Total Roster and Starting Roster sizes (1 Viewer)

[buffburgo]

I am commish for a quite high scoring 12-Team league (6pt all TD(incl QB), PPR, many bonuses). For the past few seasons, our Roster requirements were: 1QB/2RB/3WR/1TE/1K/1D/2Flex(QB,RB,WR,TE) + 5 Bench for a total of 16. The league is kinda flat as far as interaction between Owners, lack of trading, people complaining about not enough available talent to make add/drops and a few teams got stuck without a QB towards the end of the season because trade deadline passed, and there were no available QB's on the waive wire. Some teams had 5 QB's, while others had 1 or 2 (I had only Garrard for much of the season).

So, there has been talk of reducing the roster size to 14 total, by reducing the Flex to 1 and the Bench to 4. How do you think this would effect things? Would reducing the Bench to 4 but keeping 2 Flex cause more "action" than reducing bench and Flex?

Initially we had 5 bench to cover 11 starters, so 5/11=45% bench coverage. with reducing to 14, we'd have 4/10=40% coverage. But if we kept 2 flex, that would be 4/11=36% coverage. Less coverage, I would think, lends to more action, but maybe 4/11 is too tight?

 

[jburns]

I am commish for a quite high scoring 12-Team league (6pt all TD(incl QB), PPR, many bonuses). For the past few seasons, our Roster requirements were: 1QB/2RB/3WR/1TE/1K/1D/2Flex(QB,RB,WR,TE) + 5 Bench for a total of 16. The league is kinda flat as far as interaction between Owners, lack of trading, people complaining about not enough available talent to make add/drops and a few teams got stuck without a QB towards the end of the season because trade deadline passed, and there were no available QB's on the waive wire. Some teams had 5 QB's, while others had 1 or 2 (I had only Garrard for much of the season).So, there has been talk of reducing the roster size to 14 total, by reducing the Flex to 1 and the Bench to 4. How do you think this would effect things? Would reducing the Bench to 4 but keeping 2 Flex cause more "action" than reducing bench and Flex?Initially we had 5 bench to cover 11 starters, so 5/11=45% bench coverage. with reducing to 14, we'd have 4/10=40% coverage. But if we kept 2 flex, that would be 4/11=36% coverage. Less coverage, I would think, lends to more action, but maybe 4/11 is too tight?

another thing i think you can consider is removing the trade deadline (or at least pushing it back)? seems like some owners wanted to make a trade at the end of the year but simply couldn't.

 

[buffburgo]

We have the trade deadline set at Thanksgiving. I think that's pretty standard for most leagues. We could push it back i guess....

 

[mrspree15]

Some teams had 5 QBs? Why not just set individual position roster limits?

 

[m_sell31]

Some teams had 5 QBs? Why not just set individual position roster limits?

Don't include QB in your flex positions. If you want thaT MANY qb's playing get rid of one flex position all together and make it a start 2 QB league.