could have Arian Foster and Trent Richardson, vs Julio Jones and Wes Welker (on my team) I would have jumped at the chance to do it. I wouldn't make that trade today.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Through 3 weeks....in our league....
Well, with that vast amount of data, I don't see how anyone can deny it.
I think we have seen it coming for a few years. 10 years ago, a huge season from a QB was 4000/30. That's pretty standard now. With passing numbers going up, receiving numbers are climbing as well. On draft day if you told me I could have Arian Foster and Trent Richardson, vs Julio Jones and Wes Welker (on my team) I would have jumped at the chance to do it. I wouldn't make that trade today.
One specific trade example that has changed since draft day? Where you cherry-picked disappointing RBs and WRs that have overperformed so far?

THIS ALSO CHANGES EVERYTHING

In draft day if you told me I could have Roddy White over DeMarco Murray I would have jumped at the chance to do it. I wouldn't make that trade today.

See how ignorant and pointless that is?

eta: Worst thread ever?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I went rb/rb/wr in both my money leagues, 2-1 in both....top points. I don't see the problem with thus strategy

 
This thread has to be the biggest waste of time in recent memory :thumbdown:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll eat crow if things turn around, but it's become pretty clear that the days where one RB could win you a league (yes, that used to happen with Faulk, Tomlinson, etc) are done. A top QB or a couple of top ten WRs can do it for you now.

 
RBs will be become more and more important as the season moves on.

Ya'll are missing the big picture here

 
I started the same topic titled - The death of Stud RB's. In non ppr leagues, owners should focus on the top QB's WR and Graham not Rb's. In my re-draft league 20 RBs went in the first 3 rounds, while a small sample size only 5 are performing up to potential (Peterson, Lynch, Charles, Forte and McCoy). This correlates into a 25% hit ratio. No thanks. I took Brees and J Jones 1st 2 rounds.

 
Look at Peterson's first 6 weeks last year, and look where he finished. It's a long season, and is prefer RB's I can count on week in and week out.

 
I agree. I went RB/RB/WR/RB (Spiller in the 1st) and just got smoked by a team that started Ivory, Mendenhall, and Donald Brown as his 3 RB. His QB was Rodgers (week 2 when he threw for 480 & 4 TDs) and WR were Megatron, Cobb, and VJax.

 
It's called value based drafting and people have been doing it for years. I took Randy Moss in the first round the year he gave up and the Pats traded him. How do you think that worked out for me? I won my 12 team money league. Why? Because I did my homework and drafted well AFTER round 1. Round one your pick should be easy, it gets harder as it goes. This year I am 3-0 and i drafted T-Rich from the 9 spot in the first. Went AJ Green in the second and later picks like Manning in the 4th, Decker in the 5th and Moreno in the 9th have made the difference. It's not like this is the first year ever that people have been able to win without a stud RB.

 
Uh oh. In one PPR league, I've been starting LeSean McCoy and Joique Bell/Giovani Bernard. I thought I was undefeated and alone in first place, but now I'm afraid to look at the league page because this thread has convinced me I must be wrong.

 
I think you guys are misinterpreting what I am saying. I took an RB in the first (Charles at 1.3) and am in first place. So, taking an RB first doesn't kill you for the year. It also won't get you 25 ppg like it used to though. And, for a long time the preferred strategy was to stockpile RBs. You could often look at rosters after the draft and the teams that had 3 good RBs would usually end up near the top of the league. Now you can get by with one good RB if you have a stud QB and WR with a few other decent receivers.

 
Outside of the AP, McCoy, and Charles (maybe Forte and a couple others) WR are more consistent week to week in terms of scoring. If you can grab a stud WR, QB or Graham, and load up on backup RB late in the draft, you will hit on a couple week to week. If your top RBs bust and you have average WR, you're in big trouble. It seems you can do much better with stud WR and mediocre RB week to week depending on who's injured, matchups, etc.

 
I think so far, RBs haven't played a huge factor. I know in one PPR league I'm in, the top teams RBs consist of TRich, Lacy, JBell, Rice, Lamar Miller, Mathews, DRich, Mendenhall, and Moreno. 1 team that has Foster, McFadden, and Morris is 0-3.

Seems like having a top QB and good WRs/TE seems to be paying off. But it is way too early to draw an definite conclusions.

 
It doesn't matter whether it's a RB, WR, QB, or TE, if you hit on studs in your first 2-3 picks, you will be a lot better off than if you pick busts in your first 2-3 picks.

/thread

 
I told you guys it was the year of the kicker. That's why I have 6 of them.
I'll trade you Manning and Vick for Billy Cundiff?

Don't strongarm me bro, I'm 0-3 because I was going with Rian Lindell this whole time.

It's why I stopped paying for sites like this. I waited until the 7th to grab my kicker and now I'm paying for it.

Motherfecking hell.

 
Just glancing at the scoring for one of my leagues (PPR .25 RB, .5 WR, 1.0 TE) and mentally calculating VBD for a few players, through three weeks this year vs end of season last year. Using last starter baselines for a normal league setup.

RBs are more valuable this year than last year by at a good margin. The top 6-7 RBs are generally a full point per game or more better.

WRs are about the same value or slightly less.

QBs are about the same as last year except for Peyton who is nearly double Brees' value.

TEs the top 3 are much more valuable this year but the rest are about the same.

So based on 3 weeks of 2013 versus a season of 2012, TE and RB are more valuable and QB and WR are less so... and this is in a league whose PPR was designed to up the value of TE and WR at the expense of RB via more PPR for the former positions.

You might think to yourself, "well, the top few players at each position probably have a few who had good luck and they will probably drop off a bit as the season progresses... and if we just compare the first 3 weeks of each season they might be closer". And that is exactly what I'm seeing, again, just eyeballing a few players from each year.

So I don't see much to think that by the end of the season there is going to be a huge difference in the value of positions overall.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
My team in my 12-man PPR league is destroying everybody, and last week I started deangelo williams and danny woodhead at RB1 and RB2. bush and vereen were my top 2 RB's taken in the draft. I went with the strategy in PPR that decent value can be had in later rounds with RB's if you are smart, and a lot of the RB's going in round one i thought were far from being locks for top fantasy production. Went with high target receivers with big play potential.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K

 
Outside of the AP, McCoy, and Charles (maybe Forte and a couple others) WR are more consistent week to week in terms of scoring. If you can grab a stud WR, QB or Graham, and load up on backup RB late in the draft, you will hit on a couple week to week. If your top RBs bust and you have average WR, you're in big trouble. It seems you can do much better with stud WR and mediocre RB week to week depending on who's injured, matchups, etc.
Check out the game logs of the top WRs, far from consistent.

 
RBs do matter, but, thanks to PPR and the NFL turning into very much of a passing league, not as much as they used to.

 
I know this thread has somewhat degenerated into a 'I've done this' role call, but I'd definitely not undervalue RBs

In my first ever draft/season of fantasy football this year, I went RB RB WR RB WR and have seemed to hit pay dirt. Other people drafting QBs and WRs early allowed me to get in order.

Martin

Forte

Fitzgerald

Murray

V Jackson

Bernard was later picked up when someone stupidly dropped him, as I had Vareen who is injured.

Thus far my RBs have been the real spine of my undefeated team.

Beginners luck though, I'm sure ;-)

 
Overall team matters whether you get the points from RBs Wrs Qbs ect ect..... Plus 3 weeks is far too early to declare running backs useless. The team with Charles and Forte is doing quite well in my league ....as well as the team that has both Mccoy and Chris Johnson. Just because the Mccoy owner in your league either drafted poorly or has gotten unlucky so far doesnt make rbs useless.
This (except with "etc"). By virtue of the fact that some teams stock piled RBs, others teams stocked up on WRs. Total points is what matter. If your RBs outscore my RBs by 20, but WRs outscore yours by 30...it doesn't make a difference. You have to draft all positions well - or at least most of them.

And right now, at the beginning of the season...in good weather...with defenses still catching up, I think passing offenses have a slight advantage. Later in the season, when weather gets lousy and defenses have more "real" film (instead of preseason garbage), RB production will start to climb.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top 4 teams in my league have the following RBs:

4th: McCoy, Morris, Sproles, Richardson

3rd: MJD, Lynch, Bernard, DeAngelo

2nd: Foster, Snelling (he has Peyton, DT, and Desean)...he's been incredibly lucky

1st: Peterson, Murray, Miller, Joquie Bell/Pierre Thomas

 
Rushing numbers are down through three weeks of the 2013 NFL season. Is there an overall trend or just circumstances?


There's been a rush away from the run game so far in 2013. Numbers are down almost across the board, despite the increased pace of offenses and high scoring.

Does this mean the run is done in the NFL?


Let's take a look at some top-line fundamentals, comparing NFL-wide stats on a per-game basis from 2012 against the first three weeks of 2013:

2012 rush yards per game (NFL average): 115.9

2013 rush yards per game (NFL average): 106.4

Per-Game Decline: -8.2%

2012 rush yards per carry (NFL average): 4.26

2013 rush yards per carry (NFL average): 4.06

Per-Game Decline: -4.7%

2012 rushes per game (NFL average): 27.2

2013 rushes per game (NFL average): 26.2

Per-Game Decline: -3.7%

That's an overall decline -- not drastic, but definite -- driven by both volume and efficiency, with decreased efficiency a notable driver.

Top-line indicators are useful for broad trends, but understanding root causes and specific teams' issues requires a deeper dive (and some assistance from Pro Football Focus' game charting stats). Let's categorize the ways that run games are going wrong in 2013 -- as well as some instances when they're going right.

Call the fire department

A few teams' seasons may have already gone up in flames, burning their ground-game prospects to a crisp.

Once the Giants' David Wilson put pig to carpet twice in Week 1, things went south fast. New York called Da'Rel Scott off the bench, and Brandon Jacobs out of the crypt to combine for a scintillating 1.4 YPC average, barely half of Wilson's average yards AFTER CONTACT. New right tackle Justin Pugh looks overmatched, but the Giants' biggest problem is Eli handing out interceptions like Halloween candy. Down early and chasing the points surrendered by a shoddy secondary, the run game is an absolute afterthought in New York.

Run_game_fire_department_medium

It's a similar story for the Rams, who have their own bad running/bad blocking/score chasing troika in the works. Daryl Richardson's lead-back turn hasn't opened any eyes, and his anemic 1.6 yards after contact and 10 percent broken-tackle rate will keep those eyes shut. Roger Saffold's shift to right tackle has been disastrous thus far, while Scott Wells has been totally unable to move opposing defensive tackles. Sam Bradford has taken care of the ball, but the secondary's failure to take care of business has forced the Rams to play catch-up.

Failure is usually an orphan, but the Steelers' drastic decline has many fathers. Only David DeCastro and fill-in center Fernando Velasco are providing adequate blocking, but they're doing so for the league's most blah backfield. Playing from behind hasn't helped matters, and the whole offense has predictably reverted to "Ben, shake off these three tacklers and save us!"

The Jaguars ... just, ugh. The league's most dire offense is running at about the same clip, because blowouts in 2013 aren't terribly different from blowouts in 2012. The results are even worse, as a slow-starting Luke Joeckel and a badly-regressing Eugene Monroe can't create space for a rapidly-aging MJD. Once you're down 21 points, it's Cecil Shorts garbage time.

Call the personnel department

Some of 2012's best backs are off to slow starts in 2013 due to shoddy shows from the boys up front and a touch of their own regression. These squads are coping with decreased efficiency despite a generally steady or increasing volume of carries.

Ravens tackles Michael Oher and Bryant "Captain Steuben" McKinnie have been outright dreadful to start the season, boasting PFF run-blocking grades of -6.3 and -5.2 respectively. Combined with a slow start from new center Gino Gradkowski, neither Ray Rice nor Bernard Pierce has found much room to roam.

The Bucccaneers face the inverse problem: The outside blocking has been fine, while guards Davin Joseph (-5.9) and Gabe Carimi (-2.3) have been atrocious. Doug Martin's 2.3 yards-after-contact mark is pedestrian, but the box is more frequently packed thanks to Josh Freeman's foibles. Maybe a fresh start with Mike Glennon and a staph-free Carl Nicks on the interior can un-gum the works.

The Chiefs' Jamaal Charles was a missed-tackle machine against the Eagles, but he's having to make people miss in the backfield thanks to some rookie hazing for new right tackle Eric Fisher and some "you've been around awhile, but we still enjoy paddling you" beatings for perpetually overwhelmed guard Jeff Allen.

The Bills made noises about being "fine" with their guards after the departure of Andy Levitre, but Bills fans are making noises of revulsion at the play of replacement Colin Brown. His -11.2 Run Blocking grade through three games is an apocalyptic pace, and combined with center Eric Wood's effort, it has ravaged Buffalo's interior. C.J. Spiller is still breaking tackles at an outstanding 23 percent clip, but most of them are coming three yards deep in the backfield.

Run_game_personnel_department_medium

The Bears' new-look offensive front has been upped Jay Cutler's survivability while (presumably) decreasing his cussing. Outside of rookie tackle Jordan Mills they're also getting it done in the ground game. There has been some efficiency drop-off due to 16 plodding carries from Michael Bush, but strong peripherals from Matt Forte (notably an excellent 20 percent broken-tackle rate) indicate that this ground game could grow wings in the near future.

It's been personnel out wide that have caused the biggest problems for the Patriots, as a young-pup receiving corps has thrown the entire offense somewhat out of whack while precluding clock-killing opportunities.

The Vikings' Adrian Peterson has gotten predictably bad blocking from guard Charlie Johnson, but most of the blame for Peterson's regression lies with Peterson himself. That's no knock, as he was simply inhuman last year while serving as a merely badass human so far in 2013. Of course, the return of fullback Jerome Felton could have him leaping tall buildings come Week 4.

The Dolphins' something old/something new tackle tandem of Jonathan Martin and Tyson Clabo has been terrible during the season's first three games, and neither Lamar Miller nor Daniel Thomas has resembled a competent replacement for the departed Reggie Bush.

Speaking of Bush, both he and Joique Bell have been busting tackles and running well in the Lions' backfield. They've frequently shared the backfield with whoever Rob Sims (-4.1) and Corey Hilliard (-1.2) have been attempting to block, but overall the arrow is probably pointing up for the Lions' ground game.

Call the analytics department

Sometimes a deep, rigorous root-cause analysis is required to understand a team's run-game troubles.

Other times, it's easier.

Run_game_analytics_department_medium

Both the Bengals and the Saints can trace poor efficiency to simple poor choices: continuing to hand serious carries to runners like Mark Ingram and BenJarvus Green-Ellis. Differences in yards BEFORE contact among backs in the same backfield speak to both vision and speed to the hole, and both Ingram and Green-Ellis laughably underperform backfield-mates like Gio Bernard, Darren Sproles and Pierre Thomas. Saints and Bengals fans should stop asking "Who Dat?" and "Who Dey?," and start asking "Why Him?"

Call it circumstance

A few struggling-to-middling ground games may have as much to do with circumstance as anything else.

While the Browns' ground game could end up being low comedy with the departure of Trent Richardson, through the first three weeks, things were improving on 2012's run efficiency. The Browns were still choosing to take to the air instead. With Brandon Weeden on the bench, at least the take-to-the-air thing looks a tad more hopeful.

Run_game_circumstance_medium

The Falcons' ground game has taken off after rightfully interring Micheal Turner and handing the ball off to non-Walking Dead extras. Unfortunately, a leaky defense has them playing catch-up rather than kill-the-clock-with-the-undead so far in 2013.

The Texans are also enjoying an uptick in run efficiency despite chaos on the line (thanks in large part to Ben Tate's absurd 5.0 yards-after-contact average). Total production is still down, however, as two dogfights and a beatdown from the Ravens have conspired to keep the ball in Matt Schaub's semi-capable hands.

Call it fortune

Just as some ground games have luck conspiring against them, others are getting a lift from Dame Fortune.

The Titans are laboring to produce on the ground, as a rebuilt line has yet to live up to the hype. But slow and steady has been winning the race for erstwhile boom and bust king Chris Johnson. A suddenly competent defense is letting Tennessee keep the ball where it belongs -- namely, out of Jake Locker's hands.

Run_game_circumstance_goodkind_medium

The Panthers' ground game is still figuring out what it wants to be (did we see an actual read-option carry last week?), but they've figured out that they want to keep pounding it while Cam Newton continues to grow as a passer. With Star Lotulelei and Luke Kuechly anchoring an improved defense, they'll have the luxury of pounding it all the way up until Ron Rivera's inevitable last-minute gaffe.

Bilal Powell's 149-yard effort was like watching one of the all-time great rushing performances at roughly three-quarters speed. Even with that majestic tally, the Jets' ground attack is plodding along, but the QB paradigm change from "active saboteur" to "occasional hindrance" should provide them with many more opportunities to plod than they enjoyed last year.

Call it a resurgence

While some 2012 stalwarts are struggling, a few of last season's laggards have shoved their way to the forefront.

The most eye-opening run game display of the young season was the Colts' physical beatdown of a proud 49er front. Colts fans should be salivating at Trent Richardson's prospects once he's fully up to speed. The offensive line is still hit or miss, but if the young bunch can continue to gel, then Andrew Luck should be in for some badly-needed support.

It's possible that DeMarco Murray is from Krypton, and his own personal yellow sun is the St. Louis run defense. While that one-game outburst might not necessarily portend continued success for the Cowboys' run game, there are some legitimate reasons for hope. The addition of Travis Frederick at center provides at least one island of competence in the interior, there's room for growth from youngster Ronald Leary, and Dallas discovered that Doug Free is, in fact, a stick player. Cut his salary in half, and he'll start earning $3.5 million rather than outright stealing $7 million.

Run_game_resurgence_medium

If Indy had the season's most eye-opening performance, the Packers hold the most eye-popping stat with two consecutive 100-yard rushers after wandering in the desert since 2010. Tackle David Bakhtiari is enduring a baptism by fire, but the rest of the group is at least firing out and opening holes, which should bode well once the delayed product launch of Eddie Lacy finally gets underway.

You can't fall off the floor, and both the Cardinals and Chargers seem to be at least up on one elbow and eating a cheeseburger. Both squads still aspire to mediocrity on the ground, but at least mediocrity may be a legitimate aspiration this year.

Call the plays that work!

Have we forgotten anyone? Oh, that's right -- the three biggest run-game stories of the 2012 season! The Seahawks, Redskins and 49ers have all seen drastic declines in their per-game rushing totals, and the knee-jerk reaction has been that the league figured out that gimmicky read option after all.

Someone in the league office really needs to get that memo to foes of the Eagles and Raiders, though, as both squads have launched their ground games to new heights with read-option runs as a significant component. Despite limited (Philly) or direly limited (Oakland) passing threats, the willingness to use the quarterback as a run threat has added serious pop to both teams' attacks. The rushing yardage for Terrelle Pryor (198) and Michael Vick (172) place them 12th and 19th among ALL RUSHERS so far, to say nothing of the room they've opened up for Darren McFadden (186, 17th) and LeSean McCoy (395, No. 1 with a bullet). Some of the QB yardage has come on scrambles, to be sure, but the fundamental advantage of the read option is alive and well on both squads -- namely, how tough it makes life on defenders.

Run_game_plays_that_work_medium

Last year's read-option darlings are making themselves much easier to defend by paring back their usage of the concept. A quarterback is going to take extra hits running read-option plays, so if you can win without them then maybe that's a good idea. Fair play to the Seahawks, then, who could beat teams right now with three kneel-downs and the occasional fake punt thanks to their man-eaters on defense.

Washington seems wholly incapable of winning without them, but they are behind the 8-ball thanks to RGIII's still-balky knee. They mixed in a few more looks against Detroit, but are wisely taking the long view in a down division and not throwing Griffin to the wolves ... or Lions.

The 49ers are an interesting question. They did what they wanted against Green Bay and couldn't do ANYTHING against Seattle. Then San Francisco broke out an extremely passive game plan against Indianapolis. With little in the way of downfield passing threats, the Niners still ran maaaaaaybe five read-option looks against Indy. One of them in the third quarter was an ugly five-yard loss, but it featured several blocking busts that highlight the value of guys like the departed Delanie Walker. They rarely even lined up in the kind of pistol sets that make defenses nervous, and a couple of those were used for a weird boundary-side pop pitch play that needs to go back on the shelf. Don't be surprised if the read option sees a resurgence this Thursday against the Rams.

The bottom line

The decline in the ground game this season has been real, but not as dire as it might seem at first glance. The read option is dormant in some spots but thriving in others, and the drastic fall-off experienced by some squads can be explained by the cruel storms that overtake every team from time to time.

Ground game aficionados (and RB-RB fantasy drafters) take heart -- while the game is ever-changing, that doesn't mean that the run is done.
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/9/26/4768462/nfl-2013-season-running-backs-rushing-totals
Really nice article. See the link for numbers.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
Yeah I'd say that's pretty close.

My 3-0 team has:

RG3, Charles, Gore, Dez, Garcon, Cameron, Edelman/White.

I do agree with someone else who said to stream DST and K though. That's what I've been doing the last few years. Always seem to be a couple DSTs on the WW that have a decent matchup every week.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
This strategy has worked out extremely well for me the past 4 years. Its incredibly easy to get a running back that will give you around 10 points a game in the middle of the year, finding a WR on the waiver wire that will do that consistently is almost impossible.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
No, things really haven't changed at all. What's important and always has been important is getting your picks right. How is this strategy working out for guys who drafted Brady, Newton or Keap as top 5 QBs in early rounds? Not good.

2 top 10 WRs? As if its just that easy to land, especially if you drafted a top 5 QB. It's basically impossible.

Draft 2 mid range RBs who catch 4-5 balls a game? Who exactly would that be? What mid range RBs are catching 64 to 80 passes a year? Ummmm, none. There may be 3 RBs this season who even approach that type of reception total and they are all 1st rounders.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
No, things really haven't changed at all. What's important and always has been important is getting your picks right.How is this strategy working out for guys who drafted Brady, Newton or Keap as top 5 QBs in early rounds? Not good.

2 top 10 WRs? As if its just that easy to land, especially if you drafted a top 5 QB. It's basically impossible.

Draft 2 mid range RBs who catch 4-5 balls a game? Who exactly would that be? What mid range RBs are catching 64 to 80 passes a year? Ummmm, none. There may be 3 RBs this season who even approach that type of reception total and they are all 1st rounders.
Could've landed Bush or Sproles in the 2nd/3rd in most drafts.

 
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
No, things really haven't changed at all. What's important and always has been important is getting your picks right.How is this strategy working out for guys who drafted Brady, Newton or Keap as top 5 QBs in early rounds? Not good.

2 top 10 WRs? As if its just that easy to land, especially if you drafted a top 5 QB. It's basically impossible.

Draft 2 mid range RBs who catch 4-5 balls a game? Who exactly would that be? What mid range RBs are catching 64 to 80 passes a year? Ummmm, none. There may be 3 RBs this season who even approach that type of reception total and they are all 1st rounders.
Could've landed Bush or Sproles in the 2nd/3rd in most drafts.
Then there is no way you are drafting a top 5 QB and 2 top 10 WRs. That's the point. Those guys are far from mid range. The best value at RB to date has probably been Murrary, who I got in the 3rd and 4th in a couple of leagues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The new model for a great FF team is as follows:

1. A top 5 QB

2. Two top 10 WR

3. 2 mid range RB who also catch 4-5 balls a game.

4. Average D

5. Average K
No, things really haven't changed at all. What's important and always has been important is getting your picks right.How is this strategy working out for guys who drafted Brady, Newton or Keap as top 5 QBs in early rounds? Not good.

2 top 10 WRs? As if its just that easy to land, especially if you drafted a top 5 QB. It's basically impossible.

Draft 2 mid range RBs who catch 4-5 balls a game? Who exactly would that be? What mid range RBs are catching 64 to 80 passes a year? Ummmm, none. There may be 3 RBs this season who even approach that type of reception total and they are all 1st rounders.
Could've landed Bush or Sproles in the 2nd/3rd in most drafts.
Then there is no way you are drafting a top 5 QB and 2 top 10 WRs. That's the point.
Could've gone Calvin, Bush, Cobb, Ryan? It's definitely possible. I was able to grab Richardson in the 1st, Dez in the 2nd, and Cobb in the 4th in one league.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top