there will be an adjustment to league rules beginning 2097

to add clarity and enforcement to both rule 6.a (each starter on your depth chart must have a matching position designation e.g. SLB #1 must be an SLB, RT #1 must be an RT, etc) & rule 6.b (all players in RB slots must be an RB, all TEs must be a TE and all DEs must be a DE) each team will be expected to have a minimum number of players at the following positions

4 RB
1 FB
3 TE
5 DE (at least one starter for each RDE & LDE)
3 DT
6 LB (at least one starter for each SLB, MLB & WLB)
4 S (at least one starter for each SS & FS)
1 K
1 P

we have a bit of time to discuss this. if you feel this is unfair or needs modification please share your thoughts

the objective with this new requirement is to prevent owners from having just one RB in RB slot in order to force program to play a speedy WR as RB2. same principle on defense (no speedy out of position players taking field by default due to shallow depth charts)

i havent seen anyone use this approach, just trying to prevent it from happening

thank you!

My initial thought is going 3 deep at each DE spot is a bit excessive. I've had a 3rd string plenty of times, and they barely get any play time unless there's injury, so don't always want to spend a roster spot on them. Maybe 5 total could be good, where the 3rd stringer can flex between LDE and RDE when needed.

Also with RB - I would go 3 required instead of 4.

But I'll certainly follow whichever rules are implemented!

Looks good. And I think RB needs 4 (Injuries are a given) and its easy to have rb3 get touches in a game.

thank you for input. i feel good about 4 RBs since they seem to get more injuries then other positions while RB3s get some carries. also they are the main focus of speed exploit prevention....but i can see 5 DEs being a good number. ill change it to 5 now

Almost never had 4 RBs or 3 TEs I have to admit. Only added one from FA If I had a long term injury. But of course would stick to the rule and plan accordingly next offseason.


Im general I like the idea but still have doubts that you will be able to check it for the whole league Frank. Especially as you said you would like to hand over the commissioner spot. I agree that it makes sense but just want to point out that could mean more work for you and maybe some more removed owners.

If you ask me, 4 RBs seem like too many; I think 3 would be a fairer number. I also think 2 TE are usually enough, but I wouldn't have a problem with 3.
and even though they rarely get injured, I think it would be good to have 2 FB.

i agree with this.

the idea is that people will willingly follow the rules making it unnecessary to police. if someone wants to not follow the rules then that is on them.....that is who they are, i cant do anything about that besides give warning upon discovery

ill probably put up a poll for the position numbers. i have no desire to introduce this rule but it closes a loophole which wasnt considered before. i myself do not like rules much, but MFN is what it is. Anything Goes RO is a no rules league that was built to be Ultimate Legends 2.0.....but then subscription model was introduced and MFN struggles to bring in new owners....but it exists and some good owners are participating

only reason i suggest 4 is if one is injured then there are still 3 to go. RB3 gets carries, not many but it happens for sure. Lions conisder RB the most important position in the game and always have 4........add: in most recent game Lions RB3 had 8 carries

Count me in with the group that doesnt like 4 running backs, Plus the DE number is too much and the DT is too small, imo.

H...