Changing Positions

[LondonBrown]

I'm getting to see that drafting rookies with the intent of changing position isn't the strategic masterstroke it can be in other games- identifying the 240lb college ends that can make pro LBs, and the 210lb LBs that can shift to Safety used to be my stock-in-trade. I've still picked three position change players in my last draft though (habits die hard).

First, the rookie OC doesn't have any options available for a position change- he's about 265lbs is there a minimum limit for weight to shift to guard? He was a steal with this in mind in the 6th, but I picked a BAP starter-to-be in the 2nd. Interestingly the starter-to-be (who's also small) doesn't have any change position options either whilst my veteran (who's 290-ish) has the full range of O-Line available.

Second, my RB->WR project will retain 1% more skill by switching to FL instead of SE. Which means there must be a different skill set between the two WR positions- I had always thought they were totally interchangeable?

Third- well, we'll see how I go with the FB-> RB switch.

Talking of small OL, is there any setting that lets you select a zone/ trap blocking style oif OL that would emphasise a small, mobile OL?

cheers as always!!!

[gstelmack]

First, the rookie OC doesn't have any options available for a position change- he's about 265lbs is there a minimum limit for weight to shift to guard?

2k7 Heights / Weights - Front Office Football Central (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=62972)

Ability to switch positions is based on height/weight and the source position. In general, going from expensive (requires a bigger salary) to cheaper works better than going from cheaper to more expensive. For example, an LT can switch to C fairly easily, but the reverse is rarely true.

[Jughead Spock]

I imagine the RB->SE/FL thing is also reflecting the height/weight difference rather than ratings.

[QuikSand]

Second, my RB->WR project will retain 1% more skill by switching to FL instead of SE. Which means there must be a different skill set between the two WR positions- I had always thought they were totally interchangeable?

In my experience, that same 1% margin is ever-present.

[LondonBrown]

Both centres rate as WBA as centers but Light as Guards (either side). And the weights setting says there's no benefit to them bulking up & won't allow that option! So looks like I'm set at centre for the next decade, and I'll be draughting a guard next year. Haven't had much joy with trading so far.

Quicksand- so there's a 1% floating variable? I made sure I switched him to FL anyhow.

[markusg77]

you could also play the centers out of position at guard

[kislingbury]

I drafted a guy at C about 3 seasons ago in a MP league and was disappointed I couldnt change him to G, but then randomly looking through positions this year, I can all of a sudden change him to any other o-line position. I havent bulked him up at all, so there might be some secret factor at work here...

[LondonBrown]

I think that could well be the answer- just play him at (backup) guard anyhow, for now.

Talking of which my starting LT is actually a RT- and if I make the transfer he'll lose some skills & experience. He's another one just holding the fort until another rookie develops- should I carry on playing him out of position or switch him and take the hit?

This season I'm looking for 8-8 respectability (season 3 of rebuilding).

[markusg77]

... should I carry on playing him out of position or switch him and take the hit?


from a gut feel I'd say keep him playing like you do now. It is hard to get points back, once you switched him.

Maybe the more experienced FOF players can weigh in:
If you play a RT at LT and the guy would suffer a drop in rating upon a switch; what rating is used while he plays out of position? The RT rating, or the reduced LT rating, which he would have after a switch?
I believe the latter.
Any insight, agreements, disagreements?

[QuikSand]

It's not that the experienced players are being pricks about this, it's just that this part of the game is not well documented, and very difficult to test in any meaningful way. I don't think anyone really knows the "right" answer to these questions.

As a rule, I am pretty free with position switches with rookies and older fully-experienced players, but pretty reserved in doing them much with players in years 2-7 or so. If I *know* that a player is going to be needed long term in a new position, I'll make an exception if it looks like a fair switch (by my scout). Doing this in multi-player adds an extra element of risk, making me more gun shy to do so. As a result, I do play a fair number of guys out of position (usually just the minor intra-position slots), but have no good way to measure whether that's a good strategy.

[markusg77]

I approach position switches very similarly in that try to switch fully developed players, if there is need. Otherwise I rather avoid it.

Concerning switching rookies, I had once a draft pick, whom I switched before camp totally bust after camp. So I ended up switching rookies only after camp.
Did you have similar experiences or was this more likely a bad dice roll?

[QuikSand]

Concerning switching rookies, I had once a draft pick, whom I switched before camp totally bust after camp. So I ended up switching rookies only after camp.

Did you have similar experiences or was this more likely a bad dice roll?

I have seen this happen enough times to think there's something there. Hard to say for sure, but I'd bet it's wired into the game as an occasional special risk.

[Firefly]

I would have thought the opposite, that switching a player before camp was best. I did have a rookie switch from ILB to OLB that the game said would gain points, and who had very good bars, implode. But I tried it again the following year with better results. The thing is, the bust could have simply been volatility related. But I will consider the switch after camp approach in the future.

As far as playing guys out of position, I don't think I ever do it, but it's more out of neatness than anything else. I'm sure it's a good idea sometimes. That's also why I always sign all my rookie draft picks, regardless of how bad their initial bars are.

[Bako]

These are the bars for my FS:

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3166/safetytocorner.jpg (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

He is in his 4th year and is rated in the low 60's. This past season he had 0 INT's and 4 defensed balls for a 75% while starting every game.

Based on his low zone coverage, would he be more successful at Corner? The game says that if he did switch to corner he would be rated 38/58.

By the way, my other DB's are skilled in man coverage also.

Thanks for any insight in advance.

[Bako]

These are the bars for my FS:

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3166/safetytocorner.jpg (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

He is in his 4th year and is rated in the low 60's. This past season he had 0 INT's and 4 defensed balls for a 75% while starting every game.

Based on his low zone coverage, would he be more successful at Corner? The game says that if he did switch to corner he would be rated 38/58.

By the way, my other DB's are skilled in man coverage also.

Thanks for any insight in advance.


Anyone have any advice about this? With his low zone coverage, would he be more suited to play Corner?

[bighouserulez]

I would move him to corner imo his play diag is too low and m2m and bmp are much better suited for corner.

It all depends on depth of course

[RedKingGold]

These are the bars for my FS:

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3166/safetytocorner.jpg (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

He is in his 4th year and is rated in the low 60's. This past season he had 0 INT's and 4 defensed balls for a 75% while starting every game.

Based on his low zone coverage, would he be more successful at Corner? The game says that if he did switch to corner he would be rated 38/58.

By the way, my other DB's are skilled in man coverage also.

Thanks for any insight in advance.

As said earlier in this thread, you're not providing a key piece of information: What is this player's height and weight?

[Bako]

6'0 206

[NiteMaestro]

These are the bars for my FS:

http://img124.imageshack.us/img124/3166/safetytocorner.jpg (http://www.imagehosting.com/)

He is in his 4th year and is rated in the low 60's. This past season he had 0 INT's and 4 defensed balls for a 75% while starting every game.

Based on his low zone coverage, would he be more successful at Corner? The game says that if he did switch to corner he would be rated 38/58.

By the way, my other DB's are skilled in man coverage also.

Thanks for any insight in advance.

Well, in my limited experience, I would suggest moving him to SS. His run defense is so high, it seems like it'd be a liability having him at corner. FS aren't on the field as much as SS, and are usually in deep zone coverage. Due to his lack of zone skills, I'd agree to move him from FS, however, it's a question of whether you value your run defense more, but your SS will get beat (TE's and FB's probably) or playing him at CB, but possibly having a liability at SS with run support.

[Yoda]

I'd be starting him at SS.

[Epi_862]

Something comes to mind here... While i do too enjoy roster micro-management as a lot of you do, im under the impression that some believe none of what is discussed in this thread really matters.

Without being able to back this up, i have a feeling that - like some vets have said - the game calculates the result first, and then assigns stats to players based on several factors.

So, in theory, it doesnt matter if you play him at FS or move to corner - while his personal stats will be affected one way or the other, your overall team stats wont.

Now, as i said, this is just a gut feeling. Me personally, i try to play the game and pretend it correlates to real football. So in your case, i would definitely move him to SS becouse it would make football sense.