Limit number of one position player you can have on bench?

[My team is injured]

my work league last year switched to a format like this (probably in part due to me having multiple quality RBs on my bench the previous sesaon)... I lobbied against it but to no avail

it was alright though, a different strategy than my other leagues... we pretty much had a starter and a backup at every position so if there were 2 starting RB slots, then 2 backup RBs... only 2 backup spots for the 3 WR though you had the option to use of the backup RB slots for a 6th wideout... personally, I think it places too much emphasis on the draft and thins the free agent pool too much at every position but RB...

as an aside, if you use yahoo or a site where players don't go on waivers once games start on Sundays, I can completely understand the complaints although that's a separate matter... it's understandable if a person gets pissed if someone swoops up all backup RBs of players who get hurt, sitting with a laptop on Sundays as this takes no skill and foresight... but again, this is a separate issue because I see nothing wrong with stocking up on RBs using a waiver system to make claims after Sunday games..

also, I think 7 bench spots is a bit much for a league with your starting lineup... I guess it's preference but I prefer closer to 5 bench spots to force owners to make some difficult decisions.. it seems to me with 7 bench spots, there really wouldn't be many tough decisions at all during the season for most owners as to who to drop when you pick someone up..

[gablefan]

Wow, thats just bull*#&$ in my opinion, if you want to have 6 RB on your bench why should you not???

My suggestion is to tell him to think ahead and manage his own team

Well said!

[Irish_Assassin]

Most fantasy leagues try to make their league as realistic as possible. The NFL does not mandate how many players can be kept at each position. Its the coach's decision on how many players are carried per position. They may risk one position to have added depth at a position they feel is more important for success. The strategy is similar in fantasy football. It is always important to have that extra depth at one position in order to trade for another player of need late in the season. I could not make a rule limiting each team's draft strategy.

[BrutallyHuge]

I tried several times to give Caddy and Parker for Randy Moss, and those two for Galloway, then those two plus Driver for Holt and was refused each time despite either of the first two owners having a top 15 RB (the third had LJ, but that's it). I had no WRs, so I was desperate, and thought I could survive on Edge and Anderson, so giving up a WW pickup and a budding stud was worth it IMO. These guys just don't want to trade.

Sounds like my league. There's usually one or two trades per season. It changes your drafting strategy. No longer can you hoard RBs, expecting to trade them later. You need to draft a balanced team.

It makes the WW more important too. If you can't fill holes through trades, it only leaves the WW. But it also puts a lot more pressure on a good draft.