Some of the comments on VikingsForever's article I saw some discussion of intentionally punting one week to improve the team as a whole and it made me think of a strategy that I have begun using this year, that is drafting a QB and WR (or for that matter TE) from the same team.  This is actually a pretty common strategy and people often justify it by saying "hey, now every touchdown that x throws to y counts twice!"  This argument really doesnt seem to make logical sense; just because I draft Aaron Rodgers it shouldnt change my overall projection for Greg Jennings.  Clearly I would have more invested in them, but just as every touchdown and yard counts twice, every bad game by one impacts the other. 

Basically this turns your team into a boom or bust team, and this is exactly why I like the strategy.  Consistency is constantly valued in fantasy sports when I think a production-consistency tradeoff is incredibly overrated.  As Herm Edwards famously said, "you play to win the game."  I am looking for a championship in fantasy, and if I'm not first, I'm last.  If the overall quality of my team does not suffer by pairing my QB and WR then I can assume that my odds of making the playoffs will not change.  That then means that if I do make the playoffs I have 2-3 games in which I will be playing against the highest scoring teams in the league but if I can win those I have the crown. 

The risk of a down week by my tandem is well worth taking considering the fact that I am going to be in a position where I will need to rack up the points and will be needing big games regardless.  my rationale is that a great day by Aaron Rodgers paired with say Dwayne Bowe having a bad day will probably mean a loss (and same goes for a bad Rodgers day with a great bowe performance).  A bad day by Rodgers when paired with Jennings will also probably result in a loss, but a good day will likely lead to a win.  So we have kept the same outcome of a bad Rodgers game, but have now tied in the performance of Jennings to Rodgers, so there is a smaller chance of a bad performance by the wide receiver costing the team a win (it is still possible that Rodgers has a great game without involving Jennings but it is less likely than him having a great game and some random receiver having a bad one).

This strategy should ONLY be used if you can do so without hurting the quality of your team.  For example, I recently was in a 2 QB league draft.  My first two picks were Roddy White and Larry Fitzgerald, and later in the draft I saw that the next three QBs on my board were Matt Ryan, Josh Freeman, and Ben Roethlisberger.  An argument can be made for Freeman or Big Ben, but I took Ryan to pair with White.  On the other hand, I hate Kevin Kolb, so when I picked my next QB I took Bradford over him since I have Bradford projected so much higher (although I wound up taking Danny Amendola later, so I guess I still followed the pairing idea)