TE as a WR

[ddrrbb]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

OFFENSE: If you have a good receiving tight end, be sure to adjust your formation usage to get him on the field on passing plays.

Can you also put your TE in the slot (like Dallas Clark) or 4th receiver postion? Or does this screw up his ratings and make him act as a low rated receiver?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by ddrrbb

Can you also put your TE in the slot (like Dallas Clark) or 4th receiver postion? Or does this screw up his ratings and make him act as a low rated receiver?

I *think* what happens here is that it uses his positional experience at SE/FL, and since most (all?) TEs have crappy experience there, he's not very effective. I could be wrong here, but my impression is that using the RB/TE in the slot is something that just isn't fleshed out very much in FOF.

[Ben E Lou]

Heh. It also may be that things are completely literal here. I just tried putting a RB in the spaces that specifically say "slot," on the screens, and it looks like that may be the way to go here...

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah...the more I play with it, the more the "slot" position seems to be the way to go. There even appears to be a pretty big difference between lining him up at FL1 and using FL1 as the "Flanker", and lining him up as FL1 and using FL1 as the "slot." He does quite a bit better in the "slot" places.

[Ben E Lou]

And it also looks like using a RB/TE there shortens up the routes run by the slot man significantly--and I suspect that could be a good thing in some situations.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Yeah...the more I play with it, the more the "slot" position seems to be the way to go. There even appears to be a pretty big difference between lining him up at FL1 and using FL1 as the "Flanker", and lining him up as FL1 and using FL1 as the "slot." He does quite a bit better in the "slot" places.

SkyDog, just to be clear, are you getting good results by putting the RB or TE as FL1 in the depth charts, then playing him in the "slot" position? Have you seen that it is less effective to play your TE1 or RB1 in the "slot" position?

My team has much more talent at TE and RB than at WR, so if I could get those guys into more passing plays, that would be great news for me.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by danimal

SkyDog, just to be clear, are you saying that you are getting good results playing a TE or RB in the "slot" position? Is this still true even if the TE or RB does not have much positional experience at SE or FL?

So it would appear.

Is it also the case that a TE or RB without much experience at SE or FL would not do well playing in the "flanker" or "split end" positions?

From what I can tell, that seems to be correct.

My team has much more talent at TE and RB than at WR, so if I could get those guys into more passing plays, that would be great news for me.

Well, I'm not sure that it's *better* to put them in the slot. All things being equal, I'd still guess that focusing on formations that use the TE/RB in their natural positions is the better way to go. But if you've got extra RBs/TEs to get on the field, I would assume it's better to put them in the slot rather than to use a crappy WR there.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

I guess what I'm saying is that with a good receiving TE and crappy WR3, I'd use 2 WR/1 TE formations as the main passing sets, and use the Strong 3WR with the TE in the slot for variety.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Dola:

I guess what I'm saying is that with a good receiving TE and crappy WR3, I'd use 2 WR/1 TE formations as the main passing sets, and use the Strong 3WR with the TE in the slot for variety.

Wow, you answered that fast. By the time I revised the question, I saw that you had already responded.

Is it any more effective to place your TE or RB in the FL2 or WR5 position in the depth charts, then play FL2 or WR5 in the slot? Or is it just as effective to play them in the slot as TE1 or RB1?

[Ben E Lou]

From what I can tell, putting a WR in the slot as opposed to a RB/TE causes the slot to get targets on longer passing routes. That may or may not be a good thing, depending on your personnel. If you have starting WRs who are low in Getting Downfield, it *might* be good to have the slot guy eating up the targets on the slot routes.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

From what I can tell, putting a WR in the slot as opposed to a RB/TE causes the slot to get targets on longer passing routes. That may or may not be a good thing, depending on your personnel. If you have starting WRs who are low in Getting Downfield, it *might* be good to have the slot guy eating up the targets on the slot routes.

That makes sense. I was asking a different question though...

If I decide that I want to play a TE or RB in the slot, is it more effective to do that through the depth charts (for example, lining him up as FL2 or WR5 and playing FL2 or WR5 in the slot), or is it more effective to do that through the personnel screens (for example, putting TE1 or RB1 as the slot receiver). Or does it not make a difference?

[Ben E Lou]

Ah. Gotcha. I didn't see much of a difference, but keep in mind that this wasn't any sort of controlled testing, either. Just playing around.

[danimal]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Ah. Gotcha. I didn't see much of a difference, but keep in mind that this wasn't any sort of controlled testing, either. Just playing around.

Gotcha. Thanks for the quick reply!