What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why don't more fantasy leagues use 2 qb's? (1 Viewer)

T

TS Garp

Footballguy
Just wondering why this isn't more popular. Having been in a 2 qb league for a long time as well as a lot of more traditional 1 qb leagues, I can say that the former requires a lot more strategy, in my opinion. There's just something about a 1 qb league that seems to take an element of strategy away. When you introduce the element of starting 2 qb's, the draft takes on a very different dimension, and it doesn't follow the same script at 95% of other drafts out there.

Just curious what other people think of 2 qb leagues. Is it just habit that most leagues don't use it or are there things that you don't like about it?

 
i play in 4 leagues. 3 out of the 4 are start 2 qbs leagues.

i agree with you that there is more strategy involved with them.

i think it has more to do with tradition then anything else.

 
Why don't more leagues use IDP?

Some things just don't make sense you know?

 
I hate the fact that in most leagues QB is almost an afterthought along the same lines as a TE which is so different than the real game of football. That said I prefer these two solutions to drastically increase the importance of QB relative to other positions more than starting 2 QB:

- Adjust the scoring so QB's mean as much as they mean in the NFL. The best QB's carry your team, if you win with a QB not contributing much it means you have to get a great performance from almost the rest of the entire roster, and most importantly if your QB is awful you have almost no chance to win.... just like in football.

- Play in larger leagues(16+). You'll see a much different strategy regarding QB.

If I played in a small league I wouldn't be adverse to starting 2QB but I think the two listed above are a more elegant solution.

 
I love using 2 QBs, but it gets pretty tough if your league size is any higher than 10.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
With 12 team leagues you need to go to "TEAMQB" and some people are more against that concept than any idea out there.

 
culdeus said:
With 12 team leagues you need to go to "TEAMQB" and some people are more against that concept than any idea out there.
Click to expand...
Why? I'm not totally against it although I'm not in favor, but why would you have to go TEAMQB? Personally, my favorite style in 12 teams or larger leagues is either allowing QB flex where most teams will start a QB but you aren't completely screwed during bye weeks or a large lineup where if you don't get points from one position you still have the chance to win - something like 2Q, 2R, 4W, 2T, 2Flex or more.

I'd say the arguments against 2QB are

1. Only 1 QB is on the field at any time - unlike WR, TE or even RB (aside from the wildcat)

2. Most teams don't use QBBC so there's less QBs getting points.

3. Tradition

4. Most sites don't cover 2QB strategy

5. If you have 12 or more teams, not every team can have a backup for bye-weeks or injury (although you can have your QB's backup)

6. The value of lesser starting QBs is too high

Most of these are handled by simply allowing the flex position to include QB although many don't like that either.

It's weird, I prefer 2QB leagues but I don't currently play in any 2QB dynasty leagues - just a couple redrafts.

 
The approach that I like the best is the "SuperFlex" which allows for a 2nd QB but doesn't mandate it. While many teams will use 2 QBs with a SuperFlex it makes Bye weeks and injuries easier to manage and with the right scoring system really provideds even more draft/roster strategy than even 2 QB leagues.

I really dislike the inherent "devaluation" of the QB position in a standard 12 team league that only allows for 1 QB to play.

 
CrossEyed said:
I love using 2 QBs, but it gets pretty tough if your league size is any higher than 10.
Click to expand...
:lmao: That has as much to do with it as anything. On any given NFL team, there are always 1, and often 2 startable (from a FF standpoint) RBs. On most NFL teams there are 2-3 startable fantasy WRs. TE's are trickier - some teams don't use them much in the passing game. So many FF systems only have 1 TE. NFL teams only have 1 startable QB (similar to TE) - and some don't even have that (teams that run a great deal, have poor QBs, etc.) - think of the Vikings pre-Favre or the Jets or Tampa, etc. As such, trying to find 24 or 32 (for 12 or 16 team leagues) startable QBs is virtually impossible - especially when you factor in bye weeks, injuries, etc.
 
Wilbur Wood said:
The approach that I like the best is the "SuperFlex" which allows for a 2nd QB but doesn't mandate it. While many teams will use 2 QBs with a SuperFlex it makes Bye weeks and injuries easier to manage and with the right scoring system really provideds even more draft/roster strategy than even 2 QB leagues.I really dislike the inherent "devaluation" of the QB position in a standard 12 team league that only allows for 1 QB to play.
Click to expand...
My main league does the exact same thing. Start 1QB, 2RB, 2WR, 1TE, K, D and one flex at any position. With this format, there are numerous strategies that you can take. You'll see a balanced mix of RBs, WRs, and QBs taken in the 1st 2 rounds.And QBs become much more valuable in trades, with the stud QBs almost as untradeable as a stud RB.
 
Superflex is one way of handling it. I agree that leagues with >10 teams make it tough on 2 QBs.

One thing you could do would be to totally eliminate position requirements but charge points based on who you start. So you may have to star 10 people, but you have to pay a 7 point penalty for every Qb you use, a 3 point penalty for every RB and a 2 point penalty for every WR.

 
Wilbur Wood said:
The approach that I like the best is the "SuperFlex" which allows for a 2nd QB but doesn't mandate it. While many teams will use 2 QBs with a SuperFlex it makes Bye weeks and injuries easier to manage and with the right scoring system really provideds even more draft/roster strategy than even 2 QB leagues.I really dislike the inherent "devaluation" of the QB position in a standard 12 team league that only allows for 1 QB to play.
Click to expand...
To me that still doesn't solve the problem that in most scoring systems the 8th best QB and 18th best QB are separated by very little. Passing TD's need to count for more points and TO's need to take more points away imo.
 
We've got a dynasty the is a 2-QB with an all-play schedule. Pretty interesting and unlike any other leagues I've seen.

 
The answer is pretty simple. IN 12 team or higher leagues, it's impossible for every team to have a bye week alternative. It's akin to mandating trades...and mandated trades, no matter how well the rules around them conceived, are inherently unfair.

That said, I like the strategy as long as there is some sort of proviso/way around the bye weeks without requiring either a trade or a zero.

Superflex leagues are good for this, as they encourage two QB's but don't strictly require them. I've seen other league setups that use an average for a bye week QB...very fair solution IMO. (Allow a bye week starting QB to be used in the lineup, and the owner recieves that QB's average YTD.)

IN ten team leagues....two QB's is not only workable, but IMO should be the preferred lineup.

 
renesauz said:
The answer is pretty simple. IN 12 team or higher leagues, it's impossible for every team to have a bye week alternative. It's akin to mandating trades...and mandated trades, no matter how well the rules around them conceived, are inherently unfair.

That said, I like the strategy as long as there is some sort of proviso/way around the bye weeks without requiring either a trade or a zero.

Superflex leagues are good for this, as they encourage two QB's but don't strictly require them. I've seen other league setups that use an average for a bye week QB...very fair solution IMO. (Allow a bye week starting QB to be used in the lineup, and the owner recieves that QB's average YTD.)

IN ten team leagues....two QB's is not only workable, but IMO should be the preferred lineup.
Click to expand...
this...I think most players prefer to be in leagues that have at least 12 people......I am not against having rules and what not that change draft strategy somewhat......but really you could do this for any/all positions if thats what you're after....

ie: start 2 kickers and FG's are worth 10 points each.....

but really whats the point.....

there is still plenty of strategy with only starting 1 QB and I think the top tier guys get drafted pretty fairly in relation to what they bring to the game.....I think starting 2 would way over-value them and really change the draft too dramatically in the other direction (12 team and above).....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chase Stuart said:
Superflex is one way of handling it. I agree that leagues with >10 teams make it tough on 2 QBs.One thing you could do would be to totally eliminate position requirements but charge points based on who you start. So you may have to star 10 people, but you have to pay a 7 point penalty for every Qb you use, a 3 point penalty for every RB and a 2 point penalty for every WR.
Click to expand...
If ind this very interesting...ahve you done this in practice or are you just "spit-balling"...either way a pretty fun idea.
 
Leroy Hoard said:
culdeus said:
With 12 team leagues you need to go to "TEAMQB" and some people are more against that concept than any idea out there.
Click to expand...
Yes, but mine lets you start 2 and take the highest point total of the two.
Click to expand...
I like the sound of this twist. I would think if you rewarded the position with favorable QB scoring and had this option it would be an interesting way to add value to the position and would not kill those who had only 1 starting QB due to bye or injury. I am sure there will be those though that would argue against not having to pick your starter and instead just get who performs the best.
 
My regular league was a 10-team/start 2QB league for many many years and we loved it. Last year we went to 12 teams and we thought about getting rid of the 2QB requirement.......but we decided to keep it with some modifications (changing it to a flex position).......and it went very smoothly.

It's the only way to go, IMO. Anything else will make the QB position meaningless.

Last year I played in an 8-team/start 1QB league, and there were top-5 QBs on the waiver wire every week. :thumbdown:

 
Bye weeks can be tough enough but with having to start 2QBs, they are killers. Not so much for each team having to start 2 QBs as everyone is in the same position, but because luck of the draw to be the teams who are facing teams who have a QB on a bye is even more of factor than it is for other positions.

 
Agree with the superflex. In most setups, QBs 13-24 will outscore most people's backup RB, WR, and TE, so the flex spot essentially becomes a QB. But since it is flex, you aren't SOL on bye weeks if you don't have a 3rd QB as a bye week filler.

Both of my leagues have gone to this setup though instead of a true super flex, it's a flex QB/RB, and we go with 4 WR, 2 TE, and a flex WR/TE, with staggered PPR. Still works as far as not having bye week problems, and the extra WR and TE make the skill positions all of reasonable parity at the top.

 
The only league I play in where 2 QBs can be utilized is the FFOC, which is really a Superflex league. I'm pretty sure that the scoring is slanted a little in favor of QBs anyway, so basically everyone ends up starting 2 QBs.

I understand that it tends to balance out, and no one is required to go with that strategy. But to me, there's just something inherently wrong with third-tier QBs getting drafted in the 3rd round of a draft.

 
Last year we started a new 10 team league with friends that always played in other leagues. We wanted to make it a little different so we start 2 QBs and 2 TEs along with 2 RBs and 3 WRs. Turned out to be way more fun than my other leagues. Plus the draft was so different than the usual drafts I was used to.

 
TommyGilmore said:
My regular league was a 10-team/start 2QB league for many many years and we loved it. Last year we went to 12 teams and we thought about getting rid of the 2QB requirement.......but we decided to keep it with some modifications (changing it to a flex position).......and it went very smoothly.

It's the only way to go, IMO. Anything else will make the QB position meaningless.

Last year I played in an 8-team/start 1QB league, and there were top-5 QBs on the waiver wire every week. :coffee:
Click to expand...
you give the thumbdown thing like you are surprised.....what did you expect with only 8 teams......?.....not sure why people would even do an 8 teamer without some serious modifications....8 teamer is probably a perfect situation to go with 2 QB's......as well as 3 starting kickers and defenses......

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.

Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position.

AND they'll usually give their QB 4 points for TD's.

Guys this isn't reality. It's fantasy.

However, once your league gets above 10 teams, 2 QB's is exceptionally hard to do unless you have the "superflex" spot.

 
shader said:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.
Click to expand...
Silly me, you are right. How can all of us 1QB leagues have been wrong for so long? I am writing my commish that we HAVE to change our rules to allow 2 QBs and IDP instead of team defenses. If they don't change the rules, I'm quitting. I don't want to play with idiots in inferior leagues that don't make sense. By saying 'amuses', you are implying that we are silly or stupid for wanting to mimic the real game as closely as possible. Noone ever claimed to be playing actual football.

Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position.
Click to expand...
Because in 'actual' football, unlike the QB position, there can be 2 RBs and 3 WRs on the field at the same time.

AND they'll usually give their QB 4 points for TD's.
Click to expand...
AND we give WRs 6 points for a total of 10 points for the same TD! What's your point? That since we have roster restrictions that more closely mirror the NFL that we need scoring to also more closely mimic it?
Guys this isn't reality. It's fantasy.
Click to expand...
Right, you have your fantasy and I will have mine.Everyone criticizing other league's rules should get off their high horses and realize that this great hobby of ours has many variations that suit each individual league. I don't like all the rules in my league but our rules are decided on by OUR league members. State your case for recommending better scoring options but don't look down on my league's rules because YOU don't like them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Whenever someone says that so-and-so changes the strategy of the draft, I think to myself, "Why are you still doing a draft?"

All these rules to make the draft less predictable, more fair, more strategy, blah blah blah. Do an auction, and you won't need to add an 'element of strategy'.

BTW, I won't do a 2 QB league because a) an injury to a QB becomes even more magnified and b) I think QB is already plenty important. You can have a good team, and waste a season because of a QB injury that has nothing to do with strategy.

 
3nOut said:
shader said:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.
Click to expand...
Silly me, you are right. How can all of us 1QB leagues have been wrong for so long? I am writing my commish that we HAVE to change our rules to allow 2 QBs and IDP instead of team defenses. If they don't change the rules, I'm quitting. I don't want to play with idiots in inferior leagues that don't make sense. By saying 'amuses', you are implying that we are silly or stupid for wanting to mimic the real game as closely as possible. Noone ever claimed to be playing actual football.

Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position.
Click to expand...
Because in 'actual' football, unlike the QB position, there can be 2 RBs and 3 WRs on the field at the same time.
Click to expand...
How many teams have on the field at the same time - 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WR AND a flex?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stinkin Ref said:
TommyGilmore said:
My regular league was a 10-team/start 2QB league for many many years and we loved it. Last year we went to 12 teams and we thought about getting rid of the 2QB requirement.......but we decided to keep it with some modifications (changing it to a flex position).......and it went very smoothly.

It's the only way to go, IMO. Anything else will make the QB position meaningless.

Last year I played in an 8-team/start 1QB league, and there were top-5 QBs on the waiver wire every week. :thumbdown:
Click to expand...
you give the thumbdown thing like you are surprised.....what did you expect with only 8 teams......?.....not sure why people would even do an 8 teamer without some serious modifications....8 teamer is probably a perfect situation to go with 2 QB's......as well as 3 starting kickers and defenses......
Click to expand...
:goodposting: One of my favorite leagues was 8 teams, 2 QB, 3 RB, 5 WR, 2 TE and 2 flex (non-QB). Only 1 PK and D, that should have changed.
 
RUSF18 said:
The only league I play in where 2 QBs can be utilized is the FFOC, which is really a Superflex league. I'm pretty sure that the scoring is slanted a little in favor of QBs anyway, so basically everyone ends up starting 2 QBs.

I understand that it tends to balance out, and no one is required to go with that strategy. But to me, there's just something inherently wrong with third-tier QBs getting drafted in the 3rd round of a draft.
Click to expand...
I suppose it depends how we define our tiers but 3rd tier or later RBs often go in the 3rd, or earlier.
 
FUBAR said:
3nOut said:
shader said:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.
Click to expand...
Silly me, you are right. How can all of us 1QB leagues have been wrong for so long? I am writing my commish that we HAVE to change our rules to allow 2 QBs and IDP instead of team defenses. If they don't change the rules, I'm quitting. I don't want to play with idiots in inferior leagues that don't make sense. By saying 'amuses', you are implying that we are silly or stupid for wanting to mimic the real game as closely as possible. Noone ever claimed to be playing actual football.

Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position.
Click to expand...
Because in 'actual' football, unlike the QB position, there can be 2 RBs and 3 WRs on the field at the same time.
Click to expand...
How many teams have on the field at the same time - 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WR AND a flex?
Click to expand...
The "How many" at once question is silly. In a given game, most teams will have AT LEAST TWO Rb's get significant (more then five) carries, AT LEAST 4 WR's get at least 4 targets. But, barring injury, only one QB attempts more then 2 or 3 passes.

How many are on the field at once isn't the issue...the issue is how many QB's can reasonably be predicted to actually SCORE AT ALL in a given by week...during some weeks the answer is 26, which most of us find unreasonably tight for a 12 team start two league. RB's with predictable (will score SOMETHING) carries in a given week? About 50...AND THAT'S WITH SIX TEAMS ON BYE! If we applied the same positional strain to RB's, we'd be fored to start 4...every week. Where's the group leading that charge? WR's? ABout 80 get at least 4 targets, and 100 get at least 2. SO we should start 6 of them...right? :sarcasm:

There are good arguments for and against 2 QB leagues, but leave "on the field at once" arguments in the trashcan...they're worthless.

 
renesauz said:
FUBAR said:
3nOut said:
shader said:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.
Click to expand...
Silly me, you are right. How can all of us 1QB leagues have been wrong for so long? I am writing my commish that we HAVE to change our rules to allow 2 QBs and IDP instead of team defenses. If they don't change the rules, I'm quitting. I don't want to play with idiots in inferior leagues that don't make sense. By saying 'amuses', you are implying that we are silly or stupid for wanting to mimic the real game as closely as possible. Noone ever claimed to be playing actual football.

Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position.
Click to expand...
Because in 'actual' football, unlike the QB position, there can be 2 RBs and 3 WRs on the field at the same time.
Click to expand...
How many teams have on the field at the same time - 1 QB, 2 RBs, 3 WR AND a flex?
Click to expand...
The "How many" at once question is silly. In a given game, most teams will have AT LEAST TWO Rb's get significant (more then five) carries, AT LEAST 4 WR's get at least 4 targets. But, barring injury, only one QB attempts more then 2 or 3 passes.

How many are on the field at once isn't the issue...the issue is how many QB's can reasonably be predicted to actually SCORE AT ALL in a given by week...during some weeks the answer is 26, which most of us find unreasonably tight for a 12 team start two league. RB's with predictable (will score SOMETHING) carries in a given week? About 50...AND THAT'S WITH SIX TEAMS ON BYE! If we applied the same positional strain to RB's, we'd be fored to start 4...every week. Where's the group leading that charge? WR's? ABout 80 get at least 4 targets, and 100 get at least 2. SO we should start 6 of them...right? :popcorn:

There are good arguments for and against 2 QB leagues, but leave "on the field at once" arguments in the trashcan...they're worthless.
Click to expand...
The above in bold is why so many people here suggest using a super flex for your 2nd QB. The biggest argument against 2 QBs is the bye week issue, and that removes it as an issue of any significance since you can plug in another player on a bad bye week.
 
shader said:
It always amuses me when someone says "well teams only start one QB", as if we're playing actual football here. It's fantasy football.Yet, they'll play in a league that has 2 RB's, 3 WR's, and a flex position. AND they'll usually give their QB 4 points for TD's.Guys this isn't reality. It's fantasy. However, once your league gets above 10 teams, 2 QB's is exceptionally hard to do unless you have the "superflex" spot.
Click to expand...
Ok Ok I concede your fantasy can be whatever you want it to be. Enjoy.I prefer my league to be closer to real NFL lineups, 1 QB, 1 K, 6 pt TDs, etc. I don't play it anymore, but I used to play a league that also played an O-line (team, not individual), plus an 11 man IDP (3-4 or 4-3, but must use 4 DBs).
 
I play in a few leagues with the "max" format of start 2 QBs, 3 RBs and 4 WRs, and while it is extremely challenging, it's also highly rewarding.

 
Warhogs said:
Leroy Hoard said:
culdeus said:
With 12 team leagues you need to go to "TEAMQB" and some people are more against that concept than any idea out there.
Click to expand...
Yes, but mine lets you start 2 and take the highest point total of the two.
Click to expand...
I like the sound of this twist. I would think if you rewarded the position with favorable QB scoring and had this option it would be an interesting way to add value to the position and would not kill those who had only 1 starting QB due to bye or injury. I am sure there will be those though that would argue against not having to pick your starter and instead just get who performs the best.
Click to expand...
I think the natural hoarding instinct kicks in for a lot of people. They think they can hold someone hostage because they can stash away the Oakland, Washington, KC bench QBs. In any situation it's just not feasible for a 12 team league strictly. There has to be an ALLFLEX option, or you are gonna really screw somebody.
 
I just don't get that excited about analyzing and guessing which QB ranked 25-32 is the most likely to put up QB15 types numbers. And I don't like the idea of my league being won by the guy who gets lucky with his backup QB. I just don't see that it adds that much to the game and it goes against reality in that no NFL team starts two QBs.

 
az_prof said:
I just don't get that excited about analyzing and guessing which QB ranked 25-32 is the most likely to put up QB15 types numbers. And I don't like the idea of my league being won by the guy who gets lucky with his backup QB. I just don't see that it adds that much to the game and it goes against reality in that no NFL team starts two QBs.
Click to expand...
It goes against reality?Seriously?
 
CrossEyed said:
I love using 2 QBs, but it gets pretty tough if your league size is any higher than 10.
Click to expand...
My main league is a 12-team, 2-QB start league. And QBs are SACRED in that league. Many weeks, it is entirely possible that a team does not even have 2 starters in their lineup due to byes, injuries, or anything else.I have the 1.3 rookie pick, and my order of preference is Dez Bryant, Ryan Matthews, and then Sam Bradford or Jimmy Claussen, depending on which teams they end up with. QBs are just that rare and important in that league. I picked up Bruce Gradkowski late in the year, and he was actually a HUGE addition to my team at the time, and I rode him late in the year. An early season trade for Chad henne and Vince Young was instrumental in helping me get to the championship game. it is definitely the league I have the most fun in, and it is full IDP starters as well.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Instinctive said:
az_prof said:
I just don't get that excited about analyzing and guessing which QB ranked 25-32 is the most likely to put up QB15 types numbers. And I don't like the idea of my league being won by the guy who gets lucky with his backup QB. I just don't see that it adds that much to the game and it goes against reality in that no NFL team starts two QBs.
Click to expand...
It goes against reality?Seriously?
Click to expand...
I know, cracks me up every time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
2QB Draft Strategy
Replies
7
Views
2K
Chaka
Chaka
Largent
Travis Hunter in IDP leagues
Replies
16
Views
2K
Brew Swillis
Brew Swillis
Dez
FSGA draft week is here once again for 2025
Replies
7
Views
282
Bri
B

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top