How about a new FF rule for running backs...

[jjo31420]

Or we could play "TEAM" RB. Yeah, that would be fun.

No...the idea in the first post is much different than the one you are proposing here.

[PurpleHaze]

[TheDeepBomb]

I think the majority of posters saying this idea is bad is because Fantasy Football is a game of risk and gamble. If you could potentially start the entire offense of Indianapolis of Cincinnatti, who wouldn't? The fun part is finding a super sleeper and riding it all the way to the championship.

If there was no risk there would be no excitement.

[teddy ballgame]

I don't like it at all. I'd much rather do a team RB position than that.

[jjo31420]

I think the majority of posters saying this idea is bad is because Fantasy Football is a game of risk and gamble. If you could potentially start the entire offense of Indianapolis of Cincinnatti, who wouldn't?

I completely agree. But that is not the idea proposed.

[TheDeepBomb]

I think it's too 'niche' of a setting, only a select few would want it that way. Also a lot of fantasy ballers are purists, any deviation from the norm would be considered sacreligious. I know some people who don't even want Flex positions because it's 'unpure'.

[Verdun Barbarians]

:-t

Quick question, whats your reasoning for saying " " ?

Huh?

What about your reasoning to post in a thread only to ask about my resonning?

I just don't see the relevancy of applying this concept. If a fantasy owner is not "conscious" enough to stay away from RBBCs, he deserves to have some trouble.

As I said earlier:

[Kensat30]

Or we could play "TEAM" RB. Yeah, that would be fun.

No...the idea in the first post is much different than the one you are proposing here.

I know. I was introducing a completely different, but equally boring idea.