Quick something on TE usage/performance.

[Ben E Lou]

As perhaps one last word on the TE, I decided to run a very simple sniff test. I used the standard roster set, no X-factor, chemistry, etc.

For a game plan, I just did the following:

1. Loaded up a team
2. Hit Rex on every offensive screen
3. Went into formation usage screens and put a "0" on all screens for the four formations that do not use a TE (strong 3wr, weak 3wr, 4wr, 5wr)
4. Used Celeval GP tool to assign that gameplan to all teams in league.

In other words, this is no special game plan of any kind, other than a TE should be on the field every play.

I'll run this season a few times...

Season 1: Zach Miller (83/83) leads the league in ypt with 9.81. Oh yeah, and he has 81 catches for 1,148 yards. Miller, Clark, and Gonzalez all have 800+ yards and 9.0+ ypt. Of the 11 receivers in the league with 9.0 ypt or more, five (Miller, Fitzsimmons, Clark, Gates, Gonzalez) are tight ends.

Season 2: This time the big three all get 900+ yards. Gonzalez leads the way with 73 catches, 1033 yards, 9.31 ypt. Only five receivers break 9.0ypt this time, 2 are tight ends.

Season 3: More of the same. Gonzalez is the top TE with "only" 70 catches for 990 yards and 10.1 ypt. Three of the six guys with 9.0ypt or better are TEs.

I could go on, but I think you get the idea. There's no big secret to putting up strong TE numbers. An old Southern football coach once said "when you got a hoss, you RIDE him!" The default settings are very much sub-optimal for a team with a very good tight end. For example, I would venture a guess that most of us are in either "Passing" or "Extreme Passing" on 3rd and 6-7. That's a down and distance where your VG TE should be a prime target, right? However, if you're using Rex formations, and are in the Passing screen, there is no TE being used 39.1% of the time. And if you're in Extreme Passing, there's no TE being used over 50% of the time.

Here's the biggie on that issue: What kind of numbers are you getting from the guy who's out there instead of your stud TE? I'm not inclined to do all of the math there, but a quick look around a couple of MP leagues tells me that the average WR3 has a current rating somewhere in the 35 to 45 range. I'm happy if that kind of guy gives me 7 ypt, but it's more likely that he's in the 5.5 to 6.5 range. And when you pick Strong 3-WR, Weak 3-WR, Single 4-WR, or 5-WR, you're putting that guy (and worse guys) on the field over your VG TE, a guy who is likely giving you at least 7, and more likely 8 to 9 ypt.

So, bottom line: if you have a TE with good receiving bars and don't have a WR3 who is starting quality, odds are that you're doing yourself a disservice by using those four formations.

[Steel]

Yeah, I just recently realized this. I think I was thinking too much, and trying to trick the defense. So, what I started doing was keeping my best 11, or my best 5 position skill players on the field 100% of the time, and it's made a drastic difference in my offensive output across all my leagues.

[cyril]

questions:

1. how do you compare TE and WR? ie. if I have a 45/45 TE with a 50 big play and a 40/40 3rd WR with a 60 big play, how do you compare? are the attributes of the two positions comparable on a one-to-one basis?

2. Would you extend your thesis to stud FB too?

3. is it a battle of "variety of plays to minimize familiarity" vs "plays that involve your best players to maximize yardage"?

[Firefly]

Cyril, this is not a matter of bars, but of production. You can compare any receiver using ypa, including the FB. If a FB gives you more ypa than a TE or WR, you should by all means keep him on the field at all times.

As far as familiarity, give it a try and see what happens (reducing use of formations to get your best players on the field, that is). If you get too much familiarity you can still attempt a number of things while using the same number of formations, like running a more balanced offense, for example.

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah, I just recently realized this. I think I was thinking too much, and trying to trick the defense. So, what I started doing was keeping my best 11, or my best 5 position skill players on the field 100% of the time, and it's made a drastic difference in my offensive output across all my leagues.I'm starting to think this is the primary key to my game planning success in 6.3--that it's not so much the numbers I'm using as the fact that I work hard to keep the best guys on the field.

questions:

1. how do you compare TE and WR? ie. if I have a 45/45 TE with a 50 big play and a 40/40 3rd WR with a 60 big play, how do you compare? are the attributes of the two positions comparable on a one-to-one basis? A: If both have been on your team for a year or more, I'd first compare career ypt. Beyond that, you really shouldn't be looking at the TE overall rating. I think more than any other position in FOF, TEs can have the same overall rating but vastly different skills. For example, here's one 57/57 TE:

theFOFL.com : Player >> Albert Seebaldt (http://www.thefofl.com/players/player.php?player=24159)

He's got decent BPR, but is weak in RR and GD. He'll never be a top-tier receiving TE. He's a blocker. On the flip side, this 53/53 guy...

theFOFL.com : Player >> Gerald Stafford (http://www.thefofl.com/players/player.php?player=21663)

...can get the job done (though he'll forever be hampered by his endurance.)

Look for RR, GD, and BPR.

2. Would you extend your thesis to stud FB too? It's harder to know with a FB, because the blocking stats we have don't capture everything. But as far as on the receiving end, sure, but the threshold is higher. What I mean is that even a stud FB may not produce much more than a typical WR3/WR4 in terms of ypt, so in most cases you're better off using the no-FB formations just for variety.

3. is it a battle of "variety of plays to minimize familiarity" vs "plays that involve your best players to maximize yardage"? Depends on the talent differential. In IHOF, I have a monster TE who is putting up numbers better than most WR1s in the league. (Actually the DogBytes system has him as the #4 receiver in the league right now.) 10 games into the season, he has averaged 10.1ypt, is 2nd in the league in TD receptions, tied for 3rd in 20+ yard catches, and 1st in YAC per catch. He's doing all of this with a 3rd-year QB who knows only 10 formations. Fortunately for us, only one of those 10 is a no-TE (Weak, 3 WR). I have completely eliminated that one, so we're only using 9 and are getting along just fine. I use a pretty balanced game plan, so that helps. Bottom line: as long as you're not running a gimmicky game plan that does a lot of one thing, eliminating the non-TE formations shouldn't cause a significant familiarity problem



Cyril, this is not a matter of bars, but of production. You can compare any receiver using ypa, including the FB. If a FB gives you more ypa than a TE or WR, you should by all means keep him on the field at all times. Change ypa to ypt, and you're corret here.

As far as familiarity, give it a try and see what happens (reducing use of formations to get your best players on the field, that is). If you get too much familiarity you can still attempt a number of things while using the same number of formations, like running a more balanced offense, for example. Yup, similar to what I said above. I mean, don't try to keep the TE on the field all the time and then throw it 75% of the time or something like that. For 6.3, I use a balanced baseline game plan, one that I hope to release for public consumption some time this week--maybe today.

[Yoda]

Yeah, I just recently realized this. I think I was thinking too much, and trying to trick the defense. So, what I started doing was keeping my best 11, or my best 5 position skill players on the field 100% of the time, and it's made a drastic difference in my offensive output across all my leagues.

This works for defense as well. You want to keep your best players on the field.

[imdashep]

Why not just make your TE the third WR on your depth chart...

[Yoda]

Because he will be playing out of position and take a performance hit.

[Ben E Lou]

Why not just make your TE the third WR on your depth chart...Because a TE slotted as a WR (either in the depth chart or using the personnel screens) will be teh suk. The prevailing wisdom/assumption here is that the game uses his WR positional experience, rendering that "feature" pretty much completely useless

[imdashep]

Lame. Makes sense actually, since he wouldn't be running routes designed for him. So never mind haha

[cyril]

This works for defense as well. You want to keep your best players on the field.

i am on the fence about that (if you mean what i think you mean) - i run 3-4 and my wilb is much stronger than any nickelback i have. using "the best players on field" theory, I would play more "regular" d than "nickel" d. However, the benefit of the regular d with the better guy on field might be outweighed by the assumption that nickel always defend pass better than d, even if the nickelback is relatively weaker. I am not necessarily sure that this assumption is correct but this is what I am led to believe reading posts on this forum.

[Yoda]

It depends on how good your WILB is at coverage as compared to your nickle CB. I mean, if you have a stud WILB (which unless you have 3 other stud LBs, I'd advise changing his position, lol) and a below average CB for your nickleback, I'd opt to keep the LB on the field.

[Ben E Lou]

...if you have a stud WILB (which unless you have 3 other stud LBs, I'd advise changing his position, lol)...Quoted and bolded for emphasis.

[Yoda]

Also, I've been messing around with doing the all dime and all nickle defenses. Well, I haven't messed with them since pre-6.3a, but it's something to test along the lines of having your best players on the field.

If you have 6 very good-stud DBs and only 1 or 2 good LBs, are you better off running nickle/dime most/all of the time. In my previous testing, that was a no. Even when expecting the run, it was giving up a lot of rushing yards.

Then again, it just could have been my defensive formation selections.

Primelord used to have an awesome data mining page here: FOF Data Mining - Front Office Football Central (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=60130)

But it has been a while since I've been able to access it. That was some really useful information.

[MacroGuru]

Alright...

I was looking for some data like this. I am playing in an MP league, my first one back since the update...I was hoping it didn't trash my gameplan I use to much although one tendency picked up on it more that it used to and that was throwing to the TE. I used to get by with sub par and "decent" TE's. I think I now need a great receiving TE for the gameplan.

As for defenses, I still feel the fact I can play in essence a 3-3-5 and do well until the CBs and Safeties wear out shows a lot and definitely points to get the best talent on the field.