Last year reinforced a valuable yet painful lesson: No matter how much running backs should rule the day in fantasy football, they have - for the most part - been surpassed by wide receivers.

Part of what makes us all human is the fact we show bias. I have played fantasy football for nearly 20 years and running backs have always been central to my draft-day plans. It's a philosophy that has allowed me to win roughly three times as much money as I have invested into this hobby over the years. While running backs are arguably more important than ever due to the scarcity of every-down workhorses nowadays, the league has emphasized passing and most coaches now believe it is better to spread the punishment one runner used to receive among two or three backs. These shifts in philosophy are unlikely to change, no matter how much some of us believe such changes are/were unnecessary and possibly even counterproductive.

Last year was bizarre even by modern standards, but some offseason research has made it painfully clear owners who choose to pin their hopes of winning fantasy titles on running backs are doing so at their own peril. Let's be clear this admission is not an endorsement of going WR-WR-WR-WR in the first four rounds of non-TFC or FFPC drafts, but rather an acknowledgement that elite receivers tend to hold their value pretty well all season long. How often does a receiver that goes undrafted in fantasy and become a WR1? It seems for every Miles Austin or Odell Beckham Jr. (remember, he missed the first four games of his rookie year due to a hamstring injury), there are at least five or 10 running backs that come out of the woodwork to power fantasy teams to championships. Last year alone, James White (fourth), Tim Hightower (sixth), Javorius Allen (eighth) and Bilal Powell (ninth) powered their fantasy teams to the title by finishing inside the top 10 in PPR scoring over the final five weeks of the season. Now look at the receiver positon. Many of us are quite familiar with the names of Antonio Brown, Brandon Marshall and Julio Jones. In fact, I can only spot three players - Ted Ginn Jr. (16th), Kamar Aiken (17th) and Tyler Lockett (18th) - inside the top 20 over the final five weeks of the season who went undrafted in most leagues, none of whom who actually "carried" their fantasy teams.

I'm quite confident the system I introduced last year to grade players is one other analysts will try to duplicate in coming years. My biggest mistake last year was my unwillingness to deviate from the belief that a strong running back corps was the easiest way to a fantasy title. That bias meant I barely broke even in 2015. While the position should return to "normal" levels in the coming years as some future studs play their final year of college football this year, receivers are probably going to dominate the early rounds of fantasy drafts for the foreseeable future.

My system, which I have labeled the Success Score Index (SSI), involves meticulously grading and assigning certain weights to several attributes that I feel are critical to fantasy success at that position. I’m not going to pretend as if I have accounted for every possibility; it’s an impossible task in a sport that features 11 men on one side of the ball trying to work in perfect harmony and 11 men on the other side trying to interrupt it. Just because it is an impossible task, however, doesn't make it worth doing. Someone is going to win your league this year, so the title might as well go to the person weighing as many relevant factors as possible in his analysis.

Before I get to the boards, I would like to remind readers about two key points:

1) I doubt you will find another draft board like this one and further doubt you will find a similar set of rankings anywhere else. The standard the industry uses to measure accuracy among analysts is overall scoring, but I am more concerned with projected consistency and matchups. Consistency tends to lead to big fantasy numbers at the end of the season and championships while inconsistency and bad matchups at the wrong time usually lead to frustration. Someday, I hope the industry catches on to my way of thinking. Until then, I’ll try to win as many titles as possible and help you do the same.

2 ) I'll include the risk signs you have become familiar with in recent years when I release my final Big Boards in a couple of weeks. For now, owners can take solace in the fact the SSI I use to help me set my values below accounts for the attributes I feel are most important for a fantasy player at his given position. Among the areas I consider at each position are durability and job security, so don't think the absence of or means I didn't account for such risk factors.

Let’s revisit the color-coding system before we start:

Red – A very difficult matchup. For lower-level players, a red matchup means they should not be used in fantasy that week. For a second- or third-tier player, drop your expectations for them at least one grade that week (i.e. from WR2 to WR3). For elite players, expect them to perform one level lower than their usual status (i.e. RB1 performs like a RB2).

Yellow – Keep expectations fairly low in this matchup. For lower-level players, a yellow matchup is a borderline start at best. For a second- or third-tier player, they can probably overcome the matchup if things fall right. For the elite players, expect slightly better than average production.

White – Basically, this matchup is one that could go either way. In some cases, I just don’t feel like I have a good feel yet for this defense. Generally speaking, these matchups are winnable matchups for all levels of players.

Green – It doesn’t get much better than this. For non-elite players, the stage is basically set for said player to exploit the matchup. For the elite player, this matchup should produce special numbers.

Quarterback – Talent, aggressiveness of the offensive scheme, durability, offensive line play and difficulty of schedule.

Running back – Talent, job security, durability, percentage of team's backfield touches and red-zone importance.

Wide receiver – Talent, targets/game, scheme fit and the quality of quarterback play.

Tight end – Talent, importance to the team in the red zone, targets/game, scheme fit and the quality of quarterback play.

Notes:
1. For this first set of Big Boards, I have chosen to stop at 150 players. Next week, I will release my first Big Boards for 0.5 PPR leagues as well as The Fantasy Championship and FFPC Big Boards. In the final set of Big Boards in a little under two weeks, I will rank 200 players and present my final rankings for kickers and defense/special teams.

2. Over the next two weeks, I will be “quality controlling” my projections (basically double-checking my numbers, such as not having one defense projected to intercept 15 passes through four games while another has just one), so my next set of Big Boards (in two weeks) could look different – particularly at the bottom – than they currently do. As with all things that are worth doing, this process takes time and needs to be constantly revised as more information about depth charts and injuries becomes available. Thanks in advance for your patience.

3. As noted earlier, this Big Board is designed for owners drafting in leagues who need to start one quarterback, two running backs, three receivers, a tight end and a flex.

Here is the scoring system that I used to rank the players in the non-PPR format: