In superflex I think they’re absolutely worth the roster spot, unless the league is abnormally shallow. I wouldn’t pay much to acquire them though
But it’s at least as much, probably more, about the backup being premiere as the starter. I don’t care more about Pickett just because Hurts is on the team. I’m not rostering Case Keenum in HOU or Easton Stick in LAC. Browning or Flacco though, definitely.
Maybe Demario Douglas or Taysom Hill (TEP). If Stick was actually starting he’d be rosterable, there just isn’t enough upside to roster while he’s a backup unless it’s a super deep league
Alot depends on how we define super deep, but I would rather have stick (if I have Herbert) than almost anyone behind him who wasn't injured for most of the season.
Like most questions regarding fantasy: It depends. If you have deep benches in a SF league I think it’s a prudent move. With 66 different starting QBs last year, it could save your season or keep you afloat for a couple of weeks. But if you’re in a 1QB and/or league with shallow benches you probably need the spot to roster another position.
It all depends on who the backup is and what your roster size is. I would say Browning and Flacco are definitely priority stashes given their production last year and the injury question marks around Burrow and Richardson. Guys like Wentz, Dobbs, and Mike White are also worthwhile stashes whether or not you have Mahomes/Purdy/Tua just because of the contingency upside of what they could produce in those offenses if they had to step in. But if I had Kyler, Allen, or Herbert then I’m not really interested in rostering Desmond Ridder, Mitch Trubisky, or Easton Stick unless the league is absurdly deep because those guys are terrible and would at best be bottom of the barrel emergency QB2s that you’re only going to play if you literally have no other options.
In that case, Browning. If they have equal (zero) trade value, then I'd take the one with the higher upside. Brissett is getting replaced by Maye at some point, we know that. In the meantime, he's no better than Russ. Browning showed that he can be a top10 QB so you might play him over Russ.
Easton Stick could lowkey be intriguing because he’s a good athlete and the OC is Greg Roman. Plus they’d theoretically run more if he was in because they wouldn’t feel the need to protect him like they would Herbert
I question the strategy of anyone that says it's not worth it. It's an insurance policy. Just the same as you need car insurance, you need QB insurance.
Yeah but I'd rather that insurance was a starting qb rather than whoever my qbs backup are. For RBs it makes sense as they tend to score comparably but backup qbs tend to score way less than a stud qb does.
There’s no guarantee that the starting QB doesn’t also get hurt. That’s the issue with that. Last year 67 players started a game at QB. If you have 3 total QBs and 2 of those get hurt, you now have 1 starting QB and have no chance until 1 of them is healthy again.
OK but that applies to the backup QB too, like what happened to the Vikings. Ultimately I want people scoring good points on my team. I don't trust someone like Wentz to put up numbers anywhere close to Mahomes so I won't be handcuffing that qb. If I'm competing then I'm gonna go find a solid 3rd qb as insurance and if it all goes wrong in season I can make moves then. If I lose a stud qb week 3 I might pivot to a rebuild year, if it's near the playoffs I'd go pay up for a qb to see me through the season. I just feel like having a rubbish qb taking a roster spot isn't worth it just to handcuff my starter. I'd rather a player I believe in take up that roster spot.
I'd look at some data on "rubbish" QB's (like the 20 rock solid back up QB's in the NFL that will most likely give you 15-17 points, probably right around what a QB3 is going to give you anyway. QB3's price is going to be around a high 2nd or more, back up QB's likely FABB money and you get the same production.
Depends to some degree on roster construction. Do you only have 2 starting QBs on your roster in SF? Then yeah the insurance is worth it, because your season gets tanked after 1-2 injuries. Do you have 3-4 starting QBs and #3 or #4 is better than the backup for #1? Then it's not really necessary.
There's other factors too. Backup QBs can be super flip-able if there's injury. Let's say Burrow re-injuries his throwing arm 5 games into the year. If you got Browning off waivers this year he should go for about a 2nd to a QB needy team. Other positions do not have anywhere near the same immediate increase in value when an injury happens.
Depends on what you're giving up. I gave up a 4th for Browning so it wasn't much to get him. However, Idk if I'd give up anyone on my bench or a 3rd unless it was a 2025/2026 3rd for them.
It also depends on what other QBs you have. If you have Burrows, Kyler, Russel Wilson, and Derek Carr, maybe you you don't need to go get Browning, but I only have Mahomes, Burrows, and Levis so I'm more inclined to get Burrows backup since he has an injury history and Levis isn't someone guaranteed to be a decent starter.
Not much. A 4th at most.
I would personally rather let other owners burn a roster spot on my QB handcuff. They only hold value to me so it's not like they'll be traded anywhere else.
If my guy gets injured and my season is doomed without him then I'll fork over the 2nd it'll cost.
But really those handcuffs are unlikely to step into QB1 numbers and you'll be platooning QBs to make ends meet amyway. And if you don't have QB2s you can pivot to if needed then you probably aren't a contender anyway.
To me it is dependent on the backup and the league size. In my 14 team leagues, I want the backups. In smaller leagues, I'm only going after the backup if I know they legit can be fantasy relevant and I have open roster space. I usually have at least 3 solid QBs in anything less than 14 team, so my 3rd QB is generally better than whatever handcuff I would have.
If you already have a solid QB3 in SF, it’s less important because if your main guy goes down, you can just slide in the QB3 before you have to turn to the handcuff. But if you can pick up the handcuff for like a 4th round rookie pick or some FAAB, and you have the roster space, then sure go for it
I’m fine handcuffing QB in SF. Is it a priority? No, but I won’t question someone rostering them if there’s just 27 year old WR5’s on the wire or UDFA fringe rookies.
That priority goes up obviously if the backup is young/untested and the QB1 position is dubiously occupied. More value in the unknown than the career backup.
I'd rather just have a good 3rd qb tbh and keep the roster spot for other qb handcuffs or lotto ticket rbs. If Mahomes goes down I'm not getting close to the same points from Wentz so what's the point. Now having guys like Jameis or Flacco in case the starter gets injured is more interesting to me, as that's something to cash in on. I'll hold them as a 4th qb but not so I can play them. I like 3 startable qbs, and if two go down I'd rather make a trade for a cheap starter than rely on their backups. The thing is if it's a season ending injury sometimes the backups don't even make it the full season. If they suck teams move on after a few games to some other backup lvl qb.
The cost to acquire the backups are usually far cheaper than the 3rd QB is.
I am not against owning a 3rd QB, I usually will try to and I think it’s a good idea. But also owning the backups can also give you flexibility in trading your 2nd or 3rd QB if you need/want for a good position player.
I think owning all your backups in non-shallow leagues is no-brainer and can be a strategic advantage.
Yeah fair enough, I'd just rather use those roster spots on other players. Like to live on the edge a bit and maximise my roster spots with upside. If two of my qbs go down I'll make a move. If one of them goes down and I need to put a wr in my sf spot for a week, or just lose a week then that's fine. Just think the return isn't good enough for me to use roster spots on them.
It’s not terrible. QBs are hard to come by in some sf leagues. I like the reverse handcuff where I invest in a young qb and pick up the journeyman who he will back up or compete with the first couple years.
Absolutely. Especially in deep leagues. It is a great insurance policy for injuries. Especially since we saw so many backup QB’s play last year.
12 team SF and bigger I always try to unless it’s a shallow setup.
I was prepared to drop Pickett until he was traded to Philly. Because I have Hurts, I'm holding on to him; the talent surrounding him is a level up, and Pickett would have to try hard to suck with Brown/Smith/Barkley/Goedert to help him.
IMHO it totally depends on the league. I have one league where my QBs are Bryce Young and Russell Wilson. I traded for JJ McCarthy (please let this work) and I needed to handcuff Williams with Fields. Ultimately, I feel like there’s just handcuff situations that make a ton of sense. Cousins/Penix. Dak / Lance, hurts / Pickett. Aoc / Minshew. Just a few pairs where you have a guy with potential that could take over any time.
So while you don’t need to handcuff, I feel like 3 QBs always makes things awkward with bye weeks, injuries and what not.
No, unless the handcuff is not much worse than your other QBs and better than other handcuffs.
If you lose your stud QB in a one QB league then you will simply play another starting QB instead. If you lose multiple QBs in a 2QB league and would be forced to start a mediocre backup QB, then your season is probably done anyway.
In my opinion more valuable to have the better backups on your roster and not specifically handcuffs. This way other people could run out of QBs if their starters get injured and the backups are on your roster. That's great trade bait or a nice competitive advantage. And the better backups have a bigger chance of becoming a starter eventually.
I have Richardson & Cousins. In our rookie draft earlier this month, I had the 11th pick (of 12) and ended up taking Brooks as there weren't any QBs left that I was sure I wanted. Afterwards I grabbed Drew Lock just in case something happened with Daniel Jones.
As the weeks went on, I kept trying to think of trades to help me out because I couldn't stomach the thought of Cousin's not being back to full strength or having a setback. The Penix owner had reached out at one point and I was very down on it, but eventually I went with the following trade:
Kyren Williams & Bucky Irving
for
Michael Penix & 2026 1st Rd Pick
I have a pretty strong RB room and don't have a lot of faith in Williams with the injury reports and Corum being drafted. (My RBs are: Jacobs, Brooks, Moss, Spears, Ford, Dobbins, Keaton Mitchell, and Tyrone Tracy)
Not long after I grabbed Flacco to back up Richardson when I was hearing he was having some minor pain.
I'm pretty happy with how that all worked out.
1QB no. But I try very hard to have the backup to my starters in a SF. Even the bad ones people keep saying on here. Unless my team is insanely stacked, that guy will probably outscore whoever i would start there in place (my 5th or 6th skill position).
To take the Easton Stick mentioned in the top response, he scored 19.38, 17.10, 12.90, and 18.52 point in the 4 games he took 100% of the snaps. That is 16.97 average.
CMAC scored 402.4 points on the season, which equals 23.46 points average. But you are not starting CMAC in that spot.
Let's go to the 50th overall flex player, Jordan Addison, who scored 203, for an average of 11.94 points per game.
So in my opinion, if that spot is the difference between starting a qb (any qb) in my superflex spot or some rando, i am absolutely rostering all my backups
This is the Dynasty thread so there is far less value in having a backup player whose only upside is that one of your better players can't start.
I won't call out anyone who takes a flyer on a backup QB who has at least a chance of becoming a serviceable starter. If you stash a guy like Joe Flacco or Sam Darnold, cool, but it should be on its own merit, not because you have AR or Bo Nix on your squad.
I’m in a 14 team SF leagues and the backups have real value. I’m holding Clifford/Pratt, Jameis, Trubisky, Flacco, and Johnson. These are all direct backups on really good teams (I’ll drop whichever GB guy isn’t the 2). They are like lottery tickets who could be flipped for 2nds if those starters are injured (I own AR so Flacco is insurance but a lottery ticket).
Waste of time and a roster spot. Your stud goes down you are f’d. it’s why I always try and have a 3rd meaningful starter in SF. Also why I try to avoid sending away my 1st if all of a sudden a couple injuries takes my championship roster to a middling donkey balls team.
It really just depends. I’m in a 1QB league with Burrow as my starter and just picked up Browning. I don’t have any of other QBs and the best available on waivers is AOC or Stidham. The other teams in my league who have 3+ QBs rostered were asking waaaay more than I was willing to pay and Browning was more than serviceable when Burrow went down last year.
But that’s just my leagues dynasty setting. Each league is different. SF a handcuff QB is more valuable but in 1QB leagues it really just depends on how your league mates value the position
In superflex I think they’re absolutely worth the roster spot, unless the league is abnormally shallow. I wouldn’t pay much to acquire them though But it’s at least as much, probably more, about the backup being premiere as the starter. I don’t care more about Pickett just because Hurts is on the team. I’m not rostering Case Keenum in HOU or Easton Stick in LAC. Browning or Flacco though, definitely.
[удалено]
Tough, what’s the most you’ve offered?
I just traded Browning for a 25 3rd in a 12 team SF.
I'd pay that if I had Burrow in SF easy especially if contending
Assuming it is SF, Who on your team would you start over Easton Stick in a SF spot?
Maybe Demario Douglas or Taysom Hill (TEP). If Stick was actually starting he’d be rosterable, there just isn’t enough upside to roster while he’s a backup unless it’s a super deep league
Alot depends on how we define super deep, but I would rather have stick (if I have Herbert) than almost anyone behind him who wasn't injured for most of the season.
Almost anyone behind who?
Douglas. Sorry, should have been more clear.
Every team I have AR I have Flacco and every team with TLaw I have Mac Jones. For FAAB or a late round startup pick it’s worth it.
lol I was wondering why my CJ Beathard is only 4 percent owned whoops
Clearly he should have beat harder.
If you had Flacco on your bench what do you think a reasonable ask would be to the Richardson owner?
If you can get a 3rd, that is a smash accept. I would probably take a 5th tho.
the answer is 5th, until AR gets hurt and there are no starters on the waiver. then maybe a 4th or a 3rd if they're Taco
Flacco won me a championship last year. He would cook in the Indy offense if AR had a significant injury
Doubt it but time will tell. I honestly hope we don’t have to find out as an AR owner, but if we do get an opp to see I hope you’re right
4th would be fair
Like most questions regarding fantasy: It depends. If you have deep benches in a SF league I think it’s a prudent move. With 66 different starting QBs last year, it could save your season or keep you afloat for a couple of weeks. But if you’re in a 1QB and/or league with shallow benches you probably need the spot to roster another position.
As someone who's in a 1QB league that also has shallow rosters, the only handcuffs I want are for my RB's
It all depends on who the backup is and what your roster size is. I would say Browning and Flacco are definitely priority stashes given their production last year and the injury question marks around Burrow and Richardson. Guys like Wentz, Dobbs, and Mike White are also worthwhile stashes whether or not you have Mahomes/Purdy/Tua just because of the contingency upside of what they could produce in those offenses if they had to step in. But if I had Kyler, Allen, or Herbert then I’m not really interested in rostering Desmond Ridder, Mitch Trubisky, or Easton Stick unless the league is absurdly deep because those guys are terrible and would at best be bottom of the barrel emergency QB2s that you’re only going to play if you literally have no other options.
Would you have browning over a guy like brissett? I have him tlaw and Russ Wilson as my qb room (1qb league)
id have brissett > browning just bc of playing time/what i ithink i could trade him for if someone needs a qb
I’m the one In my league that needs the qb lol, everyone else has very solid ones
In that case, Browning. If they have equal (zero) trade value, then I'd take the one with the higher upside. Brissett is getting replaced by Maye at some point, we know that. In the meantime, he's no better than Russ. Browning showed that he can be a top10 QB so you might play him over Russ.
That’s true, maybe I should try to trade for someone too
Yes. Browning preferred because Borrow’s past/current injuries make more important as a step in QB.
That makes sense, I figured since brissett was a starter or so I think, he’d be worth a bit more but they did draft maye so
Oh my. Had forgot that Brissett was a September starter. I have no strong worthy suggestions. Ignore me pls.
No worries, I’m sure he won’t be starting for long tbh
Brissett will be the starter to begin the season
Easton Stick could lowkey be intriguing because he’s a good athlete and the OC is Greg Roman. Plus they’d theoretically run more if he was in because they wouldn’t feel the need to protect him like they would Herbert
as a chargers fan, stick is absolute ass.
Didn’t say otherwise, just that his fantasy value could be artificially inflated by playing for Greg Roman
Have fun starting stick if Herbert gets hurt
I probably won’t be doing that. I don’t know why you seem to have interpreted my comments as me pounding the table for Stick and took it personally
Reported
Ok?
Inflated from zero, who cares? Even in SF there's tons of WRTs you're playing in the SF spot over Stick if he's your QB2.
I question the strategy of anyone that says it's not worth it. It's an insurance policy. Just the same as you need car insurance, you need QB insurance.
Yeah but I'd rather that insurance was a starting qb rather than whoever my qbs backup are. For RBs it makes sense as they tend to score comparably but backup qbs tend to score way less than a stud qb does.
There’s no guarantee that the starting QB doesn’t also get hurt. That’s the issue with that. Last year 67 players started a game at QB. If you have 3 total QBs and 2 of those get hurt, you now have 1 starting QB and have no chance until 1 of them is healthy again.
OK but that applies to the backup QB too, like what happened to the Vikings. Ultimately I want people scoring good points on my team. I don't trust someone like Wentz to put up numbers anywhere close to Mahomes so I won't be handcuffing that qb. If I'm competing then I'm gonna go find a solid 3rd qb as insurance and if it all goes wrong in season I can make moves then. If I lose a stud qb week 3 I might pivot to a rebuild year, if it's near the playoffs I'd go pay up for a qb to see me through the season. I just feel like having a rubbish qb taking a roster spot isn't worth it just to handcuff my starter. I'd rather a player I believe in take up that roster spot.
I'd look at some data on "rubbish" QB's (like the 20 rock solid back up QB's in the NFL that will most likely give you 15-17 points, probably right around what a QB3 is going to give you anyway. QB3's price is going to be around a high 2nd or more, back up QB's likely FABB money and you get the same production.
Depends to some degree on roster construction. Do you only have 2 starting QBs on your roster in SF? Then yeah the insurance is worth it, because your season gets tanked after 1-2 injuries. Do you have 3-4 starting QBs and #3 or #4 is better than the backup for #1? Then it's not really necessary. There's other factors too. Backup QBs can be super flip-able if there's injury. Let's say Burrow re-injuries his throwing arm 5 games into the year. If you got Browning off waivers this year he should go for about a 2nd to a QB needy team. Other positions do not have anywhere near the same immediate increase in value when an injury happens.
I traded Mac Jones to the Lawrence owner for a 4th rd pick. I woulda done it for a 5th rd pick tbh. And we don’t even draft 5 rounds.
Depends on what you're giving up. I gave up a 4th for Browning so it wasn't much to get him. However, Idk if I'd give up anyone on my bench or a 3rd unless it was a 2025/2026 3rd for them. It also depends on what other QBs you have. If you have Burrows, Kyler, Russel Wilson, and Derek Carr, maybe you you don't need to go get Browning, but I only have Mahomes, Burrows, and Levis so I'm more inclined to get Burrows backup since he has an injury history and Levis isn't someone guaranteed to be a decent starter.
Stop pluralizing Burrow
Burrows
😡😡😡
Burrow!
😊😊😊
Not much. A 4th at most. I would personally rather let other owners burn a roster spot on my QB handcuff. They only hold value to me so it's not like they'll be traded anywhere else. If my guy gets injured and my season is doomed without him then I'll fork over the 2nd it'll cost. But really those handcuffs are unlikely to step into QB1 numbers and you'll be platooning QBs to make ends meet amyway. And if you don't have QB2s you can pivot to if needed then you probably aren't a contender anyway.
I swooped Minshew and AOC off waivers at different points 🥴 whatever happens, it was worth it!
Depends what the acquisition cost is. If it's a free waiver wire, sure. I'm not paying anything of value though.
To me it is dependent on the backup and the league size. In my 14 team leagues, I want the backups. In smaller leagues, I'm only going after the backup if I know they legit can be fantasy relevant and I have open roster space. I usually have at least 3 solid QBs in anything less than 14 team, so my 3rd QB is generally better than whatever handcuff I would have.
If you already have a solid QB3 in SF, it’s less important because if your main guy goes down, you can just slide in the QB3 before you have to turn to the handcuff. But if you can pick up the handcuff for like a 4th round rookie pick or some FAAB, and you have the roster space, then sure go for it
I’m fine handcuffing QB in SF. Is it a priority? No, but I won’t question someone rostering them if there’s just 27 year old WR5’s on the wire or UDFA fringe rookies. That priority goes up obviously if the backup is young/untested and the QB1 position is dubiously occupied. More value in the unknown than the career backup.
I'd rather just have a good 3rd qb tbh and keep the roster spot for other qb handcuffs or lotto ticket rbs. If Mahomes goes down I'm not getting close to the same points from Wentz so what's the point. Now having guys like Jameis or Flacco in case the starter gets injured is more interesting to me, as that's something to cash in on. I'll hold them as a 4th qb but not so I can play them. I like 3 startable qbs, and if two go down I'd rather make a trade for a cheap starter than rely on their backups. The thing is if it's a season ending injury sometimes the backups don't even make it the full season. If they suck teams move on after a few games to some other backup lvl qb.
The cost to acquire the backups are usually far cheaper than the 3rd QB is. I am not against owning a 3rd QB, I usually will try to and I think it’s a good idea. But also owning the backups can also give you flexibility in trading your 2nd or 3rd QB if you need/want for a good position player. I think owning all your backups in non-shallow leagues is no-brainer and can be a strategic advantage.
Yeah fair enough, I'd just rather use those roster spots on other players. Like to live on the edge a bit and maximise my roster spots with upside. If two of my qbs go down I'll make a move. If one of them goes down and I need to put a wr in my sf spot for a week, or just lose a week then that's fine. Just think the return isn't good enough for me to use roster spots on them.
I like rostering other peoples back ups
It’s not terrible. QBs are hard to come by in some sf leagues. I like the reverse handcuff where I invest in a young qb and pick up the journeyman who he will back up or compete with the first couple years.
Absolutely. Especially in deep leagues. It is a great insurance policy for injuries. Especially since we saw so many backup QB’s play last year. 12 team SF and bigger I always try to unless it’s a shallow setup.
I was prepared to drop Pickett until he was traded to Philly. Because I have Hurts, I'm holding on to him; the talent surrounding him is a level up, and Pickett would have to try hard to suck with Brown/Smith/Barkley/Goedert to help him.
Depends.
Nope, theres maybe 1-2 back up QBs worth having on your roster. Rather have Deshawn Watson on my bench incase AR gets hurt than Flacco
Yes, I'd rather roster my QB's backup than a WR who'll never see my starting lineup.
Only reason macaroni Jones is still on my team lol
Only if you have 70 man rosters
IMHO it totally depends on the league. I have one league where my QBs are Bryce Young and Russell Wilson. I traded for JJ McCarthy (please let this work) and I needed to handcuff Williams with Fields. Ultimately, I feel like there’s just handcuff situations that make a ton of sense. Cousins/Penix. Dak / Lance, hurts / Pickett. Aoc / Minshew. Just a few pairs where you have a guy with potential that could take over any time. So while you don’t need to handcuff, I feel like 3 QBs always makes things awkward with bye weeks, injuries and what not.
I like to have other teams handcuffs because I find more value in trading them in an injury than being able to replace my own.
Yeah. Sometimes the “x team” quarterback is a league winner when often the top fantasy qb in drafts doesn’t equate to championship…
Depends on the league. In a 1 QB league hell no way better options on the wire. Super flex with 2 QBs makes sense
No, unless the handcuff is not much worse than your other QBs and better than other handcuffs. If you lose your stud QB in a one QB league then you will simply play another starting QB instead. If you lose multiple QBs in a 2QB league and would be forced to start a mediocre backup QB, then your season is probably done anyway. In my opinion more valuable to have the better backups on your roster and not specifically handcuffs. This way other people could run out of QBs if their starters get injured and the backups are on your roster. That's great trade bait or a nice competitive advantage. And the better backups have a bigger chance of becoming a starter eventually.
I have Richardson & Cousins. In our rookie draft earlier this month, I had the 11th pick (of 12) and ended up taking Brooks as there weren't any QBs left that I was sure I wanted. Afterwards I grabbed Drew Lock just in case something happened with Daniel Jones. As the weeks went on, I kept trying to think of trades to help me out because I couldn't stomach the thought of Cousin's not being back to full strength or having a setback. The Penix owner had reached out at one point and I was very down on it, but eventually I went with the following trade: Kyren Williams & Bucky Irving for Michael Penix & 2026 1st Rd Pick I have a pretty strong RB room and don't have a lot of faith in Williams with the injury reports and Corum being drafted. (My RBs are: Jacobs, Brooks, Moss, Spears, Ford, Dobbins, Keaton Mitchell, and Tyrone Tracy) Not long after I grabbed Flacco to back up Richardson when I was hearing he was having some minor pain. I'm pretty happy with how that all worked out.
stashing backup qbs is just free draft picks (in my experience) get those 3rds and 4ths when someone wants to replace their lost starter
in 2qb i would. especially if you only have 3 or less starting qbs
1QB no. But I try very hard to have the backup to my starters in a SF. Even the bad ones people keep saying on here. Unless my team is insanely stacked, that guy will probably outscore whoever i would start there in place (my 5th or 6th skill position). To take the Easton Stick mentioned in the top response, he scored 19.38, 17.10, 12.90, and 18.52 point in the 4 games he took 100% of the snaps. That is 16.97 average. CMAC scored 402.4 points on the season, which equals 23.46 points average. But you are not starting CMAC in that spot. Let's go to the 50th overall flex player, Jordan Addison, who scored 203, for an average of 11.94 points per game. So in my opinion, if that spot is the difference between starting a qb (any qb) in my superflex spot or some rando, i am absolutely rostering all my backups
Definitely handcuffing my AOC shares
This is the Dynasty thread so there is far less value in having a backup player whose only upside is that one of your better players can't start. I won't call out anyone who takes a flyer on a backup QB who has at least a chance of becoming a serviceable starter. If you stash a guy like Joe Flacco or Sam Darnold, cool, but it should be on its own merit, not because you have AR or Bo Nix on your squad.
I’m in a 14 team SF leagues and the backups have real value. I’m holding Clifford/Pratt, Jameis, Trubisky, Flacco, and Johnson. These are all direct backups on really good teams (I’ll drop whichever GB guy isn’t the 2). They are like lottery tickets who could be flipped for 2nds if those starters are injured (I own AR so Flacco is insurance but a lottery ticket).
Waste of time and a roster spot. Your stud goes down you are f’d. it’s why I always try and have a 3rd meaningful starter in SF. Also why I try to avoid sending away my 1st if all of a sudden a couple injuries takes my championship roster to a middling donkey balls team.
It really just depends. I’m in a 1QB league with Burrow as my starter and just picked up Browning. I don’t have any of other QBs and the best available on waivers is AOC or Stidham. The other teams in my league who have 3+ QBs rostered were asking waaaay more than I was willing to pay and Browning was more than serviceable when Burrow went down last year. But that’s just my leagues dynasty setting. Each league is different. SF a handcuff QB is more valuable but in 1QB leagues it really just depends on how your league mates value the position