|
|
Post by John on Aug 9, 2020 2:11:46 GMT
Should we use our 5 carry for 50 carries rule or computer usage option?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2020 14:32:45 GMT
I vote for computer usage option.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Aug 9, 2020 14:41:43 GMT
I think we should examine the computer usage options before we vote for a usage change. My general thoughts are that I always prefer everyone to be able to "play" the game without worrying about "do I have enough carries", or pass attempts or receptions to be on the field. I don't like the idea of playing a game where the offense can run out of "carries" and then I can force the offense to become one dimensional at crucial points of the game. With that being said, I also do not like the idea of a guy with 10 carries being an "elite" running back. I thought 50 carries captured a nice balance; perhaps we raise it. Perhaps we use a different computer option, but let's discuss the pros and cons of the alternatives while still retaining playability for 24 teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2020 14:50:55 GMT
People named Kenneth Dixon, Gus Edwards and CJ Anderson (and yes, Mike Gillislee) should not be able to run 20+ times and gain 200 yards in a game because they have 51 carries.
These types of players often get traded to playoff teams (Dixon, Edwards and Gillislee), so I struggle with the statement that teams won't have enough carries.
I can also logically see extending out our current rule to:
1-50 carries = 5 carries per game
51-100 = 10 carries per game
101-150 = 15 carries per game
151-200 = 20 carries per game
200+ = unlimited
But instead of manually doing it, why not let the computer do it for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 9, 2020 14:59:10 GMT
I think we should use one option or the other but changing the numbers now would be unfair to some because the number of carries is already known.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 9, 2020 16:51:39 GMT
December 23 2018 C J Anderson had 20 carries for 167 yards vs Arizona.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 9, 2020 18:58:50 GMT
Entire 2018 Season for CJ Anderson--67 carries for 403 yards.
Not sure why the topic was brought up if you feel the 2018 version of CJ Anderson should have unlimited carries.
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Aug 9, 2020 19:32:44 GMT
What may work "best" in this scenario is not usage limitations, but using the RB fatigue option. Backs with more carries will be more valuable but will not diminish a back that has 50-100 carries. It just means if you decide to run a low carry back 20 times a game, they will be less effective as their carries mount up. The fatigue rule does not apply to QB's, WR's or TE's.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan D (Ravens & Redskins) on Aug 9, 2020 20:07:10 GMT
To play devils advocate here, why are we considering limits on RBs only? Why not QBs, TEs, WRs or FBs/BBs? Longest reception limits? Etc...
Along the same lines - why are players who did not play 16 games allowed to play 16 games in our league?
Why do we allow non-starters to start in our league? Theres 32 teams worth of starters for only 24 teams in our league?
Are we going to do something to curb the abuse of throwing long to blocking backs to take advantage of coverage linebackers?
The goal isn’t to have an exact replay. Once your start implementing one of these rules, it is a slippery slope, in my opinion.
Also, I agree with Rich that with RB carry limits that you will easily be able to force a guy out of carries and turn him one dimensional. I have seen it happen in other leagues that have limits.
Personally, I don’t like carry limits - not looking to draft guys just because they have a large amount of carries. I think our current rule does a solid job of taking care of our "issue" - if it can even be considered one. Also, strat has changed they way they carry low card guys which also helps. They are few and far between. This is my thought whether I have Gus Edwards or not.
|
|
