Why you shouldn't go 'Zero RB' in fantasy football even in an unpredictable 2020

Last year, we went over the case for and against the fantasy football draft strategy known as “Zero RB,” in which you target wide receivers and a top tight end before you even think about taking a running back.

The idea there is to lean on certainty — wide receivers get injured less and are usually more consistent week-to-week producers, while running backs could be first-rounders the first week of the season and then be out for the season the next. That means if you throw some darts late on upside RBs and nail a couple of them, plus one or two off waivers, you’re set for the year.

Personally, I’ve never tried Zero RB and don’t plan on trying it anytime soon. The problem I have is there are too many WR2-types who I like that could leap to WR1 levels. Tight end is less shallow than it used to be, and with running back, my strategy that’s worked involves taking two names early and a bunch of upside picks later on to fill out your bench later in drafts. In other words, you’re still taking shots with RBs you might target by going Zero RB.

In 2020, with so much uncertainty, unpredictability and just overall weirdness, I’ve seen some fantasy owners wondering if this is the year to try Zero RB. And here’s where I respond: nope.

It’s not like there’s MORE uncertainty with the running back position than ever before. The uncertainty lies with every single player who could miss games due to being put on the COVID-19 list. And yes, I know part of the strategy with Zero RB is that backup running backs produce more than backups at other positions when they get elevated to starting roles.

But I’ll repeat it again to make my point: everyone has the same risk in 2020, so don’t talk yourself into Zero RB just because you think this year will be different in some way.