Players by committee

[Daddymike59]

New season hasn't even started yet and I'm already fed up with all these teams that can't post a consistent roster. rbbc in Minn. Tampa Det Philly, qbbc in Cleve STL SD. Chi. I don't think the problem is with the quality of the players, the problem is with the inept Coaches that rely on their wives to make gametime decisions for them. WR is really the only position that doesn't consistently have that problem. Does that mean that wr is the only pos. without a shortage of talent or that they are constantly boo-hooing about playing time? Well now that that is out of my system, I'll go back to trying to figure draft ratings.

[CC]

You can play up to 5 WRs on the field at one time.
You only have 1 HB or QB on the field at a time.
THis results in more contreversy, the only thing WRs do is complain about not getting the ball.

[The Great Gambini]

You can play up to 5 WRs on the field at one time.
You only have 1 HB or QB on the field at a time.
THis results in more contreversy, the only thing WRs do is complain about not getting the ball.

Good call CC

[deftdelivery]

I'm a little bothered with the Committee's, as all of us fantasy football players are. But I don't think it's ineptitude of the coaches, but rather giving everyone a fair shot before the season starts. If two players have similar talent levels, coaches choose to go by committee to see which guy will pan out, or to utilize both players' different styles. Before the season starts, we'll know of more starters. But for now, it's any man's guess.

[KingGhidra]

Committees benefit FF. Gives you more options at the RB position. If all 32 teams had their #1 RB set in stone, you couldn't play 12 team leagues anymore since 4 teams would be without a true #3 backup RB.

Of course, you can move to a 10 team league, but then every team starts to get stacked at all the skill positions and the QB position is devalued even more.

Of course, you can start 2 QBs to counteract that.

10 team league.
2 QB
2 RB
3 WR
2 TE
2 K
2 DEF

That might be interesting...

[The Great Gambini]

It's hard to find a happy medium. I have only ever played 12 team leagues, and I never really had any complaints. We started 1 qb, 1 wr, 1 rb, 3 wr/rb, 1 te, 1 k, 3 idp. Sure, it was hard to find a 5th rb/wr to start sometimes, but that's what made it fun!

[moochman]

I don't think the RBBC is a reflection of inept coaching, but of the evolution of the head coach. The use of specialty players has been expanded to having a need for a third down RB, a recieving RB, a straight ahead short yardage RB, etc. They have to find enough plays for these guys so that they are in game shape when called upon. This has led to over-coaching that makes the coach feel in control (and most coaches are severe control freaks). The unfortunate backlash is that many coaches have devalued letting a RB get a feel for a game. Some RBs seem to learn what works as the game goes on, or even wear a defense down. They don't get that chance in a RBBC.

[Go Vikes]

The vikes just need to give osmith the ball

[tonytexastony]

I hate the RB by committees too. I think the Vikes should stick with Bennett though.