Talk Fantasy Football

I'm about to enter my very first BB league (although I have played a few dozen games before, so not a complete noob). It's pretty short, 10ish games + playoffs, and we are using 4.0 rules. I'm using Skaven, and I actually had the exact same starting team in mind as Narkotic suggested in his Skaven Guide:

TR100:
7 Linerats
2 Gutter Runners
2 Storm Vermin
1 Thrower
3 Reroll
6 Fan Factor

My question is: I've read a lot of posts on starting teams (including the Sticky post on TR100 starting teams), and many seem to have a very low FF (~1-3), why is this? It would seem that having such a low FF could really hurt your income. I had an Apotechary in mind, but that would leave me with only 1 FF, and before finding these forums I'd never even heard of starting with a FF of less than 5. Maybe I'm missing something here...

My general plan for the league is to start against the less bashy teams (elves, human) so I don't get as many rats killed/injured. My first buy will be Apotechary, then just start replacing dead players and get a 3rd GR. Buying a 4th reroll is something I don't think I can afford, but that of course depends on how unlucky I am with casualties (there are a lot of bashy teams). And I will definately not be buying a Rat Ogre. How's this sound?

The TR100 thread is aimed at real life tournament play, which is typically resurrection style and therefore FF only effects the KO table.

10-12 games is enough, IMO, that FF9 (or very close) should be a priority - especially with rats where players die fairly easily.

Under LRB 4.0 or earlier, in general 6~8 games is the balancing point where FF is of even value. More than 8 games and is it mathematically a better investment than buying more/better players.