Ooh. I found another team with 17 players. I know why that is and it isn't the same as mine.

I wanted the option:

"To add a horrible player at one position so I could play him in session 1 all 3 matches and allow the other players at that position to get to FIT 1 for session 2".

But that wasn't an option...  :-)

Steve is a Crazy Tomato. The end.

Will you be posting the answer in due course - I just guessed!

I will, James. 

Al with a brilliantly devious reason!

It seemed like a good idea at the time.

And at that time we started with a 4 match session followed by two 3 match and two 4 match sessions. Also at that time I T7'd the home conference and TMVL in session 1 and then home conferences and WGM after that. So I played bottom 7 a lot. 

We all have 2 players that never need to play and that season  (3) I didn't need more than the 2 competitive recruits. To keep to 16 I was going to get two 1* Liberos as they were the cheapest. Both Liberos I had were similar and I realised I could play a 1* in the thrown games to get one Libero fit+1. And then the same the session after with the other Libero.

And that led me to getting 1* at RS and MB for the same reason. I couldn't afford any more so went for the next cheapest. The plan was to get one or both S and OH for this season and maybe next. 

And then Al talked about expansion and, because I was helping trying to work out a schedule I realised we were going to mainly 3 match sessions. With 3 matches you can play just 3 MB or OH so don't need a 5th and I came up with a different idea for the Setter position.

My 1* now sophomores have played one or two sessions but the difference this season is I haven't thrown any games. 

I meant to add. New Orleans have 17 players - looks like 4 competitive and the free one. Mendon also have 17 - looks like 3 competitive, 1 free and 1 2*.

So...was it what I guess somewhat then?  :-)

I took the free one to hedge my bets against the 3* competitive recruit.  We don't get to see the actual stats until after all recruiting is done. Turned out, my extra recruit ended up better than the competitive one and has been seeing all the playing time this season.
As Steve notes, there is little need for the extra player as there are no injuries or suspensions due to grades or "off court behavior."  I have two players that haven't gotten any playing time at all this season.

having sooooooo many players is just goddamn greedy!

I guess there is an advantage to have 3 players in the 1 place positions (RS, S, L) to allow fitness through absence,  As 4 are needed at MB and OH that makes 17. Would 3 be enough at these two positions?.  My 4th OH has only seen 7 sets of action and that to allow the best to rest in session 1.

With so many 4 match sessions of the past it made sense to me to have a 5th MB and planned a 5th OH. You could either T7 (or nearly T7 if you thought one top OH with a 3rd placed OH would be enough) two games and B7 two games and give one a rest for FIT.

Or do the three OH rotation with OH1 plus OH 2 vs Quincy et al, OH1 plus OH3 and OH2 plus OH3 vs teams I thought I could beat (as I've done all this season) with OH4 plus OH5 in the thrown game.

I like Al's idea with 3 L (for example) and playing the fill-in all 3 games to allow your best two to gain Fit for session 2 onwards. You could get lucky with the schedule and even win 2 or 3 of them.