Leagues without Flex position

[McBain 13]

If I'm commissioner, I will always include the flex spot for RB/WR/TE.

 

I think this is what separates the men from the boys.

[posty 2,320]

Thanks for letting us know...

[TV's Frank 0]

I think only gay Communists play in leagues that use flex players. They're probably the same jobless wellfare cheats who play in leagues that don't use waivers. And when those amateur crybabies lose their penny ante leagues year after year, all they do is complain about bad luck. None of them are cool like me and none of them play in a league as cool as mine. Mostly because they're stupid. And gay. And Communists.

 

/meta

[Thornton Melon 549]

If I'm commissioner, I will always include the flex spot for RB/WR/TE.

 

I think this is what separates the men from the boys.

 

So....leagues with flex positions are for registered Level 3 sex offenders?

[itsbigmoni 1]

I've been in both leagues. I don't really notice a difference in "fun." For the past 2 years we've gone 2rbs-3wr's-1te. I don't mind it. Whats the big deal about the flex?

[nobody 2,113]

In my league, we have 15 roster spots and every position is flex. The scoring system in its entirety is that you get 1 point for every person you start. I'm tied for first right now.

[GridironGuzzlers 3]

and if you REALLY want a fun league add a flex for wr/rb/te/qb/k/d whoopee!

[Beer Me Please 1]

Just changes the strategy a bit. If anything, it places your team on more of an auto-pilot.

 

I'll be honest with you, I noticed a significant difference in the number of trades and proposed trades when my main league went to a flex position a few years ago. If you could only play 2RBs, 2WRs, and one TE and you had, for instance, three good RBs, it really would make sense to come up with a trade. Unless you could live with your WRs. Anyway, there are almost no trades in our league anymore since you can pretty much play the best players on your squad.

[Pogs23 6]

I play in a 2 RB 3 WR league and what I wouldn't give to be starting Chris Johnson in my Flex on sunday instead of Knox as a 3rd WR... Started Foster and McCoy this week. I have had alot of McCoy's points sitting on my bench every week.

[RoadLizard 73]

Its not so much the flex player thats important - its NOT requiring a tight end that makes the difference. There just arent enough good TEs to go around so it makes the top 3-4 of them way too valuable. Also, we allow a run and shoot lineup with 1 RB and 4 WRs should you desire. It works great. Flexibile lineups are the ONLY way to go.

[travis_henrys_baby_momma 10]

If I'm commissioner, I will always include the flex spot for RB/WR/TE.

 

I think this is what separates the men from the boys.

 

Guess the jokes on you. And...you're fat.

[IMMensaMind 460]

Our league has voted to add a flex position next year. I voted 'yes'.

[parrot 789]

I think only gay Communists play in leagues that use flex players. They're probably the same jobless wellfare cheats who play in leagues that don't use waivers. And when those amateur crybabies lose their penny ante leagues year after year, all they do is complain about bad luck. None of them are cool like me and none of them play in a league as cool as mine. Mostly because they're stupid. And gay. And Communists.

 

/meta

 

[skinsrule05 30]

In my league, we have 15 roster spots and every position is flex. The scoring system in its entirety is that you get 1 point for every person you start. I'm tied for first right now.

 

Awesome!!!

[jerryskids 5,456]

Its not so much the flex player thats important - its NOT requiring a tight end that makes the difference. There just arent enough good TEs to go around so it makes the top 3-4 of them way too valuable.

I agree with this, and will add that when we got rid of required TEs, it was also because there was so much WR talent going wasted.

 

That being said, if I had to assign a difficulty factor, I'd say that the more flex, the easier to manage. As others have said, you just lock and load your 5 best players for the week. I lost Gore; OK, I'll plug in Austin.

 

I disagree however with the comment that having flex reduces trades; I think it is the opposite. The example was where you start 2 RBs and have 3 good ones. No way do you get rid of the 3rd RB; you need the depth if one of the others goes down. With flex, you have the flexibility to plug in a WR, so you can be more creative with trades.

[alex5444 0]

I agree with this, and will add that when we got rid of required TEs, it was also because there was so much WR talent going wasted.

 

That being said, if I had to assign a difficulty factor, I'd say that the more flex, the easier to manage. As others have said, you just lock and load your 5 best players for the week. I lost Gore; OK, I'll plug in Austin.

 

I disagree however with the comment that having flex reduces trades; I think it is the opposite. The example was where you start 2 RBs and have 3 good ones. No way do you get rid of the 3rd RB; you need the depth if one of the others goes down. With flex, you have the flexibility to plug in a WR, so you can be more creative with trades.

 

We added flex this year for the first time to a 14 team league. What I've noticed is that it has REALLY hurt teams that are low on RB depth. Teams that stacked up and are starting 3 RBs have caused other teams to only have 2 viable RBs. When somebody's RB gets hurt, there is little he can do because there is hardly anyone available on the waiver wire that can fill in. It's a lot easier to find a WR to plug in off the waiver wire than it is for an RB this year

[McBain 13]

I've been in both leagues. I don't really notice a difference in "fun." For the past 2 years we've gone 2rbs-3wr's-1te. I don't mind it. Whats the big deal about the flex?

 

The fun is with your flex spot, you can play someone who is a real sleeper and try to hit a homerun. The leagues I am in with only 2 RB spots, I end up sticking with my studs week after week.