FOF7 Height and Weight

[EdgeSteel]

Hey, been playing FOF7 for a long time and love grabbing tall WRs, even though they seem very rare. Just wondering if anyone notices height and/or weight actually having an impact (other than training new positions) in games or is it just down to stats?

[Ushikawa]

Supposedly it matters in FOF8, there is a chart in the offesnive and defensive philosophy pdfs. In 7, there was much debate about it but never any clear answer as to its impact.

[Sharkn20]

Originally Posted by Ushikawa

Supposedly it matters in FOF8, there is a chart in the offesnive and defensive philosophy pdfs. In 7, there was much debate about it but never any clear answer as to its impact.

I saw players performing way worst in FOF8 when they aren't in the ideal weight, in relation to what thry did previously in FOF7.

Superstars perform like Superstars still, but if they are not in their ideal weight they won't perform Top Notch if you know ehat I meant.

[Sharkn20]

Originally Posted by Mobarak

He was on my board. I was most likely moving him to FS

5'9 / 185 Lbs FS??? Oh Lord.... He would struggle at that position big time.

[Hammer]

I don't know what to make of all this size business. I have a small SS, 180 lbs or so, 41 rated, 67 run defense in the CFL. 295 tackles and 29 passes defended in his first 3 seasons. That would be over achieving if his size was prototype, let alone nearly 30 lbs under.

[Hammer]

I am very sceptical. Haven't noticed any difference to this point. I notice DL seems to list according to weight, but other positions don't. Unfinished project?

[Sharkn20]

Originally Posted by Hammer

I don't know what to make of all this size business. I have a small SS, 180 lbs or so, 41 rated, 67 run defense in the CFL. 295 tackles and 29 passes defended in his first 3 seasons. That would be over achieving if his size was prototype, let alone nearly 30 lbs under.

What team have you got in the CFL??

Did you notice a decline in his production from 2044 to 2045??

[Hammer]

Chiefs. I don't have the game in front of me, but I don't think so. The SS is Johnny Hill.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Hammer

Chiefs. I don't have the game in front of me, but I don't think so. The SS is Johnny Hill.

His PDPct dropped from 80.4 in the last year of FOF7 to 73.0 in the first year of FOF8.

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by Sharkn20

5'9 / 185 Lbs FS??? Oh Lord.... He would struggle at that position big time.

Lol, this unit is struggling already, I had several other guys slotted before him though

[Hammer]

Looking at Hill's tackle count, it hasn't declined in the move to FOF8. He was fully developed after his rookie season, so it seems reasonable to compare the past 2 seasons. Actually a slight improvement in tackle percentage, 12.8 in FOF7 and 13.7 in FOF8.

Intelligently applying weight would lead to no decline in pass defense skills in my opinion, but decline in tackling ability. But then tackle count could be misleading, he might make the tackle but in a less effective manner. Not sure if the game works that deeply, probably not.

Ultimately I don't think the sample size here gives us any real conclusion. In any case a conflict of data in Hill. It would be interesting to see further similar players. I am leaning towards there being no intelligent application of weight though. More likely any penalty would be a general one across all bars. Probably.

[Ben E Lou]

Oh, unless shown strong evidence otherwise, my operating assumption is that abs(weight-idealwt)*k is applied as a modifier to play success.

[Sharkn20]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

His PDPct dropped from 80.4 in the last year of FOF7 to 73.0 in the first year of FOF8.

That's what I meant, is a massive decline in defensive efficiency from one version to the next. The Tckl % could be because your Front 7 is constantly blown up and he has to make more tackles...

I see this as a difference and a reason to search for Weight specific players when possible.

[Ben E Lou]

Well, I wouldn't go that far just yet, either. All we know for sure is that this one guy's pass defense declined tremendously. It could be primarily for other reasons, or it could be primarily because he's well below ideal weight. I was just posting in response to the Q&A about his production.

This is relatively easy to test, btw. I just haven't gotten around to it. Might do it today.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

But if I had to guess, simply based on all the effort that Jim clearly put into retooling both sides of the ball, writing those detailed documents, and adjusting the talent levels, I'd be extremely surprised if weight isn't an important factor now.

[Hammer]

Originally Posted by Sharkn20

That's what I meant, is a massive decline in defensive efficiency from one version to the next. The Tckl % could be because your Front 7 is constantly blown up and he has to make more tackles..

Dude, wash your mouth out. We had the best run defense in the league last year @2.85 ypc. 0.78 ypc better than any other team in the league. 319 yards less than anyone else over the season.

Hill was 2nd in both tackles and assists on our team playing SS at 5-10, 182 lbs.

If this is an easy test for you Ben I think it would be great for us to gain further information and put this to bed, one way or the other.

[Mobarak]

I think(and I'm no expert) weight has more to do with position changes and how a player gains ratings at a position in the first 4-5 years.

I'm sure there are plays that take weight into consideration as well. An example would be like

weight doesn't affect a WR's ability to catch the ball or make a cut, but might make a difference (along with str) when it comes to run blocking and getting off press coverage, not getting injured on the play etc.

I don't do any "testing" but I have multiple monitors and read every game log for my teams, that said something I've watched and haven't seen any real difference is the height of the receivers and corners. I've seen plenty of superstar CB's that are like 5'9 with great stats playing on the outside. Again I don't have any testing proof but I was interested enough to pay a small amount of attention to it.

[Hammer]

I hoped it would be written so that weight and height made a real life realistic type of difference, rather than a general penalty across bars type of difference.

I look at my CFL team, the top tackler is also undersized. We had a DE 40 lbs under weight. Played Cover 2 largely. I know stats can lie but it seems odd we did so well against the run if weight is a big deal.

[Squirrel]

Originally Posted by Hammer

I know stats can lie but

Interested whether you think current rating tells us anything in this debate. There's the example of this guy, who I signed in FA as a 40/40 ILB with exp 6. One pos switch later and now he is a 61/61 DE. Performing OK at that.

I'm normally distrustful of current rating, but it makes me wonder.

I'd also say that during my initial FOF 8 SP play when the game was first released, as I was trying to get a feel for it, the single thing that seemed to take me past the AI was when I began to pay attention to the weights. But maybe it was a mirage and I just picked up critical mass on cohesion or something, I don't know.

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by Squirrel

Interested whether you think current rating tells us anything in this debate. There's the example of this guy, who I signed in FA as a 40/40 ILB with exp 6. One pos switch later and now he is a 61/61 DE. Performing OK at that.

I'm normally distrustful of current rating, but it makes me wonder.

I'd also say that during my initial FOF 8 SP play when the game was first released, as I was trying to get a feel for it, the single thing that seemed to take me past the AI was when I began to pay attention to the weights. But maybe it was a mirage and I just picked up critical mass on cohesion or something, I don't know.

I agree with you on the position changes. I'm not sure how to link a player from another site to this one but he's in the CCFL, DE Jalen Schwartz. I drafted him at WLB and his stats in DA and game itself were horrible. he was real heavy and real slow so I gambled that he would improve if I moved him to DE where his body type would be better suited. He improved dramatically. Gave me 3 sacks his rookie year coming in on base 4-5 WR sets. (51 pass plays)

[Hammer]

It seems that the OLB to DE switch works when the player has prototype DE bars. Pass rushing and run defense, but no pass defense skills. The current rating evaluation must put weight on different bars. The LB gets dragged down by lack of pass defense, the DE doesn't. I had a guy pop up 20 points with a simple switch in the RZB.

Just recently I traded with Ben for a 198 lbs CB who looked like a prototype SS in the CFL. I got a small jump, 5 or 6 points, but nice all the same. 90 ish run defense bar is presumably a bigger rating influence at SS.

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by Hammer

It seems that the OLB to DE switch works when the player has prototype DE bars. Pass rushing and run defense, but no pass defense skills. The current rating evaluation must put weight on different bars. The LB gets dragged down by lack of pass defense, the DE doesn't. I had a guy pop up 20 points with a simple switch in the RZB.

Just recently I traded with Ben for a 198 lbs CB who looked like a prototype SS in the CFL. I got a small jump, 5 or 6 points, but nice all the same. 90 ish run defense bar is presumably a bigger rating influence at SS.

Totally agree on the OLB and DE switch, in this particular case this guy was garbage in all stats, it was a purely experimental pick. Probably will still end up only average in the 40's but he was destined for another career without that switch.

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by Hammer

It seems that the OLB to DE switch works when the player has prototype DE bars. Pass rushing and run defense, but no pass defense skills. The current rating evaluation must put weight on different bars. The LB gets dragged down by lack of pass defense, the DE doesn't. I had a guy pop up 20 points with a simple switch in the RZB.

Just recently I traded with Ben for a 198 lbs CB who looked like a prototype SS in the CFL. I got a small jump, 5 or 6 points, but nice all the same. 90 ish run defense bar is presumably a bigger rating influence at SS.

The CB to SS, SS to CB switch seems to elude a lot of GM's. I see a lot of safeties with no run defense or zone with decent bump and run and m2m all over the place, I found this to be a relatively easy switch in late rounds.

When I drafted in the allocation draft of the CCFL I wasn't paying attention at all to this stuff, year 2 I switched both my starting corners to safeties and both starting safeties to corners. Kaden McKenzie started as a FS and is currently the number 2 rated CB in the CCFL behind the alien Gus Harding with Denver =(

[thefatcat]

Originally Posted by Hammer

It seems that the OLB to DE switch works when the player has prototype DE bars. Pass rushing and run defense, but no pass defense skills. The current rating evaluation must put weight on different bars. The LB gets dragged down by lack of pass defense, the DE doesn't. I had a guy pop up 20 points with a simple switch in the RZB.

I think this could be correct, if you think a LB has nine bars he is evaluated on. I know the algorythm is not this simple but let's say his 9 bars as a LB add up to 450 you then divide by the 9 bars 450/9 = 45/45 rating

Now let's say that LB has 30,30 and 30 for his cover bars. Move him to DE where they only have 6 bars in play at one time subtract the 30/ 30 and 30 (the coverage bars are not in play for a DL) and that makes 450-90=360 then that 360/6 = 60/60 rating.

[garion333]

My assumption is height and weight always played a role, but that it was a small de/buff to any dice rolls. I said much the same about chemistry and I think it's the same here. We aren't talking about a core system of the game, it's a fringe aspect.

Height/weight is treated much like the NFL in that regard. It's not a core system, athleticism can overcome many size deficiencies (see: Drew Brees). So too can technique overcome physical shortcomings. Is it better for a DL to be super tall? Sure, but it's not necessary.

You get the same in FOF. Size is as important as you want it to be, but it probably shouldn't be the most important factor in choosing someone.

All that said, Jim talked a good bit more about size with FOF8 and I'd be shocked if he didn't tweak the formula to make it more important. How important? Probably about as much as before but with 5 or 10% more effect. It's clear his formulas and dice rolls in this game are incredibly involved and any change can have a cascading effect. So much of this game is in doing the small things that add up to a decent effect. Drafting and cap management are the big first things to understand, but after that, excepting gameplanning, there are a ton of little things that you can spend years learning. It's why we're all still here eve n if we're unhappy with the current version.

Tldr Ignore height/weight and you can do just fine focusing on the draft, etc. But maybe don't fill your entire roster with 5'8" players.

[wustin]

my only issue is how some elite QBs prospects in the draft can be 5'10-5'11

[Mobarak]

Check out Luke Sedor, Cinncinati, CCFL

5'7 177lb rookie CB, I currently see him at 57/73.

lol how does a 5,7 guy guard guys 6'0 and taller? A pure beast out of the 4th round.

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by Mobarak

Check out Luke Sedor, Cinncinati, CCFL

5'7 177lb rookie CB, I currently see him at 57/73.

lol how does a 5,7 guy guard guys 6'0 and taller? A pure beast out of the 4th round.

Albeit a small beast.

[garion333]

Originally Posted by Mobarak

Check out Luke Sedor, Cinncinati, CCFL

5'7 177lb rookie CB, I currently see him at 57/73.

lol how does a 5,7 guy guard guys 6'0 and taller? A pure beast out of the 4th round.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...e-unstoppable/

[Mobarak]

Originally Posted by garion333

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...e-unstoppable/

It's a nice article but that's a different sport and it's offense, a shorter WR is certainly a viable option, I read most of it.. how is the guy on defense?

[garion333]

Originally Posted by Mobarak

It's a nice article but that's a different sport and it's offense, a shorter WR is certainly a viable option, I read most of it.. how is the guy on defense?

This better?

[Mobarak]

Uh, what thought process did you have when you read my post.

Check out Luke Sedor, Cinncinati, CCFL

5'7 177lb rookie CB, I currently see him at 57/73.

lol how does a 5,7 guy guard guys 6'0 and taller? A pure beast out of the 4th round.

It was a rhetorical question..

[Sharkn20]

Originally Posted by Mobarak

Uh, what thought process did you have when you read my post.

Check out Luke Sedor, Cinncinati, CCFL

5'7 177lb rookie CB, I currently see him at 57/73.

lol how does a 5,7 guy guard guys 6'0 and taller? A pure beast out of the 4th round.

It was a rhetorical question..

Superstars will play like superstars in FOF. But if he was 6'0 he would be even better.