The term "too many mouths to feed" is often used for specific players or teams. This label may be put on players in systems with multiple players warranting the football. The 2022 season allows us to see up-to-date schemes and recent data to analyze. During the offseason, coaching changes and roster transactions will happen. These influence each team, which is an important reminder to individually analyze each team. The data provided is from the 2022 season, which allows a baseline to work from. This article will analyze the number of times a receiving option scored over 10 PPR points in a single game. This analysis was done on receiving production only; if a running back surpassed 10 points from receiving stats, they were included.
Two Coaching Systems
I would like to think everyone who watches football or plays fantasy football has a general idea of coaching systems. Here are two examples of coaching systems. Arthur Smith loves to run the football and diminishes the talents of Kyle Pitts and Drake London. This is an important reminder the NFL does not care about our fantasy football teams. On the contrary, Justin Herbert is in a system that favors throwing the ball. This means there is potential to find more fantasy-relevant assets; Keenan Allen (WR12-PPG), Mike Williams (WR22-PPG), and even Gerald Everett (TE13-PPG) were relevant assets from the 2022 season.
The Chargers running back's (Austin Ekeler) receiving stats from 2022 would have finished as WR22 (PPR). I know I used points-per-game for the receiving options and then total finish for the running back. I used what would prove my point. Okay, fine. Ekeler would have been WR33 in points-per-game for his receiving production. Moving on.
Too Many Mouths to Feed
Let's get into this idea there are too many mouths to feed. I gathered the data from the 2022 season and input it into the chart below. The chart contains each team's targets and receiving options over 10 points per game. This means rushing production was not factored in. If a running back had 10+ receiving points, they were factored in.
You should take the time to look over the chart before continuing to read. I do not need to bore you breaking down each team, we can clearly see the evidence showing mouths can be fed. It is interesting to see Detroit supporting over three options in 41% of games. Who would have thought? Here is a quick breakdown of the chart:
- Zero games:
- You want to see a lower percentage in this category.
- 10 teams had zero receiving options below 10 points.
- Tennessee had 35% of games with zero options over 10 points.
- You want to see a lower percentage in this category.
- One:
- We would like to see at least one option scoring 10 points.
- 10 teams supported a fantasy-relevant option every week.
- Tennessee had the least games with at least one option.
- We would like to see at least one option scoring 10 points.
- Two:
- It is fair to assume two receiving options can be fantasy relevant.
- Three teams supported two options over 90% of games.
- Eight teams supported two options over 75% of games.
- Seven teams supported two options under 50% of games.
- It is fair to assume two receiving options can be fantasy relevant.
- Three
- This is when we see the "too many mouths to feed" argument.
- Four teams supported three options over 50% of games.
- 12 teams supported three options for over 25% of games.
- Chicago is the only team to have zero options to score 10 points in a single game.
- This is when we see the "too many mouths to feed" argument.
- Four:
- People are eating here.
- Cincinnati had 31% of games with four options scoring 10 points.
- Eight teams supported four options over 10% of games.
- 13 teams did not support four options in a single game.
- People are eating here.
The data informs us of the possibility of multiple receiving options to score over 10 points in a game. The five teams supporting five options are due to a boom game. This data is a baseline for an understanding of the "too many mouths to feed" argument. We can see multiple mouths are fed. The biggest question is consistency. Which receiving options are consistently surpassing 10 points per game?
Consistency is Key
I will provide examples from the team's weekly stats. The above chart observed total targets. It is fair to assume when a team is throwing the ball more, they increase the potential to support multiple receiving options. I will note an example of low, average, and high passing volume offenses. These teams were picked based on if they were below, near, or above the league-average targets.
Detroit Lions (383 Targets)
Detroit had the second-fewest targets in the NFL. However, they supported three options in 41% of games and four options in 12%. This is intriguing to note. We need to understand consistency. Here is their weekly breakdown:
- Low passing volume
- One stud wide receiver
- Role players
Amon-Ra St. Brown was the consistent asset having 81% of games over 10 points. When looking at the other options, it is not exciting. Their production was variable, meaning we should not feel excited to plug them into your lineups. Side note, if you are playing Best Ball, it will behoove you to roster the second or third receiving option. When we do not know when a boom game will happen, best-ball settings have our backs. Low volume passing offense explains why there was one consistent option.
An important note is their first-round rookie selection, Jameson Williams, was recovering from an ACL injury. Detroit did not seem to rush him back into the offense upon his return in week 12. Detroit also drafted Jahmyr Gibbs in the first round of the 2023 NFL Draft. They may be looking to throw the ball more in 2023.
Cincinnati Bengals (594 Targets)
Cincinnati was near the league average for total targets. They supported two options in 94% and three options in 56% of games. Ja'Marr Chase and Tee Higgins are arguably the top receiving duo in the game. It should make sense why multiple options are supported in this offense.
- Average passing volume
- Two stud wide receivers
- Skilled third wide receiver
- Stud quarterback
Chase and Higgins are consistent, scoring over 10 points in at least 75% of games. Tyler Boyd is an intriguing player to roster in fantasy football. We know he is not a top option in the offense; he did have 50% of games over 10 points. You are getting a coin flip for a fantasy-relevant week out of a desperation play, which is not too shabby. It also helps when you have Joe Burrow at quarterback.
Los Angeles Chargers (687 Targets)
The Chargers had the second-most targets from the 2022 season. They supported two options in 94% of games and three options in 47% of games. It helps when you have good wide receivers in Keenan Allen and Mike Williams.
- Top of the league in pass attempts
- Good wide receivers
- Top receiving running back
- Justin Herbert at quarterback
The Chargers have three variables: high pass volume offense, good receiving options, and a stud quarterback. This formula creates multiple fantasy-relevant options. Despite Ekeler being a running back, he surpassed 10 receiving points in 65% of games.
Important Scheme Changes
NFL teams will have coaching and roster changes. When there is consistency in coaching, we can understand the offense and how to address the players for fantasy purposes. We know Chicago will be a run-heavy team. However, they acquired DJ Moore in the offseason, and giving Justin Fields a legitimate receiving option may open up the playbook.
Eric Bieniemy is the new offensive coordinator for Washington. People may assume he will bring the Kansas City-style offense over, but let's not forget that was the Andy Reid offense. He may prefer a different scheme, he may not. If you are risk-averse, staying away from the unknown is for you. Meaning: draft Terry McLaurin and let others take the bet on Jahan Dotson, Curtis Samuel, Logan Thomas, and Antonio Gibson. When in doubt, bet on talent.
When coaching or player changes happen, we can only make an educated guess on what may happen. It is best to understand multiple variables influencing those decisions.
Discussion
The notion of too many mouths to feed, when used, has to have context. Let's look at another analogy, "too many cooks in the kitchen". I would like to think your local restaurant only needs a handful number of cooks, but a Michelin restaurant likely requires more. A head chef will run the kitchen, I am thinking Ja'Marr Chase to the next best chef, Tee Higgins. Chase is the Gordon Ramsay of the Bengals.
Each chef (fantasy asset) plays an important role in the kitchen (NFL offense). One may specialize in desserts, while one specializes in appetizers. It will be important to understand the kitchen, sometimes you want a specific style of food, and it will not offer it. Is this metaphor working?
It will be important to note a pass-heavy offense versus a run-heavy. A pass-heavy offense has a higher likelihood of supporting more than two fantasy-relevant receiving options. You may remember the frustration of the Tennessee offense when A.J. Brown was there. When addressing the run-heavy offense, you may still draft the team's number one target. There just may be a little frustration when the consistency is not there, despite the talent.
- Pass heavy:
- Want the top two targets on the team (Chase/Higgins).
- A coin flip on the third target (Boyd).
- The remaining options are for spot start weeks.
- Tight end (Hurst)
- Wide receiver depth in case of injuries
- Run heavy:
- Want the top target on the team (St. Brown).
- The second target may still be viable (Chark).
- The remaining depth may only be relevant for injuries or potential match-up weeks.
- Want the top target on the team (St. Brown).
Conclusion
Too many mouths to feed is a fallacy. This statement matters to the correct system. Pair talent in a lower passing volume offense (Philadelphia, 502 targets), and you have mouths to feed. A.J. Brown (WR6) and DeVonta Smith (WR9) finished as WR1s for the 2022 season. Dallas Goedert missed five games yet still finished as TE12, better yet, as TE5 in PPG. Pair talent in a high-volume offense (Tampa Bay, 724 targets), and you still have mouths to feed. Mike Evans (WR17) and Chris Godwin (WR19) finished as WR2s; they each missed two games and would have extrapolated to WR9 and WR11. Injuries will happen.
A final note to end on, an NFL offense does not need to be pass-heavy to still warrant fantasy-relevant receivers. The coaching scheme will matter. Jacksonville was one of three teams below 400 targets and still supported Christian Kirk (WR12) and Evan Engram (TE5). Zay Jones had a modest season (WR26) despite a bottom-tier pass volume offense.
I want to bet on talent. The ball will find talent. Just make sure the player is talented. Targets are earned. Having a stud quarterback combined with receiving talent is a bonus. Draft with a purpose. Draft to have fun. Set yourself nicely to win your league. Oh, and don't forget about the luck factor.