UM Fantasy Football League IV
- Thread starter King Richard
- Start date
AchrisK
Weakling
rms
Active Member
rms
Active Member
Welp, forget offering me a trade for Mendenhall, DeAngelo Williams was placed on IR so I need to keep him for depth now.
rms
Active Member
rms
Active Member
I don't think it's too much. Receivers are overvalued in both fantasy and real life. Unless they are thrown the ball, they are completely useless on just about every play, whereas running backs run the ball, catch the ball, and pass block, and sometimes doing multiple things on a single play (this is also why I think naming Jerry Rice the greatest football player of all time completely absurd). The days of the one man backfield are almost over, but that's only because wearing out your stud running back is very detrimental to an offense, especially if they are excellent blocking and receiving backs (ala Joseph Addai).
Besides, why would I want every position's scoring to be identical? That's just stupid.
Besides, why would I want every position's scoring to be identical? That's just stupid.
rms
Active Member
lol dude so basically every starting or split carried back is better than every receiver? how is that fair haha
No, receivers do score quite a bit in our league actually, but not nearly as much as feature backs.
Brandon Jackson has 108 rush attempts, 460 rush yards, 25 receptions, 193 receiving yards, and 4 total touchdowns.
Whereas Roddy White has 1 rush for 3 yards, 70 receptions for 934 yards and 7 tds.
This is a perfet example of what I was explaining earlier; running backs do it all, receivers only receive. Therefore running backs are more valuable. And that's not just because they earn extra points every time they touch the ball, receptions are worth just as much as rush attempts, but since running backs touch the ball more, they're worth more. They aren't equal in terms of production, therefore they won't be equal in terms of points.
Whereas Roddy White has 1 rush for 3 yards, 70 receptions for 934 yards and 7 tds.
This is a perfet example of what I was explaining earlier; running backs do it all, receivers only receive. Therefore running backs are more valuable. And that's not just because they earn extra points every time they touch the ball, receptions are worth just as much as rush attempts, but since running backs touch the ball more, they're worth more. They aren't equal in terms of production, therefore they won't be equal in terms of points.
AchrisK
Weakling
A back that gets a zero yards run is more than likely still helping the team by keeping the running threat in place. Maybe a system where a back gets .5 for a carry, and maybe -.1 per lost yard could be cool.
I think I would prefer an adjustment of points per carry/reception. Maybe .5 for RBs and 1 for receivers. I also think negative points are better than no negative points, but I don't like them if they are too severe. I am not complaining about this year's league. It's fun to try different scoring scenarios.
I think I would prefer an adjustment of points per carry/reception. Maybe .5 for RBs and 1 for receivers. I also think negative points are better than no negative points, but I don't like them if they are too severe. I am not complaining about this year's league. It's fun to try different scoring scenarios.
rms
Active Member
i've started anarchy!
but isnt that the reason that RB's may get more points or in your words do more work so that you can have 3 RBs and 2 WRs? or 3 WRs or 2RBs ? I thought that would make the difference
but isnt that the reason that RB's may get more points or in your words do more work so that you can have 3 RBs and 2 WRs? or 3 WRs or 2RBs ? I thought that would make the difference
