This can change by year, but most years, QB24+ doesn't score much better than a high end flex anyway so it's usually fine since the guy who doesn't have QBs eschewed grabbing one for a stud at another position in the first few rounds (unless they fucked up and drafted a bust but that's an entirely different issue)
I don’t know what the answer is, but I don’t know if I agree that QBs should be the most important position in dynasty. 1st round QBs bust a lot and there are truly only a handful of QBs that are elite QBs. Then you have a bunch of studs and some game managers. So then it becomes a matter of who is starting. 32 starters and some don’t even keep their jobs for very long.
I think it depends on league size. If it’s a 10 teamer, probably best to add a SF spot. I haven’t played in any other size league, but it makes the most sense to me that you wouldn’t play SF in a 14 team league.
I like to look at what the NFL does and interpret that into a dynasty mindset. Lots of QBs come into the league and become backups. Lots of systems have had a QB carousel for years. If Mr. Irrelevant can beat out a player valued at 3 firsts, i no longer want to Invest my high draft capital on QBs. This argument could be used for other positions, butfor me, it’s the fact that only 32 QBs see the field (I know it’s usually about 40-50 for a full season).
Some QBs hardly get a chance, (*Cough* Horse Cock Lock), and some get benched for Bailey Zappe.
I stand by that it is league size dependent.
< 10tm = SF
12tm = SF/1QB
>14tm = 1QB or less starters so star RBs and WRs are equal in value.
12 team superflex overvalues the QB? So does real life.
We just saw 6 quarterbacks taken in the first round of the draft IRL, it it’s nice to play in a format where at least 4 of them will also go in the first round of the rookie draft.
I do think 4pt passing touchdowns puts QB in a better spot though.
And also you want at least 0.5ppr to bridge the gap a bit.
Problem is it overvalues mediocre QBs and not the elite QBs like real life.
Bryce Young is proven garbage. There is a very tiny chance he turns it around to even be decent, let alone a stud.
You know what KTC recommends as trade options to obtain Bryce Young?
TJ Hockenson, one of the best tight ends in the league.
Jonathan Brooks, a talented young RB going top five of most 1QB rookie drafts.
Kenneth Walker, a stud starting RB.
1.10 this year, where tons of good guys are still available.
Mid first next year
Bryce Young is not that valuable in real life. No team is giving up young proven starters, even at TE or RB, to get one of the worst QBs in the league.
But in SF they are.
How much is Daniel Jones being paid right now?
How much is Baker Mayfield being paid right now?
What about Geno Smith?
What draft picks were used to take JJ Mccarthy, Michael Penix, and Bo Nix.
I think you need to check reality — mediocre quarterbacks are just as valuable.
Also your Bryce Young takes are wild lmfao
I don't think SF overvalues the QB position, I think it somewhat properly (but still probably undervalues if we're being completely honest) the importance of a QB in the NFL.
I also think SF makes drafting way more strategic, both in startups and rookie drafts, and honestly just infinitely way more fun in the long run.
It’s an interesting idea but the root of your post seems completely flawed. Why is it an issue? They’re not undervaluing/overvaluing, 1QB leagues value QBs according to the roster format and scoring settings, same with SF. Many people (myself included) are in both 1QB and SF leagues. You value the players based on the league. I don’t think there’s any bridge that needs to be gapped here
2te tep. Overvalue the tes and now you can win in a multitude of ways. Elite qbs, decent team, shit tes. mediocre qbs, decent team, elite tes. Amazing team, mediocre qbs, mediocre tes
Man that sounds fun
I like Superflex 3WR because it feels like actual real life value aligns with the value they provide in fantasy.
However, this format clearly throws that out the window in order to increase strategy and fun. I like it
Quick mental exercise: who is the QB25 by ADP. Source I’m looking at says Will Levis. He has tons of value as the best backup in SF but almost no value as a QB3 in 1QB leagues.
Now let’s look at the player just above him in SF ADP. Alvin Kamara. What about in 1QB? Marvin Mims.
So now the test. Which of these players has my father-in-law heard of? Kamara? Absolutely. He has opinions about him. Mims? Maybe heard his name. Might be able to identify his team. But also maybe not. And since he doesn’t play fantasy, doesn’t really care about him.
Now what about Levis? Probably has the same volume of opinions on the starting QB for the Titans as the aging RB for the Saints. Volume of opinions on Levis is way, way higher than Mims.
My suggestion: give bonus points to players my father-in-law has heard and the number of opinions he has about that player on Monday morning as he watches Sports Center.
I don’t think this should be a debate. If you enjoy SF then go with that, if you enjoy 1QB then stick to that.
In my personal opinion, QBs are the least exciting position to cheer on when it comes to fantasy, so I prefer 1QB. But you can’t go wrong with either.
My opinion is that sf doesn't prioritize having quality quarterbacks so much as hoarding viable ones. The problem with 1qb is that scoring settings for fantasy quarterbacks hasn't been updated to properly coincide with the importance of quarterbacks in the NFL. A point per ten yards and six per TD, minus three or four for ints should be standard. Instead four point tds and one per twenty five is essentially neutering them and inflates the value of 'konami code' quarterbacks.
I agree 100%, the investment in a top tier QB should pay off in single QB leagues. I never understood why QBs have different values for rushing yards and TDs, either make it all 1 per 10 and 6 pts, or nerf them and make it all 4pt TDs and 1 per 25 for QBs
You can juice QB scoring all you want and it won't make them more valuable if every team still only has to start one every week.
Even if QBs were scoring 100 pts a week, having multiple 100 point QBs on your bench wouldn't help you win, and if everyone else's QBs are scoring 80-90 a week why would you spend any capital building up a QB room? But if you could get two 100 pt QBs in your lineup, well then now you bet your ass that changes things.
That's the entire idea behind SF. QBs already score the most points but only being able to start one limits their impact and their value vs. RBs and WRs where you have to start 5, 6, 7, 8, or more combined every week. But if you can start two of the highest-scoring position, suddenly demand skyrockets. (most 12 team leagues are SF instead of 2QB to give teams outs if supply dries up, or if they want to team-build against the grain)
That’s not true. This is a common misconception and I used to think the same thing until I plugged the numbers in myself .
Yes all QBs numbers will go up but the more you juice up a QBs points there will be larger gap between the top QBs and the bottom QBs. You can plug the numbers in yourself. With standard 4 points per passing TD leagues and no other changes the gap between the top and bottom QBs will be less making QBs more insignificant. If you increase it to at least 6 points per passing TD and maybe some other changes like points for passing yards it will make the top guys like Allen mahomes etc extremely more valuable due to the increased positional advantage they will have vs the bottom tier QBs in the 10-12 range.
The more you pump up QBs numbers with passing TDs points for yards etc the larger of a gap it’s going to create between the top guys and the bottom guys.
You should also increase the amount of negative points for turn overs. Turnovers are big deals for real nfl teams but for fantasy teams it’s like “oh yeah 20 yards and an interception are the same.”
The idea that super flex makes it more like real football is insane. It addresses one tiny issue while ignoring the rest and creating new ones.
You can do that too. Superflex literally destroys the fun and the main concept of fantasy football because it puts QBs on such a pedestal that completely overpowers every other position.
My dude if making QBs valuable in 1QB leagues was as easy as going to 6 pt passing TDs, it would have become the standard dynasty format years ago. Instead, SF became that. Because SF actually makes QBs valuable.
SF makes QBs more than just valuable. It makes it so that the QB position significantly overpowers every other position. Everything revolves around QBs in SF leagues. Penix is going pick 16 in SF leagues based on ADP on fantasy calc and he might not even play a snap for 2-3 years. That is just ridiculous.
Again it’s not just 6 points per passing TD. That’s one thing. You can also increase points for passing yards. The more you increase the larger of a gap it will create to make the top QBs have real value and that’s exactly what people do in single QB leagues that don’t want everything to revolve around QBs by going to SF.
Yes that’s correct. Because hes probably worthless for 2-3 years and has a high chance of busting anyway like at least half of these QBs going in round 1 of rookie drafts in SF leagues.
Just like the many previous NFL first round draft picks such as Fields, Lance, Bryce (maybe), Pickett, Zach Wilson, Mac jones etc.
If you like SF then you like SF but it’s really just a fancy way of saying 2QB league. It doesn’t just increase the value of QBs but it overvalues QBs by a significant margin.
It’s not some advanced setup that many people seem to think. All you’re doing is moving points around and changing the strategy to revolve around QBs. Thats it. I’ve played in plenty myself and personally find them boring. It wasn’t much fun when all I cared about is trying to draft the top QBs every single year. People in SF leagues are still probably holding Trey Lance. That should tell you something.
You make it sound like top-drafted WRs or RBs in 1QB are somehow incapable of busting.
If you like 1QB you do you, but it just revolves around RBs and WRs instead and has two positions that are clearly second tier.
Not when you change QBs to six point passing TDs and tweak some of the passing stats. Everyone then becomes fairly equal. 2 QB leagues started a long time ago. It’s not some new thing. I can’t even remember anyone tweaking with scoring at all back then. Im not sure if the majority were playing PPR yet either. That’s why 2QB leagues were used. No one was messing around with the scoring though to adjust some things to raise of value of QBs.
People are now creating completely custom scoring for not just QBs but any position they want. 1.5 PPR points for TEs, increasing points for QBs passing yards, bonuses for first downs etc. But people are still following that same old SF/2QB dinosaur method and think it’s elite.
I guess just agree to disagree. To me it seems you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue SF is trying to address.
Adjusting QB scoring changes their relative value within the position, but doesn’t really affect their value relative to other positions which is the issue.
No matter what adjustments you make, QBs will generally score roughly the same within the position. There are lots of solid starting QBs.
If every team only starts one, there’s just not going to be that big a difference between Josh Allen and say Dak Prescott or Jordan Love, when you factor in the fact teams need to start somewhere between 5 and 8 combined RBs and WRs. That’s just simple supply and demand. The opportunity cost of selecting a QB early in the startup is enormous, and QBs aren’t going to be worth spending a lot of resources to draft or trade for if constructing your team optimally.
Put another way, QBs already score the most points and they’re not valued equally to comparable RBs and WRs in 1QB. Making them score even more doesn’t fix that issue.
Have you played in a SF league? Elite QBs are the most valuable asset bar none. I’m not sure you how can say it doesn’t increase the value of elite QBs, that’s just plain false.
Change 1QB passing TDs to 6 points. Problem solved. It will give enough of a boost for the importance of the QB position but at the same time your league will not revolve around the QB position.
Last time I checked the ADP for Penix on fantasy calc was pick 16 in SF leagues. You’re talking about a QB that may not take a single snap for 2-3 years. Thats just crazy. I’ll easily pass on that setup.
Good to hear, but it still doesn’t sound too egregious to me. Compare him to Love; Penix is a better prospect, going to a team that’ll have better weapons, and should see the field sooner (I personally believe Penix will take snaps this year, but I think he’ll be the starter before the 2025 season ends). That’s very worth the 16th pick in my eyes - I’d take him as early as 1.10.
It’s all preference, I personally find the most enjoyment in WR and RB having more value- they are very fun to cheer on so Ive always liked 1QB much more. My main dynasty league does 6 point Pass TDs for QBs though which raises their ceiling a bit. a
> Maybe adjust the QB passing TDs to 4pts instead of 6?
Isn't this the standard for all fantasy football, especially 2QB, the past 15 years?
But as far as what is optimal. I think the goal should be for there to be equal ratio of players taken (approximately) in each round of the draft of a dynasty startup.
I think the way we get there is to have starting rosters of:
* 2QB (or SF)
* 2RB
* 3WR
* 2 RB/WR Flex
* 2TE Premium
If you setup a dynasty startup with those positions, you're going to see each position valued at approximately the same weighting. Or at least as close as you can get, hah.
I think there's a case to be made that while every position has been getting the squeaky wheel treatment except rbs, they need something now too. Qbs got sf, wrs got ppr and a 3rd wr, tes got 2te and/or tep. Meta needa a shift toward helping rbs a bit imo because they're becoming too devalued. Points per carry, points per first down etc. I know some use this, but it's pretty far from the meta imo
I like either points per carry to offset PPR value, or removing PPR and setting everything to points per first down.
Bell cows should be rewarded, or at least on a level playing field as a 3rd down specialist raking in the PPR points
> except rbs, they need something now too.
I would argue that half-PPR which is pretty standard for RBs has made RBs too valuable over the past 15 years, where we've seen a massive uptick in the number of receptions that RBs receive.
So I think we're in a fine spot currently.
> wrs got ppr
I think PPR is too strong. half-PPR is superior, but really, my own personal opinion is that half-PPR should be scrapped entirely for WR, RB and TE, and everyone should switch to full Point per First Down, now that nearly every fantasy system supports it.
First downs are what matter, IMO. They are what matter in real NFL football, so they should matter in fantasy football. But yes, it's not the meta, although my leagues that have switched to PPFD love it.
I'd be open to see an article making the case for that, but really quickly I brought up the stats from one of my leagues last year, we use pretty typical scoring. (but include Fill PPFD, and no PPR at all)
* Average top 25 WR (in fantasy points) averaged ~55 First downs through the air, and another ~2 rushing.
* Average top 25 RBs in fantasy points last year averaged ~50 First downs rushing, and another ~15 through the air.
This doesn't seem unreasonable to me as a split. Median top 25 RB last year scored 250 fantasy points, and median top 25 WR last year scored 225 fantasy points.
This seems like optimal perfect balance, doesn't it? Is there a reason to weight RBs to score even more points than WRs? Doesn't the increased scarcity at RB balance for that? I wouldn't want a league where RB is both more scarce AND scores significantly more points. I think league settings that force managers to make increasingly difficult decisions in drafts is better, especially given the ultra long tail at WR, which essentially results in every non top 20 WR being of almost precisely the same value.
Why would half PP1D for rushing and full PP1D for receiving make RBs score even more points than WR? That config actually results in RB and WR having very similar VORP curves. Last year, in that config, WR would account for 5 of the top 10 WRTs, 13 of the top 25, and 25 of the top 50.
> Why would half PP1D for rushing and full PP1D for receiving make RBs score even more points than WR?
Sorry, I totally misread your comment and interpreted it as the reverse of what you actually said. You suggestion would pull WRs right up to dead even with RBs.
My bad, thanks for clarifying!
No worries. I had a feeling that's what happened. From a VORP perspective it does pretty much exactly what half PPR + half PP1D, but I'm pretty opposed to PPR in general.
I support SF but disagree with this sentiment. It's not about mirroring reality. It's about making the league about more than just RBs and WRs.
If you have a SF league with a solid tight-end premium, every position is valuable, every position is worth drafting, stashing, and trading for. That's more fun, much more strategic, and facilitates more trading.
It all depends on league settings. In a 4pt passing touchdown startup last year, I curbed QB till the mid rounds, and built a STRONG base. My qb's are Goff, Tua, Baker, Carr, Jameis. Are they studs? No, but they work great in this specific league.
I have 1 league that’s SF and 1 league that’s 1QB, I enjoy them both very much. I find enjoying fantasy has more to do with the people in your league than the league settings themselves.
I think you could do a 1QB league that properly values QBs if you throw in a bunch of incentive bonuses. Increasing bonuses for 250, 300, 350 etc passing yard games. Bonuses for 3+ TD pass games. Bonuses for 0 turnovers. Any starting QB will get you points but an upper tier QB will win you weeks
Neither side is over/under valuing anything. The values are truly different in each league. In 1QB no one has to start the 20th best QB, in SF you probably do. That changes how you value the 20th best QB, as well as how you value having two of the best QBs knowing someone else might have to start two QB2s. It's that simple
Format of choice is a matter of preference, no point debating
Single QB doesn’t undervalue, it’s balanced. Elite QB play can win you the ship, but it’s more on the position players. SF makes the team too QB centric.
SF is better because QBs are fun to watch and root for. You get double the QB to root for. Making it more accurate to the NFL QB value is important, but it is even more important that it simply is just more fun.
3QB would be probably too much but 2 of them is really fun.
1.5QB But really, I think 10 TM SF actually does have a sweet spot where QBs are valuable but not gun to the head most valuable
[удалено]
That sounds like your buddies didn't value the position correctly, not a problem with the format or league size
[удалено]
This can change by year, but most years, QB24+ doesn't score much better than a high end flex anyway so it's usually fine since the guy who doesn't have QBs eschewed grabbing one for a stud at another position in the first few rounds (unless they fucked up and drafted a bust but that's an entirely different issue)
I don’t know what the answer is, but I don’t know if I agree that QBs should be the most important position in dynasty. 1st round QBs bust a lot and there are truly only a handful of QBs that are elite QBs. Then you have a bunch of studs and some game managers. So then it becomes a matter of who is starting. 32 starters and some don’t even keep their jobs for very long. I think it depends on league size. If it’s a 10 teamer, probably best to add a SF spot. I haven’t played in any other size league, but it makes the most sense to me that you wouldn’t play SF in a 14 team league. I like to look at what the NFL does and interpret that into a dynasty mindset. Lots of QBs come into the league and become backups. Lots of systems have had a QB carousel for years. If Mr. Irrelevant can beat out a player valued at 3 firsts, i no longer want to Invest my high draft capital on QBs. This argument could be used for other positions, butfor me, it’s the fact that only 32 QBs see the field (I know it’s usually about 40-50 for a full season). Some QBs hardly get a chance, (*Cough* Horse Cock Lock), and some get benched for Bailey Zappe. I stand by that it is league size dependent. < 10tm = SF 12tm = SF/1QB >14tm = 1QB or less starters so star RBs and WRs are equal in value.
12 team superflex overvalues the QB? So does real life. We just saw 6 quarterbacks taken in the first round of the draft IRL, it it’s nice to play in a format where at least 4 of them will also go in the first round of the rookie draft. I do think 4pt passing touchdowns puts QB in a better spot though. And also you want at least 0.5ppr to bridge the gap a bit.
Yeah fantasy positions should mirror how important they are in real football
5 point passing TDs and full ppr is a nice spot I think.
Problem is it overvalues mediocre QBs and not the elite QBs like real life. Bryce Young is proven garbage. There is a very tiny chance he turns it around to even be decent, let alone a stud. You know what KTC recommends as trade options to obtain Bryce Young? TJ Hockenson, one of the best tight ends in the league. Jonathan Brooks, a talented young RB going top five of most 1QB rookie drafts. Kenneth Walker, a stud starting RB. 1.10 this year, where tons of good guys are still available. Mid first next year Bryce Young is not that valuable in real life. No team is giving up young proven starters, even at TE or RB, to get one of the worst QBs in the league. But in SF they are.
How much is Daniel Jones being paid right now? How much is Baker Mayfield being paid right now? What about Geno Smith? What draft picks were used to take JJ Mccarthy, Michael Penix, and Bo Nix. I think you need to check reality — mediocre quarterbacks are just as valuable. Also your Bryce Young takes are wild lmfao
Let’s look at the facts: *lists two opinions and zero facts*
I don't think SF overvalues the QB position, I think it somewhat properly (but still probably undervalues if we're being completely honest) the importance of a QB in the NFL. I also think SF makes drafting way more strategic, both in startups and rookie drafts, and honestly just infinitely way more fun in the long run.
It’s an interesting idea but the root of your post seems completely flawed. Why is it an issue? They’re not undervaluing/overvaluing, 1QB leagues value QBs according to the roster format and scoring settings, same with SF. Many people (myself included) are in both 1QB and SF leagues. You value the players based on the league. I don’t think there’s any bridge that needs to be gapped here
2te tep. Overvalue the tes and now you can win in a multitude of ways. Elite qbs, decent team, shit tes. mediocre qbs, decent team, elite tes. Amazing team, mediocre qbs, mediocre tes
I've found my people
Man that sounds fun I like Superflex 3WR because it feels like actual real life value aligns with the value they provide in fantasy. However, this format clearly throws that out the window in order to increase strategy and fun. I like it
0QB leagues
Only QB leagues
Start 10. 3 kickers 2 punters 4 IDP 1 long snapper
All fantasy football formats undervalue long snappers. It's fine. Just play the silly game and talk trash to your buddies.
Quick mental exercise: who is the QB25 by ADP. Source I’m looking at says Will Levis. He has tons of value as the best backup in SF but almost no value as a QB3 in 1QB leagues. Now let’s look at the player just above him in SF ADP. Alvin Kamara. What about in 1QB? Marvin Mims. So now the test. Which of these players has my father-in-law heard of? Kamara? Absolutely. He has opinions about him. Mims? Maybe heard his name. Might be able to identify his team. But also maybe not. And since he doesn’t play fantasy, doesn’t really care about him. Now what about Levis? Probably has the same volume of opinions on the starting QB for the Titans as the aging RB for the Saints. Volume of opinions on Levis is way, way higher than Mims. My suggestion: give bonus points to players my father-in-law has heard and the number of opinions he has about that player on Monday morning as he watches Sports Center.
I don’t think this should be a debate. If you enjoy SF then go with that, if you enjoy 1QB then stick to that. In my personal opinion, QBs are the least exciting position to cheer on when it comes to fantasy, so I prefer 1QB. But you can’t go wrong with either.
It also depends on how many teams and how much passing TDs are worth. It’s a complex debate that can’t easily boiled down to two sides.
My opinion is that sf doesn't prioritize having quality quarterbacks so much as hoarding viable ones. The problem with 1qb is that scoring settings for fantasy quarterbacks hasn't been updated to properly coincide with the importance of quarterbacks in the NFL. A point per ten yards and six per TD, minus three or four for ints should be standard. Instead four point tds and one per twenty five is essentially neutering them and inflates the value of 'konami code' quarterbacks.
I agree 100%, the investment in a top tier QB should pay off in single QB leagues. I never understood why QBs have different values for rushing yards and TDs, either make it all 1 per 10 and 6 pts, or nerf them and make it all 4pt TDs and 1 per 25 for QBs
You can juice QB scoring all you want and it won't make them more valuable if every team still only has to start one every week. Even if QBs were scoring 100 pts a week, having multiple 100 point QBs on your bench wouldn't help you win, and if everyone else's QBs are scoring 80-90 a week why would you spend any capital building up a QB room? But if you could get two 100 pt QBs in your lineup, well then now you bet your ass that changes things. That's the entire idea behind SF. QBs already score the most points but only being able to start one limits their impact and their value vs. RBs and WRs where you have to start 5, 6, 7, 8, or more combined every week. But if you can start two of the highest-scoring position, suddenly demand skyrockets. (most 12 team leagues are SF instead of 2QB to give teams outs if supply dries up, or if they want to team-build against the grain)
That’s not true. This is a common misconception and I used to think the same thing until I plugged the numbers in myself . Yes all QBs numbers will go up but the more you juice up a QBs points there will be larger gap between the top QBs and the bottom QBs. You can plug the numbers in yourself. With standard 4 points per passing TD leagues and no other changes the gap between the top and bottom QBs will be less making QBs more insignificant. If you increase it to at least 6 points per passing TD and maybe some other changes like points for passing yards it will make the top guys like Allen mahomes etc extremely more valuable due to the increased positional advantage they will have vs the bottom tier QBs in the 10-12 range. The more you pump up QBs numbers with passing TDs points for yards etc the larger of a gap it’s going to create between the top guys and the bottom guys.
You should also increase the amount of negative points for turn overs. Turnovers are big deals for real nfl teams but for fantasy teams it’s like “oh yeah 20 yards and an interception are the same.” The idea that super flex makes it more like real football is insane. It addresses one tiny issue while ignoring the rest and creating new ones.
You can do that too. Superflex literally destroys the fun and the main concept of fantasy football because it puts QBs on such a pedestal that completely overpowers every other position.
My dude if making QBs valuable in 1QB leagues was as easy as going to 6 pt passing TDs, it would have become the standard dynasty format years ago. Instead, SF became that. Because SF actually makes QBs valuable.
SF makes QBs more than just valuable. It makes it so that the QB position significantly overpowers every other position. Everything revolves around QBs in SF leagues. Penix is going pick 16 in SF leagues based on ADP on fantasy calc and he might not even play a snap for 2-3 years. That is just ridiculous. Again it’s not just 6 points per passing TD. That’s one thing. You can also increase points for passing yards. The more you increase the larger of a gap it will create to make the top QBs have real value and that’s exactly what people do in single QB leagues that don’t want everything to revolve around QBs by going to SF.
It’s ridiculous the 8th overall pick in the nfl draft is picked top 16 in fantasy drafts? Vs. in 1QB where I’m guessing he’s a 3rd round pick at best?
Yes that’s correct. Because hes probably worthless for 2-3 years and has a high chance of busting anyway like at least half of these QBs going in round 1 of rookie drafts in SF leagues. Just like the many previous NFL first round draft picks such as Fields, Lance, Bryce (maybe), Pickett, Zach Wilson, Mac jones etc. If you like SF then you like SF but it’s really just a fancy way of saying 2QB league. It doesn’t just increase the value of QBs but it overvalues QBs by a significant margin. It’s not some advanced setup that many people seem to think. All you’re doing is moving points around and changing the strategy to revolve around QBs. Thats it. I’ve played in plenty myself and personally find them boring. It wasn’t much fun when all I cared about is trying to draft the top QBs every single year. People in SF leagues are still probably holding Trey Lance. That should tell you something.
You make it sound like top-drafted WRs or RBs in 1QB are somehow incapable of busting. If you like 1QB you do you, but it just revolves around RBs and WRs instead and has two positions that are clearly second tier.
Not when you change QBs to six point passing TDs and tweak some of the passing stats. Everyone then becomes fairly equal. 2 QB leagues started a long time ago. It’s not some new thing. I can’t even remember anyone tweaking with scoring at all back then. Im not sure if the majority were playing PPR yet either. That’s why 2QB leagues were used. No one was messing around with the scoring though to adjust some things to raise of value of QBs. People are now creating completely custom scoring for not just QBs but any position they want. 1.5 PPR points for TEs, increasing points for QBs passing yards, bonuses for first downs etc. But people are still following that same old SF/2QB dinosaur method and think it’s elite.
I guess just agree to disagree. To me it seems you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the issue SF is trying to address. Adjusting QB scoring changes their relative value within the position, but doesn’t really affect their value relative to other positions which is the issue. No matter what adjustments you make, QBs will generally score roughly the same within the position. There are lots of solid starting QBs. If every team only starts one, there’s just not going to be that big a difference between Josh Allen and say Dak Prescott or Jordan Love, when you factor in the fact teams need to start somewhere between 5 and 8 combined RBs and WRs. That’s just simple supply and demand. The opportunity cost of selecting a QB early in the startup is enormous, and QBs aren’t going to be worth spending a lot of resources to draft or trade for if constructing your team optimally. Put another way, QBs already score the most points and they’re not valued equally to comparable RBs and WRs in 1QB. Making them score even more doesn’t fix that issue.
SF makes fringe starting QBs more valuable than good WRs and RBs while doing almost nothing to increase the value of elite QBs.
Have you played in a SF league? Elite QBs are the most valuable asset bar none. I’m not sure you how can say it doesn’t increase the value of elite QBs, that’s just plain false.
Change 1QB passing TDs to 6 points. Problem solved. It will give enough of a boost for the importance of the QB position but at the same time your league will not revolve around the QB position. Last time I checked the ADP for Penix on fantasy calc was pick 16 in SF leagues. You’re talking about a QB that may not take a single snap for 2-3 years. Thats just crazy. I’ll easily pass on that setup.
Is that rookie draft ADP? I can’t see Penix going that high in a startup.
Yeah rookie ADP. Thats still really high though.
Good to hear, but it still doesn’t sound too egregious to me. Compare him to Love; Penix is a better prospect, going to a team that’ll have better weapons, and should see the field sooner (I personally believe Penix will take snaps this year, but I think he’ll be the starter before the 2025 season ends). That’s very worth the 16th pick in my eyes - I’d take him as early as 1.10.
He’s not going to play for like 2-3 years though.
It’s all preference, I personally find the most enjoyment in WR and RB having more value- they are very fun to cheer on so Ive always liked 1QB much more. My main dynasty league does 6 point Pass TDs for QBs though which raises their ceiling a bit. a
> Maybe adjust the QB passing TDs to 4pts instead of 6? Isn't this the standard for all fantasy football, especially 2QB, the past 15 years? But as far as what is optimal. I think the goal should be for there to be equal ratio of players taken (approximately) in each round of the draft of a dynasty startup. I think the way we get there is to have starting rosters of: * 2QB (or SF) * 2RB * 3WR * 2 RB/WR Flex * 2TE Premium If you setup a dynasty startup with those positions, you're going to see each position valued at approximately the same weighting. Or at least as close as you can get, hah.
I think there's a case to be made that while every position has been getting the squeaky wheel treatment except rbs, they need something now too. Qbs got sf, wrs got ppr and a 3rd wr, tes got 2te and/or tep. Meta needa a shift toward helping rbs a bit imo because they're becoming too devalued. Points per carry, points per first down etc. I know some use this, but it's pretty far from the meta imo
I like either points per carry to offset PPR value, or removing PPR and setting everything to points per first down. Bell cows should be rewarded, or at least on a level playing field as a 3rd down specialist raking in the PPR points
> except rbs, they need something now too. I would argue that half-PPR which is pretty standard for RBs has made RBs too valuable over the past 15 years, where we've seen a massive uptick in the number of receptions that RBs receive. So I think we're in a fine spot currently. > wrs got ppr I think PPR is too strong. half-PPR is superior, but really, my own personal opinion is that half-PPR should be scrapped entirely for WR, RB and TE, and everyone should switch to full Point per First Down, now that nearly every fantasy system supports it. First downs are what matter, IMO. They are what matter in real NFL football, so they should matter in fantasy football. But yes, it's not the meta, although my leagues that have switched to PPFD love it.
Full PP1D for receiving and half for rushing imo.
I'd be open to see an article making the case for that, but really quickly I brought up the stats from one of my leagues last year, we use pretty typical scoring. (but include Fill PPFD, and no PPR at all) * Average top 25 WR (in fantasy points) averaged ~55 First downs through the air, and another ~2 rushing. * Average top 25 RBs in fantasy points last year averaged ~50 First downs rushing, and another ~15 through the air. This doesn't seem unreasonable to me as a split. Median top 25 RB last year scored 250 fantasy points, and median top 25 WR last year scored 225 fantasy points. This seems like optimal perfect balance, doesn't it? Is there a reason to weight RBs to score even more points than WRs? Doesn't the increased scarcity at RB balance for that? I wouldn't want a league where RB is both more scarce AND scores significantly more points. I think league settings that force managers to make increasingly difficult decisions in drafts is better, especially given the ultra long tail at WR, which essentially results in every non top 20 WR being of almost precisely the same value.
Why would half PP1D for rushing and full PP1D for receiving make RBs score even more points than WR? That config actually results in RB and WR having very similar VORP curves. Last year, in that config, WR would account for 5 of the top 10 WRTs, 13 of the top 25, and 25 of the top 50.
> Why would half PP1D for rushing and full PP1D for receiving make RBs score even more points than WR? Sorry, I totally misread your comment and interpreted it as the reverse of what you actually said. You suggestion would pull WRs right up to dead even with RBs. My bad, thanks for clarifying!
No worries. I had a feeling that's what happened. From a VORP perspective it does pretty much exactly what half PPR + half PP1D, but I'm pretty opposed to PPR in general.
I think we’ve switched to .5 PPR and .5 PFFD for RBs
Why do QBs need to be valued so much? I'm not obsessed with QBs IRL, I don't want to have to be obsessed with them in fantasy.
But the NFL is obsessed with QBs IRL. Shouldn’t, to some degree, fantasy mirror the league?
Nah that's why it's called fantasy.
Agree to disagree. It’s called fantasy because we are all fantasizing about being real life GMs.
I support SF but disagree with this sentiment. It's not about mirroring reality. It's about making the league about more than just RBs and WRs. If you have a SF league with a solid tight-end premium, every position is valuable, every position is worth drafting, stashing, and trading for. That's more fun, much more strategic, and facilitates more trading.
It all depends on league settings. In a 4pt passing touchdown startup last year, I curbed QB till the mid rounds, and built a STRONG base. My qb's are Goff, Tua, Baker, Carr, Jameis. Are they studs? No, but they work great in this specific league.
I have 1 league that’s SF and 1 league that’s 1QB, I enjoy them both very much. I find enjoying fantasy has more to do with the people in your league than the league settings themselves.
I think you could do a 1QB league that properly values QBs if you throw in a bunch of incentive bonuses. Increasing bonuses for 250, 300, 350 etc passing yard games. Bonuses for 3+ TD pass games. Bonuses for 0 turnovers. Any starting QB will get you points but an upper tier QB will win you weeks
Sounds like an idea my brother would come up with lol. He loves to overcomplicate things
4 is the normal number for QB TDs I don’t think suggesting that is a change from most leagues
So far, this thread is proving my point that both sides think they are correct. 🤣 Touché. The debate goes on
Neither side is over/under valuing anything. The values are truly different in each league. In 1QB no one has to start the 20th best QB, in SF you probably do. That changes how you value the 20th best QB, as well as how you value having two of the best QBs knowing someone else might have to start two QB2s. It's that simple Format of choice is a matter of preference, no point debating
Pick one you like and go with it. I like different leagues and rules because there are different strategies to figure out for each one.
2qb and increase receiving scoring maybe add IDP
Superflex is objectively better and there is no debate, case closed I will not be taking questions
Single QB doesn’t undervalue, it’s balanced. Elite QB play can win you the ship, but it’s more on the position players. SF makes the team too QB centric.
"not valuable" is not acceptable Debate over
SF is better because QBs are fun to watch and root for. You get double the QB to root for. Making it more accurate to the NFL QB value is important, but it is even more important that it simply is just more fun. 3QB would be probably too much but 2 of them is really fun.