I see both sides of this argument... Well, maybe not.. I think that Brian just likes to always make an argument.
If you really think about it, what are the chances of a 1RB team having any consistancy over the 13 week season + the playoffs? ( rhetorical also)
Every team will still have to have a solid #2RB... This just allows a little more flexability to the teams that have a rough season w/injuries etc.
Just my 2cents
Looking forward to RFA bidding getting started... Have a good trip and get back safe
.. I am already jonesin' for FF action. :armed :champ
Late,
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nittany Dodgers
I know what Matt pointed out is the intended consequence, and I don't have a huge problem with that (though, with all the things we do to make managing a team difficult, I'm not sure why we want to give freebies on the issue of starting lineups). I just think this kind of change can have effect we do not forsee. Such as a team that pays through the nose for a stud RB now has an easier way of filling out his starting lineup. Instead of having to find another starter caliber RB to go with his LT or Alexander, or whatever, now all he has to do is find another WR3 caliber player. Maybe this will drive up WR prices, and drive down 2nd/3rd tier RB prices. I don't know. I do think people are going to keep this in mind going into the RFA period, draft and free agency.
I'd rather see something like a limited number of 1 RB lineups allowed through the season to allow for byes and short term injuries (long term injuries should have an effect on all but the best managed teams), or larger rosters/TS/PS to allow teams more flexibility during the season.
We make teams make hard choices throughout the season, such as decided which limited number of players they will keep through RFA, which limited number of rookies will be kept on the roster, how long of a contract will a player get? These are all tough choices that impact a teams success, and all have real consequences. Why the free pass when you haven't made good choices among those to have so many choices as to who you are going to start?
That's rhetorical. I'm not interested in debate, or selling people at this point.
|