Disecting The Flex

cctekguy

cctekguy

Staff member
Many of us play in a league that allows a "Flex" position. On the surface, this looks like a great way to get some of those bench points into the game and elevate the level of competition, awarding a bonus to the team with greater depth.

Positional depth in the NFL is crucial to any team that expects to extend their season but what is it doing to your fantasy team\league?

We had a slogan at the chemical facility I worked at in regards to hazardous waste. "Dilution is the Solution". In other words, by adding more non-hazardous material to the waste stream we could reduce the concentration of hazardous materials thereby making our waste less hazardous. It worked, in principle, but the truth is we were discarding exactly the same amount of hazardous material but were discarding it in a less expensive waste stream.

When we add a flex to the roster, aren't we just diluting the positional talent pool and tipping the scales towards "best available"? I know it doesn't sound like a big deal but, when you think about it, it completely alters the dynamic structure of the game.

Starting with the draft and throughout the season, owners are allowed to "fudge" on positional requirements, letting that mediocre RB2 slip bye in favor of a higher scoring WR3 they can start in the flex. This could still be considered strategy but it's playing outside the boundaries of positional talent.

Still....no big deal, right? What about the trade you don't need to make because you can get an equally high scoring player at another position? A major complaint many owners have about the league they're in is that there is not enough trading....you know, owner participation. When a league offers FLEXability to the line-up requirements it greatly reduces the need for an owner to pursue another owner's player.

If I have 3 good RBs and you have 3 good WRS....who cares? We can both start them all and never have to deal with one another. An injury to your RB should NOT mean a trip to the waiver wire to pick up a WR. A league thrives on interaction and making it easier to put points on the field is counter productive.

In the interest of fantasy, I think Dilution is the Dissolution.

Keep the position values pure and I think you will have livelier, more fulfilling fantasy experience.
 
i was not a fan of my first year having a flex... I admit, it was for some these reasons, but also because I kept starting Mathews... If I had to start two RB well then it was AP and my flavor of the week (turner, felix jones, etc), but since i had the FLEXability I wasn't gonna lose out on potential mathews scores
 
Not sure I agree here teckie.....the more players your force into the starting line-ups, the deeper you force fantasy owners to go into their talent evaluation. The deeper they are forced to go, the more advantage i feel the well prepared owner is. Any novice can find 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE....when you start to go deeper....weather it is 3 WR...1 FLex or what not....you start to seperate the men from the boys per say....

Start all the flex you want, just increase the number of starters needed. The more you do that, the deeper knowledge you are requiring which in the end favors anyone who is on a fantasy football message board in March ;)
 
No argument about the depth, Miller.

But once you lose position specificity then you bastardize the talent pool.
 
cctekguy said:
No argument about the depth, Miller.

But once you lose position specificity then you bastardize the talent pool.
Click to expand...
I don't think that is necessarily the case, your just opening up more options for creative owners to think outside of the box. I like it......
 
I agree with Miller more here Teckie than I do you.

Yes, by definition, you do allow more "loopholes" for folks. To me the key isn't flex though.

Most leagues flex is either a Rb/Wr/Te. So it allows teams to go 3Rbs or 4 Wrs or two Tes for example. To me that makes a league more challenging. Why? Cause depth will go very quickly and it forces you to be much more up to date on potential talent that you normally wouldn't need if you had a striaght 2rb,3wr,1te setup. Makes you start planning for the scat back or slot WR that may break out or such. Just makes it more challenging in my eyes.

I agree, it makes it easier to get pts.but how you get the points is more challenging.

What I don't like about the flex, and for that matter some leagues is lineup variation and where pts come from. I am a purist. I don't think we should be allowed 3rbs. Why, cause the NFL doesn't do it. I like to run my leagues so you follow what the NFL does. So no wishbone or 3rbs. I also don't like return yardage included for Offensive players. I have seen teams that dominate cause they have a return guy that suddenly explodes.

In my opinion, if you want to use returns for a league, then you should mandate a returner position.

Just my $0.02
 
I like the flex. It adds flexibility (pun intended) to the way you design your team, plus it's fun, which is the point of playing for me. I just added it in my local league 3 years ago and wouldn't go back. FFPC has two flex positions, which I think is great. Start 2 RBs and 4 WRs or 4 RBs and 2 WRs. Lots of options.

As far as bastardizing, I don't agree. Definitely changes strategy for me as I am more likely to go RB heavy with a flex since RBs are generally more consistent from the position. Plus, I like drafting the best player vs filling a position.
 
Plus, I like drafting the best player vs filling a need
Click to expand...
I love that flexability when building a team. The ability to take that best player available vs filling a need is a definite plus for me as well "E."
 
It helps with bye weeks too. Swing your rb3 into rb2 spot and plug in the favor of the week in the flex. Love it!
 
The original post was not necessarily a voice of personal dissatisfaction with the flex position. A flex makes many aspects of the game easier and therefore "more fun" as E pointed out. Not many of us want to see our season collapse because of an injury or 2 and a flex allows you to have nearly any of your bench players to step in to the void while you sniff around the ww for something better. A flex position also takes a lot of the pain out of bye weeks, which is nice.

Where you lose me on this are the comments that a flex makes the game more challenging. What could be more challenging than having to replace an RB2 with a RB instead of a choice of 3 positions. Instead of plugging in your best bench player you must instead start looking at your best bench player as trade bait because you KNOW there isn't an RB worth picking up on the wire.

Working a clever deal in a moment of desperation....Now THAT is challenging.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top