Rosters/Lineups - Roster limits for positions.
This feature would allow commissioners to set the maximum and minimum number of players a team can roster at each position at a given time. For example, teams can have a maximum of 3 QBs on their roster or a team can have a minimum of 1 kicker. Currently there is no way to set the maximum or minimum number of players a team can roster at each position.
Product Support
shared this idea
-
FCC
commented
Yes, Mike K, we want the commish in a private league to be able to set limits on ROSTER positions;we already set the number of starters at any position. This issue has nothing to do with starters.
-
Mike K
commented
The commissioner can currently limit the starting spots by position with the Edit Roster Positions tool. Do you mean limit the number of RBs or WRs a team can have in total. For example 2 starting RBs and only allow 4 RBS on the team total?
-
james willey
commented
i would set it at a max of 3 QB, 6 RB, 6 WR, 3 TE, 2 K, 2 DEF but unfortunately I cant do this!
-
Anonymous
commented
I think more is involved than just the fantasy points that they score.
RBs are more likely to get hurt.
I want some insurance against those injuries.
And, the only way to have it is to draft one or two extra RB back-ups.
It's the only intelligent way to draft.
If you prohibit this insurance, you will hurt the better managers and reward the not-so-good managers.
Do you really want to do that? -
Anonymous
commented
Simply make the overall bench size smaller - say 5 total. Then a GM really has to decide how to compose it. If he wants to make his bench all RBs, so be it. In my league we have standard team composition but with a W/R/T flex instead of a 3rd WR and also an extra 5 IDPs (individual defensive players). We only have 5 bench spots. It works great at keeping viable players available - even in a 14 team league!
-
Anonymous
commented
If you set up your league with RBs and QBs scoring lots more points than the other positions, then of course you'll have managers drafting extra RBs and QBs.
If you set up your league so that DEFs and Ks and return specialists also have a lot of value, then managers will choose extra DEFs and Ks and return specialists.
The issue here involves supply and demand.
WRs have an over-supply, so you don't benefit from picking extra WRs unless return specialists are rewarded in your league specs.
DEFs and Ks are actually in shorter supply than RBs and QBs. It is amazing how much differently a manager will draft when DEFs and Ks and return specialists are valuable positions on a roster. -
Anonymous
commented
I agree I need this done for my league as commish. I have guys hoarding one position excessively.
-
your name
commented
what is taking so long? This needs to be fixed now. Just reinstall last year's interface, which worked fine.
-
Anonymous
commented
Please add this ability to Commissioner Tools. My league is quite strict with such rules as roster limits for each position. Inferior FF websites have this option and i'm surprised that Yahoo doesn't have it.
-
Anonymous
commented
yes yes yes yes yes yes
I have been asking yahoo for this for about 10 years.
For some reason, perhaps abject stupidity, Yahoo is the only major Fantasy site that doesn't permit a private league to set roster limits. -
Megan Geers
commented
Please incorporate the MAX roster positions. I have a 12 person league and we limit the max number of RB or WR they can have.
-
J.K.
commented
A position cap would actually reduce the flexibility of managers.
That's the wrong direction.
Managers need more flexibility, not less. -
joe wood
commented
-
Anonymous
commented
Well, Jose, I think that you are mostly right.
However, reading the blather that Mavrock is spewing,
I expect his league's problem would be more easily solved
by simply adding a second QB to the starting roster. -
Anonymous
commented
If you set up your league with RBs and QBs scoring lots more points than the other positions, then of course you'll have managers drafting extra RBs and QBs.
If you set up your league so that DEFs and Ks and return specialists also have a lot of value, then managers will choose extra DEFs and Ks and return specialists.
The issue here involves supply and demand.
WRs have an over-supply, so you don't benefit from picking extra WRs unless return specialists are rewarded in your league specs.
DEFs and Ks are actually in shorter supply than RBs and QBs. It is amazing how much differently a manager will draft when DEFs and Ks and return specialists are valuable positions on a roster. -
None
commented
Mavrock....reading your post on the RBs I cant agree more with your "Here's a breakdown of the issue in that same league" post. It is freaking ridicules for one team to horde RBs or any other position so others cant use them. Now if they picked them up as trade bait I have no problem with that BUT if they do it so others cant pick them up then that's bs. Just my opinion. In my own league for 10 years I had to cut the bench size down from 6 to 5 to now 4 because of idiots. ( QB, RB,RB WR WR , WR, TE , (RB/WR< (used only for return guys only) D , K, and any 3 IDPs) Now guys have to actually use strategy for the bye weeks and cant horde positions, The biggest down fall is lack of bench players due to idiots hording and not trading. With a cap on position this will eliminate hording positions and can add more bench. I as much as the next guy like to have extra RBs or WRs but not to ***** other teams.
-
None
commented
I been telling yahoo this for years. It its really fucstrating when a team has 6 rbs on there roster and wont trade them and openly tells everyone that he picked them up so nobody else does. Even after reducing the bench to try to eliminate this in the private league some idiot still does it. ESPN has a limited position and it works well with the idiots. Unfortunately ESPN fantasy football has other deficiency's that keep me from taking my league there for now. Cap on position is a excellent idea. For private leagues let the commish decide on how many per position. If you do this try not to ***** the pooch on this idea like you have in the past...please.
-
Anonymous
commented
Having a "roster limit for position" would be a negative development. I strongly oppose it.
-
James
commented
I agree with Klondike (on Dec.24). The Hand Cuff concept of drafting is to get the back-up players for your RBs. Fantasy Football players have been using it forever, and they have been rewarded for it because RBs are frequently injured.
The only fair way to put a cap on the number of RBs that a team drafts is to enforce a rule against the NFL that prohibits RBs from being injured. I want to see how far that rule goes.
-
Anonymous
commented
If I were in MaveROCK's league, I'd want as many RBs as I could get. RBs are frequently injured, demoted, or ignored. The NFL probably goes through about a hundred starting and committee RBs per year, and even the elite ones aren't used much some weeks. If I didn't have a good extra RB, then I'd have to try to be the first person to check the waiver wire each week that one of RBs is injured or on a bye or meeting a team with a good run defense.
Putting a limit on the number on your roster favors the person who sits with his computer on his lab ready to pounce on an RB immediately when something goes wrong.
The limit also presents an ugly problem when an injury causes a few games to be missed. If you have 4 RBs, the odds are that one will be on his bye week at the same time that another one has a two-week injury and another one is scheduled to play against the third best run defense in the NFL. You almost have to find another RB to take the place of one of the ones on your roster, but you can't afford to drop any of the three described above. So, what do you do?
If during the draft you picked up a couple of RBs who are part of a committee, then you could limp along until your injuries and bye weeks are solved. If not, then you lose to the person who is sitting with his computer in his lap ready to pounce on whatever RB looks promising for the next week.