LogFAQs > #926401032

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, Database 5 ( 01.01.2019-12.31.2019 ), DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	The Best Board 8 Fantasy Football 2019 Topic
Nanahara715 08/22/19 11:19:51 AM #142:	Reg posted... Nanahara715 posted... For larger leagues, fewer base skill position requirements & more Flex is better, IMO The more I think about it, the more I agree. Though I always found the idea of a WR/TE slot in particular a bit silly, but mostly I like the idea of streaming TEs, picking matchups etc as an alternative to spending heavy draft capital on Kelce/Kittle/Ertz Something like (QB or Superflex)/RB/WR/TE/Flex/Flex/K/DST with 4 bench (+IR?) sounds good though. Would support another flex spot (6 flex starters x 16 teams is 96 flex, or 3 players per NFL team, which is pretty reasonable) - maybe 6 bench? Wouldn't do an IR under Yahoo's rules. Makes decisions tougher. Would support [next year] moving to a Player Copy system, I think that would solve a bunch of our problems. <cite>Nanahara715 posted [p:926401032] in The Best B... [t:77896197]...</cite> <quote>Reg posted...</cite> <quote>Nanahara715 posted...</cite> <quote>For larger leagues, fewer base skill position requirements & more Flex is better, IMO</quote> The more I think about it, the more I agree. Though I always found the idea of a WR/TE slot in particular a bit silly, but mostly I like the idea of streaming TEs, picking matchups etc as an alternative to spending heavy draft capital on Kelce/Kittle/Ertz Something like (QB or Superflex)/RB/WR/TE/Flex/Flex/K/DST with 4 bench (+IR?) sounds good though.</quote> Would support another flex spot (6 flex starters x 16 teams is 96 flex, or 3 players per NFL team, which is pretty reasonable) - maybe 6 bench? Wouldn't do an IR under Yahoo's rules. Makes decisions tougher. Would support [next year] moving to a Player Copy system, I think that would solve a bunch of our problems.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1