Flex lineup Vs. Fixed?

[Redskins Win]

All of my leagues are fixed positions. I wish that one had a flex. That is WR/RB flex. I agree with Plindsey in disliking the WR/TE flex for the same reasons. I do like having to play a TE, it makes drafting that more strategic as well as gameday decisions.
So I guess I'm envious of those with a flex position. The last time I played in a league with a flex postion was in an XFL league, because no one could guage the level of performance or even who them clowns be.

[The_Dude]

I've been playing with flex positions for years - mainly because that's how we played back before there was such a thing as a "standard yahoo league."

But, I've really been thinking that the format needs to change a little bit. I don't think my league mates are quite ready for PPR, but it seems like 2 RB, 2 WR and 1 Flex is at least better than the 3 flex we play with now... probably what we'll go with next year.

The TE/WR flex position to me is worthless because it completely marginalizes the TE position. There's a big difference between Antonio Gates and the #10 tight end, and you shouldn't be able to get away with playing a WR at that spot.

Alright, off to work...

Dude

[DrSpackle]

I'm in two money leagues this year. One standard set line-up and the other starts one flex. You know, I don't see a huge difference between the two. You are still starting a player you believe will have the most impact on Sunday. Sure you have to have more depth, but your roster is a bit bigger and WW is a lot smaller. The strategy is still the same. In the flex league, the scoring favors WRs so I just tend to start an extra WR.

[Goody]

I don't like the TE/WR flex spot, because there are really only 2-3 TE's which have any value in that kind of system, BUT I love the RB/WR flex spot... It adds a whole new strategy to the game... I mean, take this week for example.... In one of my flex spots I have the following options:

Rueben Droughns
Mewelde Moore
Ronnie Brown
Ricky Williams
Eddie Kennison
Donald Driver


Who should I play? Tough call there.... The WR's have just as much chance of scoring big as any of those RB's.

I love having flex spots in point per reception leagues, too, because WR's have added value, and it REALLY becomes a tough choice whether or not to play a WR in the flex or a RB.....

Totally agree!! The RB/WR flex was the best thing to happen to FF. It adds a whole new dimension to drafting and weekly play. For example, in one of my leagues this year, I drafted James, Mcgahee, K. Jones, Favre, Boldin with my first 5 picks.

I think with the flex position, it adds more value to the RB position. The third rnd pick is the most important and taking an elite WR or solid RB is a must. I just love it when people draft a QB in the first rnd!! Too bad I drafted J. Walker in the 4th as my #1 WR. It would have been a great pick if he didn't get injured. Also, my 3rd rnd pick of K. Jones hasn't panned out yet, and has hurt me so far. Hopefully he comes around.

[octagon999]

This year in my $ league we have both a fixed TE and a flex WR/TE slot. I LOVE it. Normally you wouldn't play a TE there, but considering how someone like Cooley scored, I would have been even better off putting him in there instead of any of my WRs I had left.

Next year my plan is to make it QB, RB, RB/WR, WR, WR/TE, TE, K, DEF. Not only does that give you a TON of flexibility in working your roster, but it also gives you a lot more strategies in both the initial draft and building your ongoing team.

YMMV.

[Plindsey88]

This year in my $ league we have both a fixed TE and a flex WR/TE slot. I LOVE it. Normally you wouldn't play a TE there, but considering how someone like Cooley scored, I would have been even better off putting him in there instead of any of my WRs I had left.

Next year my plan is to make it QB, RB, RB/WR, WR, WR/TE, TE, K, DEF. Not only does that give you a TON of flexibility in working your roster, but it also gives you a lot more strategies in both the initial draft and building your ongoing team.

YMMV.

In a league like that, I would draft RB, RB, TE, and WR the rest of the way in....

I'd pick up a QB, K, and Def late, but almost all the players I drafted would be WR's, thus giving me the greatest amount of flexibilty to play matchups, and the greatest number of shots at picking up the emerging stud....

[bigh0rt]

I prefer a fixed TE position with RB/WR flex position. Pays off for good drafters. You no longer have that "who do I play this week, ABC RB or XYZ RB" Now you can play them both and still have to deal with the strategy of drafting a TE.

Ditto.

[PACKman1144]

Here my 2 cents

I prefer the fixed line up with out the flex for a few reasons. It gives each posistion it's own individual value, rather than lumping them together. Like for instance RB/WR downgrades the WR's value because as we all know, any given starting RB on average will put up more points than any give starting WR. So this means you should always play that RB and the WR's take a backseat. Likewise in the WR/TE, the TE becomes almost useless, rather than having it's own individual identity.

Probaly the main reason as why I am opposed to a flex posistion is that it takes less skill. Now hear me out on this one. When you have a bye week, on a fixed posistion, (we'll say RB, start 2), you have say, two backups RB's to choose from. But if one of them is injured. And your other starter is probable, you might have to hit the WW, where knowledge is the key. But If that posistion is a flex, you could just gut it out for a week and plug in one of your WR's. Having a fixed line up creates more posistional scarcity within a team, thus leading to more skill IMO.

[smackthefirst]

Here my 2 cents

I prefer the fixed line up with out the flex for a few reasons. It gives each posistion it's own individual value, rather than lumping them together. Like for instance RB/WR downgrades the WR's value because as we all know, any given starting RB on average will put up more points than any give starting WR. So this means you should always play that RB and the WR's take a backseat. Likewise in the WR/TE, the TE becomes almost useless, rather than having it's own individual identity.

Probaly the main reason as why I am opposed to a flex posistion is that it takes less skill. Now hear me out on this one. When you have a bye week, on a fixed posistion, (we'll say RB, start 2), you have say, two backups RB's to choose from. But if one of them is injured. And your other starter is probable, you might have to hit the WW, where knowledge is the key. But If that posistion is a flex, you could just gut it out for a week and plug in one of your WR's. Having a fixed line up creates more posistional scarcity within a team, thus leading to more skill IMO.

I have to disagree with it taking less skill. It completely lies on the makeup of your league. In my 10 teamer for example, we start 2QB/2RB/3WR/1TE/2K/1D and a flex that can be anything but a QB. Now drafting for this has been harder than any of my other leagues. Here are some reasons:

Wait on a QB and you'll have two weeks where you take goose eggs. A minimum of 20 QBs start each week and every team tries to carry a backup and then there are teams that grab the last available QBs simply to force teams into trades. Right now im running with Hass/Palmer but only have Martin and Boller to come in right now.

Same can be said for RB's. You try to come out with 4 if possible. You can start 3 and have the one backup for your three bye weeks. But of course going this RB heavy will leave you hurting at WR.

Since you must start 3WR's, getting a stud is a major plus but at a huge expense to a 2/3RB. If you try to wait on WR's like I do, you may end up with about 4-5 guys to play matchups and hope someone emerges.

Simply put for TE, if you get Gates (or up until now Gonzo) you were sitting very pretty. And one team took the huge gamble this year and took Gates and Shockey a few rounds later. You got it Shockey is his flex. His team is relatively strong with this approach adn he hurts every other team by snatching one more good TE.

So I am voting for flex, but flex can have so many meanings now. But I do not agree with such a broad statement that "Flex" leagues take less skill. With fixed leagues you almost know how many at each position you must come oout of the draft with. With flex leagues I can change my approach more on the fly. I go in looking to get 3RB's and a QB in the first four rounds. But if a great WR would fall to fourth, I may jump on him and then I have to worry about the RB later. But at that point I can say ill just start 2 rbs a week and go with more wrs or tes to make up for it and just have a bye week filler.

[warrick95]

I don't like the TE/WR flex spot, because there are really only 2-3 TE's which have any value in that kind of system, BUT I love the RB/WR flex spot... It adds a whole new strategy to the game... I mean, take this week for example.... In one of my flex spots I have the following options:

Rueben Droughns
Mewelde Moore
Ronnie Brown
Ricky Williams
Eddie Kennison
Donald Driver


Who should I play? Tough call there.... The WR's have just as much chance of scoring big as any of those RB's.

I love having flex spots in point per reception leagues, too, because WR's have added value, and it REALLY becomes a tough choice whether or not to play a WR in the flex or a RB.....

I agree. If all the WR and RB spots were flex (I've never seen any of these), then I'd disagree, but if it's a flex spot in addition to the existing slots (usually 2 RB/3 WR), I'm all for it. I like having that additional player in there.

Selfishly, I've always liked playing with that slot, because I like selecting three RBs near the top of the draft.