Those who start 2QBs...do you like it? (1 Viewer)

[jerseyh8r]

I am the commish of a keep 5 (10-team) auction league in it's second year (had been a re-draft for 5 years before that). Last year we started 1QB, 2RB, 3WR, 1TE, 1PK, and 1 DEF--all TDs are 6pts, 1 PPR all positions, and 1 per 10 yds rush/rec, 1 per 25 yds passing.

Over the next 2 seasons, I am looking to try to "level" the positions. This season, we are adding a FLEX position...all teams were told mid-2006 season of the move for the upcoming season so they could prepare. After crunching some numbers, I am really tempted to tell everyone that we will be moving to a start 2 QB next season, which I know will meet with some hesitation--so I was looking to get some input from the board before asking my league-mates to take a leap of faith.

Right now, especially in the auction, the 2nd tier of QBs has virtually no monetary value whatsoever and the waiver wire was filled with 'em in the 2006 season. I think 2QBs will help add value to the position (after the top 10 are gone), encourage trades (QB1=RB1=WR1, QB15=RB15+WR15, etc), and vary possible strategies throughout the season. Any thoughts are appreciated.

ETA:Bolded

 

[section 8]

I'm in an 8 team dynasty league, expanding to 10 in the near future. We start 12 players..2 QB, 3RB, 4WR, TE, K, and Def..With a 24 player roster and 4 player taxi squad we get plenty of opportunities to second guess ourselves....I'm active in 5 leagues this season and this has been by far the most enjoyable......I would like to see 2 starting QBs in the other leagues....Would make things very interesting...

 

[sholditch]

it adds a new dimension to the game and makes QBs more valuable. Played in my first one this year and liked it.

 

[jerseyh8r]

I'm in an 8 team dynasty league, expanding to 10 in the near future. We start 12 players..2 QB, 3RB, 4WR, TE, K, and Def..With a 24 player roster and 4 player taxi squad we get plenty of opportunities to second guess ourselves....I'm active in 5 leagues this season and this has been by far the most enjoyable......I would like to see 2 starting QBs in the other leagues....Would make things very interesting...

This is the kind of stuff I was hoping to hear.

 

[doughboydeluxe]

I love starting 2 QB. Two of my leagues (10 team and 12 team) do this, and it definitely adds value to the QB position. You will find hesitation among people who have never played in a 2QB league, but once they try it and see how it actually makes you have to think about who you are drafting, they will be on board, too.

 

[valhallan]

My local league has been starting 2 QBs for many years now and we love it. I’ve been in a handful of start 1 QB leagues but none of them have been as fun as the start 2.

If you really want to balance the positions, take a good look at your scoring system too. 4pt pass TDs, 1pt/25 yd passing, 6pt all other TDs, 1pt/10 yd rush/rec, and PPR is the system we use.

 

[jerseyh8r]

My local league has been starting 2 QBs for many years now and we love it. I’ve been in a handful of start 1 QB leagues but none of them have been as fun as the start 2.

If you really want to balance the positions, take a good look at your scoring system too. 4pt pass TDs, 1pt/25 yd passing, 6pt all other TDs, 1pt/10 yd rush/rec, and PPR is the system we use.

Thanks...have been looking into simply moving down to 5pt for pass TDs vs 6pt. I recently took the top 90 FF performers (from each season) over the last 3 seasons and entered their stats into a spreadsheet. I found that if I just decreased the TDs to 5pt for passing the point distribution looked like this:

QB	  RB	WR	TETOP 40 (2004-2006)		9	19	12	0TOP 80 (2004-2006)		24	24	29	3TOP 120 (2004-2006)		38	38	41	3TOP 160 (2004-2006)		45	50	60	5TOP 200 (2004-2006)		58	61	73	8

[fingers crossed] I like it and thinks it should prove to be fairly successful [/fingers crossed]

 

[jerseyh8r]

One and only bump for the am crowd. TIA

 

[ffinmyblood]

2 QB's???

 

[u999spf]

2QB's are great. You are right there are going to be owners afraid of it or complain about it because they are people that do not like to change things or because 'There are never 2QB on the field at the same time' crap.

Jeff Pasquino wrote an article on it last year with all the pros of moving to a 2 QB start league. I used this to help my other league owners to read up on it and to sway them into giving it a try for 1 year. The biggest worry for people is that there are not enough QB's to go around but with your 10 team league, everyone can at least start with 3QB's. You may want to consider a roster limit of 3 or 4QB's on a roster so that someone doesn't hoard all of them.

By making a 2QB start league you make the QB's much more valuable than in the past and get them closer on par to the RB's. The QB position is the most important position in football and it would be nice if fantasy football was able to duplicate that. With 2QB start leagues you can. RB's dominated the early rounds of drafts because of their scarcity, not scoring systems, etc. By doing the same with QB's people have to adjust for this. I hated seeing the Rueben Droughns of the world getting drafted before a Donovan McNabb draft after draft. This will not happen in a 2QB draft.

We tried it last year in my 12 team league and the only complaint was lack of QB's available. In a 12 team league it was impossible for every team to have 3 healthy starting QB's so there were weeks where people got the short end of the stick. They did have the option to look ahead or make trades but some elected not too. It was a little cut throat, which I liked. I hoped that this new rule would also promote more trading but that did not really happen. In fact, there were less trades than normal. In a 12 team league, if you were lucky enough to have 3 starting QB's, you were really hesitant about trading that 3rd guy away until all the bye weeks were over because if one of you other guys went down you were screwed so people really held onto these guys. One guy would not trade his 3rd QB (Losman) for Reggie Bush (mid season - before he really started to score) even though he really needed a 2nd RB, for this reason.

This year there was talk of getting rid of this rule because of the lack of QB issue but I was able to convince them to modify this rule to a SuperFlex position instead. You can start 1 more player at ANY position. Most teams will still try to start 2QB's because a QB2 will probably outscore a RB3 or WR4 or TE2 or K2 or DEF2 most times but these other options are available to them now for when injuries and bye weeks strike. Also, I believe this will still shake up the draft order where QB's will be more valuable and get drafted earlier and should give people more options when considering trades. (We did the Superflex in 2 of my other leagues last year and it worked out great.)

 

[sizzer55]

i would recommend this "super-flex" option for 12 team leagues for sure and probably 10 team leagues as well. hopefully, everyone's scoring system still has qb's as the highest scoring players on average so pretty much every team will want to start a qb in the flex spot if they have a decent qb to start. since qb's are generally more consistent scorers than the other positions, it helps to distinguish the good from bad qb's if the scoring system makes qb's the highest scoring position. otherwise, qb's scoring will be in too much of a clump. this is especially true for 1 qb leagues though. with 2 qb leagues, the scarcity of qb's alone will greatly increase their value. basically, i think it's better to keep passing td's the same as rushing and recieving.

 

[lawrence phillips]

Two QB leagues are all that I know as I've been in the same one for 15 years. I could not envision bringing it down to 1 qb and basically have the QB position mean next to nothing. Finding that 3rd qb who will be your backup adds another important element to the roster.

 

[GregR_2]

I love lineups that start 2 QBs and don't want to go back.

Let me add to those saying to use a flex instead of a definite QB slot. The biggest problem with requiring a 2nd QB is that there aren't enough to go around to fill bye weeks and injuries. Less of a problem in a 10 team league than in a 12, but still a problem in a 10. Making it a flex resolves this problem.

On a slightly different note, if you want to level the positions I suggest you add a flex QB/RB which will be a QB 90% of the time, and then add a flex WR/TE. Actually I'd add a full time WR and TE, then also add a flex. That's what my dynasty league is, 1 QB, 2 RB, 1 flex QB/RB, 4 WR, 2 TE, 1 flex WR/TE. We have staggered PPR that favors TE, then WR, then RB, and with that setup we have something close to parity across the top of the positions, though of course each year one guy may stand out above the others. If you have 1 PPR for everyone the TE and WR will still be trailing RB by a bit even with that.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I play either way.... 10 teams I like the 2 QB thing... 12 or more I like the 1 QB

 

[jerseyh8r]

2QB's are great. You are right there are going to be owners afraid of it or complain about it because they are people that do not like to change things or because 'There are never 2QB on the field at the same time' crap.

Jeff Pasquino wrote an article on it last year with all the pros of moving to a 2 QB start league. I used this to help my other league owners to read up on it and to sway them into giving it a try for 1 year. The biggest worry for people is that there are not enough QB's to go around but with your 10 team league, everyone can at least start with 3QB's. You may want to consider a roster limit of 3 or 4QB's on a roster so that someone doesn't hoard all of them.

Good thought on the roster limit...hadn't considered it.Thanks for your input u999spf....very informative and appreciated.

 

[jerseyh8r]

Two QB leagues are all that I know as I've been in the same one for 15 years. I could not envision bringing it down to 1 qb and basically have the QB position mean next to nothing. Finding that 3rd qb who will be your backup adds another important element to the roster.

These are the type of remarks that I will be bringing to my leaguemates...along with the 80% approval rating.

 

[jerseyh8r]

I love lineups that start 2 QBs and don't want to go back.Let me add to those saying to use a flex instead of a definite QB slot. The biggest problem with requiring a 2nd QB is that there aren't enough to go around to fill bye weeks and injuries. Less of a problem in a 10 team league than in a 12, but still a problem in a 10. Making it a flex resolves this problem.On a slightly different note, if you want to level the positions I suggest you add a flex QB/RB which will be a QB 90% of the time, and then add a flex WR/TE. Actually I'd add a full time WR and TE, then also add a flex. That's what my dynasty league is, 1 QB, 2 RB, 1 flex QB/RB, 4 WR, 2 TE, 1 flex WR/TE. We have staggered PPR that favors TE, then WR, then RB, and with that setup we have something close to parity across the top of the positions, though of course each year one guy may stand out above the others. If you have 1 PPR for everyone the TE and WR will still be trailing RB by a bit even with that.

Thanks....good thoughts here, but can't make broad changes in one year. Gonna aim for the 2nd QB next season (2008), will consider other moves after that. Just trying to give the guys ample time to prepare (esp. considering it is a keep 5-auction style)

 

[Jason Wood]

Of the dozen or so leagues I do each year, my favorite is a start 2QB league. We originally went to 2QB by necessity, as two buddies had to drop out of a 10-teamer at the last minute and we were pressed into doing an 8-man league for a season. We went with 2QBs to balance that out, but when we went back to a 10-owner format decided to keep it.

For me, it's simply a matter of balance. The league is also high performance (1 pt per rec, bonuses for length of TD, bonuses for 100-yard and 300-yard games, etc...) so it really removes the need/desire to overweight RBs. All three main skill positions (TE is still a bit lower priority) have equal weight and it's not atypical for several QBs and a bunch of WRs to come off in the first two rounds.

 

[H.K.]

My local league has been starting 2 QBs for many years now and we love it. I’ve been in a handful of start 1 QB leagues but none of them have been as fun as the start 2. If you really want to balance the positions, take a good look at your scoring system too. 4pt pass TDs, 1pt/25 yd passing, 6pt all other TDs, 1pt/10 yd rush/rec, and PPR is the system we use.

Same here. 10 teams or less, then 2 QB leagues are the way to go.

 

[PsychoMan]

sounds like there's no good way to do 2 required QBs in a 12 team league, correct? like someone stated above, during bye weeks, some teams will always get the short end of the stick. i could see how this would be nice for 8 or 10 team leagues though.

 

[smackdaddies]

I have been playing in a 10 - 12 team 2qb total points league for 6 years.

I like it because it is different than my other leauges. I play in 3 leaugues per year, all very different. It makes the game more challenging/varied because you are forced to evaluate things differently.

12 team start 2qb leauges are challenging, but it is no different than other challenges. If you dont get one of the top 4 rb in a regular leauge, what are you going to do? Cry? No, you work to maximize your talent, work trades, watch the waiver wire to make your team competitive even though you dont have the best.

If you have poor qb's it is the same thing. You strenghten your team elsewhere, work the waiver wire, make trades.

If you whine about it your an amaetur - your also a loser. if you work at it your a pro - and a winner.

I would suggest this - if you start 2qb in a 12 team leauge - stick with 4pts per td pass, 6pts per TD run/reception. If you go to 6pt td pass, you unbalance the leauge too much.

Last year I won and drafted 4 RB (start 2, one flex) in the first 5 rounds. My starting RB made up for the fact I did not have the best #2qb (poor even)

 

[GregR_2]

2QB's are great. You are right there are going to be owners afraid of it or complain about it because they are people that do not like to change things or because 'There are never 2QB on the field at the same time' crap.

Jeff Pasquino wrote an article on it last year with all the pros of moving to a 2 QB start league. I used this to help my other league owners to read up on it and to sway them into giving it a try for 1 year. The biggest worry for people is that there are not enough QB's to go around but with your 10 team league, everyone can at least start with 3QB's. You may want to consider a roster limit of 3 or 4QB's on a roster so that someone doesn't hoard all of them.

Good thought on the roster limit...hadn't considered it.Thanks for your input u999spf....very informative and appreciated.

Let me preface this comment with, if a whole league of guys agree they like the league a certain way, they should make it that way.But that said... many people hate roster limits and with a fairly good reason. Hoarding only works when other owners are taking less valuable players over players at the hoarded position who are ultimately more valuable.

I had a work league that ran for about 7 years, with some of the owners being of mediocre skill. One or two of them complained year after year about people hoarding RBs. Despite experiencing acutely that those RBs had value that their teams needed, they never would adjust their draft strategy and take those RBs where they needed in order to get them.

Give it some thought before you look at imposing roster limits on a league. I would argue the problem that roster limits addresses is better fixed by opening a discussion with your owners that hoarding only works when the league is undervaluing a position. So if hoarding is working, the best fix is for owners to reevaluate their own draft strategy with the realization they weren't giving enough importance to those players.

 

[GregR_2]

sounds like there's no good way to do 2 required QBs in a 12 team league, correct? like someone stated above, during bye weeks, some teams will always get the short end of the stick. i could see how this would be nice for 8 or 10 team leagues though.

No, you can. See my first post in the thread. Just make it a flex position where starting a QB is almost always the best play to make, but that you can start someone else at another position if need be. My dynasty league is 12 teams and does this. It's a lot harder to assure yourself even 2 starting QBs in a dynasty since you have to plan ahead for your starting QB losing his job, and you won't always get that right. But we don't have any problems with it because it's a flex.

 

[shadyridr]

sounds like there's no good way to do 2 required QBs in a 12 team league, correct? like someone stated above, during bye weeks, some teams will always get the short end of the stick. i could see how this would be nice for 8 or 10 team leagues though.

Perhaps using TEAM QBs?Anyway Im intrigued about the whole 2 QB system but it could be tough in a 12 team league

 

[jerseyh8r]

2QB's are great. You are right there are going to be owners afraid of it or complain about it because they are people that do not like to change things or because 'There are never 2QB on the field at the same time' crap.

Jeff Pasquino wrote an article on it last year with all the pros of moving to a 2 QB start league. I used this to help my other league owners to read up on it and to sway them into giving it a try for 1 year. The biggest worry for people is that there are not enough QB's to go around but with your 10 team league, everyone can at least start with 3QB's. You may want to consider a roster limit of 3 or 4QB's on a roster so that someone doesn't hoard all of them.

Good thought on the roster limit...hadn't considered it.Thanks for your input u999spf....very informative and appreciated.

Let me preface this comment with, if a whole league of guys agree they like the league a certain way, they should make it that way.But that said... many people hate roster limits and with a fairly good reason. Hoarding only works when other owners are taking less valuable players over players at the hoarded position who are ultimately more valuable.

I had a work league that ran for about 7 years, with some of the owners being of mediocre skill. One or two of them complained year after year about people hoarding RBs. Despite experiencing acutely that those RBs had value that their teams needed, they never would adjust their draft strategy and take those RBs where they needed in order to get them.

Give it some thought before you look at imposing roster limits on a league. I would argue the problem that roster limits addresses is better fixed by opening a discussion with your owners that hoarding only works when the league is undervaluing a position. So if hoarding is working, the best fix is for owners to reevaluate their own draft strategy with the realization they weren't giving enough importance to those players.

Thanks again...it may prove to be something that would be useful to implement for 1 year and ease the transition for the weary. Then when the flaws are pointed out, remove the limits. I think that it just may be an easier sell (2QBs) for the apprehensive if their is a limit is all, and I would rather have 2QBs with a limit for a year or 2 than I would stick with the cheap tier 2 QBs

 

[Power Monster]

Not so much a 2 QB start in this ten team league but a flex spot where the power comes from starting two QBs. There was nothing cooler than putting in Brady and Mcnabb last year (until McNabb went down) but then I just put in Garcia and pounded some teams.....

 

[finnref]

2 qb is great. Makes you plan more for the draft and forces you to think ahead more in planning for bye weeks and the usual injuries. Must be no more than 10 teams, however. In one league we added two teams and went to the flex qb. Tried a one qb league again and was bored. There was always an easy qb pickup on the waiver wire. No challenge. Will never do one qb again.

We play 2qb,2 rb, 3 wr, and one flex rb-wr.

We also play two defenses in one league which is also good fun.

 

[BigRed]

it adds a new dimension to the game and makes QBs more valuable. Played in my first one this year and liked it.

Starting 2 PKS would a new dimension to the game and make PKs more valuable too. But it would also be dumb, just like starting 2 QBs, IMO. I hate it. I know FF doesn't = NFL but in this respect it should and starting 2 QBs is to me just plain stoopid. I never did buy much into the "we have to make RBs less valuable" bit anyway. To each their own though.

 

[jerseyh8r]

Starting 2 PKS would a new dimension to the game and make PKs more valuable too. But it would also be dumb, just like starting 2 QBs, IMO. I hate it. I know FF doesn't = NFL but in this respect it should and starting 2 QBs is to me just plain stoopid.

I understand your point BigRed, but last season in the auction PManning went for $50+, while only 5 or 6 other QBs went for >$10. There was just no reason to go higher when the WW was gonna be filled with good talent at the position. I understand that it isn't considered a good solution to what I would consider to be a "FF purist" (no disrespect intended), but it is something I would really like to try...especially considering that 85% of the people who have done it like it. If you come back to this thread, I am curious: Have you tried it and not liked it, or just don't like the idea on principle (NTTAWWT)?

I never did buy much into the "we have to make RBs less valuable" bit anyway. To each their own though.

It isn't so much to intentionally make the RB less valuable (which I grant is the end result comparatively to the other positions) so much as it is an effort to try to make trading more feasible between teams--creating a system where a top 10 QB= top 10 RB= top 10 WR, same for top 20s, top 30s, etc. In the leagues where RB is king I find that the draft/auction is boring/predictable and strategy is primarily dictated by draft slot more than anything else. This isn't as important in an auction league, but would impact mid-season moves for sure.

 

[chris1969]

The few 2 QB leagues I've been in have been my favorites. It only works well if there are 10 or less teams, but the leagues seem to be more active for trades and the QB spot isn't taken for granted every week.

 

[Mighty Ducks]

Lots of good replies here. I think that 2 QBs (and larger starting lineups with flex positions, etc.) are more appealing to those who like to have options to building their team. What these do is tend to level the playing field against the random draft position that people get by luck of the draw. With 2 QBs and other flex and PPR options you can overcome the guy with the top pick by beating him at other positions. This is much harder to do with a small lineup. So I agree with the majority of your posters in favor of the 2 QB lineup, however ............

there remains a large population out in fantasy land that will not want to go to 2 QBs for a variety of reasons that were presented earlier. Seems that to many a player the decisions in a fantasy draft are mano-v-mano (ie: do I like Bulger better than Brees?, Gore more than Westbook?, Ward more than Burress?) vs groups-v-groups (ie: Bulger/Vick/Westbrook/Morency/Ward/ ...etc. vs Green/Favre/Tomlinson/Dunn/Wayne ...etc.?). For these reasons I'm not optimistic you'll get the responses you desire by presenting these posts to your leaguemates regardless of how positive they are. However, I do wish you the best in trying!

 

[jerseyh8r]

...Seems that to many a player the decisions in a fantasy draft are mano-v-mano (ie: do I like Bulger better than Brees?, Gore more than Westbook?, Ward more than Burress?) vs groups-v-groups (ie: Bulger/Vick/Westbrook/Morency/Ward/ ...etc. vs Green/Favre/Tomlinson/Dunn/Wayne ...etc.?). For these reasons I'm not optimistic you'll get the responses you desire by presenting these posts to your leaguemates regardless of how positive they are....

I agree that this is probably the feeling that most people who oppose the change will have. Basically, and maybe I am seeing it wrong, that argument sounds a lot like, "It's too hard." That won't fly with me simply because the league that I am in was a free Y! league for 4 years, but the same 4 guys were always in it at the end and wanted something more competitive (so the top 4 went and created this current league). No one is going to quit over the 2QB start, but there are 3-4 guys (out of 10) who are going to be very reluctant and hesitant. This thread has helped me see some of the arguments for and against the system which will help me prepare for any conversations that I have with my league members on the topic. If there are any other FBGs who can give me some reasons NOT to do 2QB start from your own experiences beyond, "They don't start 2 QBs in the NFL, why should your FF team?"....they would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks for all your helpful responses guys....much appreciated.

Have a great weekend.