The H-Back Experiment

[Franklinnoble]

Alright... I don't know if this is really going to be a full-blown dynasty, but I wanted to experiment with a new set of house rules.

I'm starting a new FOF2k4 career, using the default player file with preference draft.

The idea is to run the offense with only one true WR. Others will appear on the roster per the game's requirements, but not be used. There will be no true TE. The roster will be loaded with RB's and FB's, and they will start at TE and WR.

In fact, I intend to start FB's at RB and TE, and RB's at FB and WR.

I don't have a real reason for this, other than to see if it can be done with some measure of success. Plus, I think FB's and TE's are cheaper to re-sign than RB's and WR's, so I expect to have fewer salary cap issues with these guys starting outside their native positions. Maybe. I dunno.

[Subby]

Very cool. Will be watching with interest...

[fantastic flying froggies]

Very cool. Will be watching with interest...
What Subby said.

[Franklinnoble]

Alright... so the first season was miserable... 4-12. But with a preference draft, there wasn't much chance to tailor the talent to my exact needs (namely - lots of solid FB's, and RB's that can actually catch).

Here's a summary of my results:



FB Randal Stermer led the team with 1028 yards rushing, at 3.4 yards per carry. He's a rookie with decent (but not great) rushing attributes. I know I can do better - I've had careers with FB's starting at RB that have dominated.
The WR portion of the experiment doesn't look too good right now. My one "true" WR starter, FL Dan Peak, led the league with 123 catches for 1857 yards. Nobody else on the team had more than 32 catches. The big problem is that I had RB's at all three other WR slots, and none of them can really catch very well.
My QB, Wilbur Gospe, is terrible. 64.6 rating. I know he doesn't have much to work with, but that's just terrible. He's a 5th year guy, so he's not getting much better.
The bottom line:

I have serious, specific needs to address via free agency, trades, and/or the draft. Specifically:



I need at least one RB with outstanding receiving attributes.
I need at least one FB with outstanding rushing attributes - in fact, I prefer one FB that is awesome in all attributes so that he can shoulder most of the offense.
I need a QB that can throw accurately, and that is a master of screen, short, and medium passes.
I should also try to tweak my gameplan for shorter passes to backs out of the backfield.

[Subby]

How does your offensive line look?

[Travis]

It's like reading a dynasty about the Chargers, except you have 1 actual WR on your team ;)

Keep it up, I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of FB you get to carry the load.

[Poli]

Can I be the head coach? I got the 50/50 pedigree, you know. ;)

[Franklinnoble]

How does your offensive line look?
Mediocre.

I ended up drafting #6 overall (amazing that there were five teams worse than 4-12). Somehow, a freakishly good QB drops to that spot. I had to take him.

David Fassero from USC - 35/85. Awesome potential in all aspects of the passing game. It almost seems a shame to waste him on this experiment. Ah, well.

There's squat for linemen after that. I drafted a bunch of FB's and RB's that I hope will fit the roles I have in mind for them. I took some high-volatility chances in rounds 6 and 7 on a T and G and hope to get lucky.

[Franklinnoble]

Well, there was slight improvement during the 2004 season.

We finished 4-11-1

Ugh.

Fassero finished his rookie year with a 71.0 rating, passing for 3166 yards and 16 TDs. His passing average was 6.22.

Rookie FB Norman Freeman led the team in rushing, with 1202 yards at 3.3 per carry.

Dan Peak led the league in receiving again, with 108 catches for 1471 yards. Again, nobody else on the team had more than 32 catches. While I don't have stud receiving RB's yet, I'm beginning to think this might not work. Perhaps I need to bench Peak and not give the QB anything but RB's to throw to. Any suggestions?

[QuikSand]

In time, I expect you can get nice production from running backs playing receiver.

My first "H-back" thought was that you were going to try to give your TE time at the FB position, and see how many rushing yards you could get from him. Might be an interesting challenge on its own.

Good luck.

[Franklinnoble]

In time, I expect you can get nice production from running backs playing receiver.

My first "H-back" thought was that you were going to try to give your TE time at the FB position, and see how many rushing yards you could get from him. Might be an interesting challenge on its own.

Good luck.
It's just really difficult to get anybody in the FB slot of the depth chart any real rushing yards. I did consider that, but haven't given it a shot yet.

Maybe after I sort out the RB receiver angle, I'll approach that.

[Franklinnoble]

Ok... I'm going to digress here for a little bit, because something really interesting just happened.

I'm in the 2005 draft, picking third (yeah, two other teams still sucked worse). I draft a stud RB with the #3 overall, in hopes that he'll improve my receiving game.

That's not the interesting part. The interesting part, is in the 5th round, I decide to get a backup QB, as I traded Gospe for an offensive guard during the FA period. So, I get a guy with decent, but hardly spectacular ratings, and high volatility.

Now, it's immediately after the draft. I have not started the late FA period yet. And this does NOT look at all like the QB I just selected:

http://www.noblebrown.com/images/berger1.jpg

I've never seen a player's ratings shoot up so much right after the draft. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a player's ratings go up right after the draft. As this guy looks now, he should have been a top-10 pick, easy. And I got him in the 5th round.

Is this some cruel joke? Are the football gods telling me to abandon this foolish experiment and acquire some real frickin' WR's already?

[Poli]

As the head coach, I'm really happy right now. :)

[gstelmack]

I've never seen a player's ratings shoot up so much right after the draft. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen a player's ratings go up right after the draft. As this guy looks now, he should have been a top-10 pick, easy. And I got him in the 5th round.

Is this some cruel joke? Are the football gods telling me to abandon this foolish experiment and acquire some real frickin' WR's already?
For the last two drafts in our office league, I've been following player changes at several points:

1) Immediately after drafting them (i.e. during the draft).
2) Right after draft / before late FA.
3) Right after late FA / before training camp.
4) Right after training camp.

I have guys go up or down at all 4 stages. In fact, with this last draft as I've learned what to look for, I had 3 of 7 picks go up, 2 go down, and 2 stay the same immediately after picking them. These trends can and do change throughout the stages. But I had one TE go up 17 points right upon being drafted.

To me, the fact that draftees can have such drastic changes at stage 1 (during the draft) kind of ruins the draft a bit. If a guy ends up MUCH worse, you want to pick another guy up at that position. You should not have this information until the draft is over.