RB --> WR

[isaccoubaldi]

I draft this guy at 1.5. On my roster I have a good RB so my intention was to move Davison to WR. I haven't a great knowledge about position changes so I like to know what do you think before to make a mistake ...

http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac63/isaccoubaldi/1.png


http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac63/isaccoubaldi/2.png

http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac63/isaccoubaldi/3.png

http://i886.photobucket.com/albums/ac63/isaccoubaldi/4.png

[Ben E Lou]

I would see if he'll weight-train down. If so, don't switch him until after training camp, when he has lost weight.

[isaccoubaldi]

Thanks Ben.

[Dutch]

I thought it would be okay to "trim down" and then switch to get the benefits of TC (since it's done sequentially)...but now I guess that logic would be wrong.

[Kozure]

yes, I am fairly sure that he can do it in the same stage as long as he weight trains first.

[Ben E Lou]

I thought it would be okay to "trim down" and then switch to get the benefits of TC (since it's done sequentially)...but now I guess that logic would be wrong.As best as I can tell, they don't actually get smaller until after TC. What I know for sure (at least as of the last time I checked) is that in SP if you wait until after TC to make the switch, you keep a few more future points than you do if you switch before camp, even with a "trim down." That said, if it's a situation where you're on the brink of a title and you want to maximize his impact as a WR this year, then you're not really losing all *that* much in future by switching him pre-camp. I'd expect that guy to be upper 60s if you switch him pre-camp, low-to-mid 70s if you switch him post-camp (assuming he can trim down.)

[JesterBlaze]

I believe you have to sign him on the 1st try to get a chance to change his weight.

If I'm wrong I'm sorry. I can remember thinking "Shit, I guess I had to have him signed BY this stage" with a few rookies and I think it was when I wanted to drop/gain weight.

[Firefly]

Absolutely, lose the weight first. If you could do it at the same time, then there wouldn't be any point in having a weight issue at all. Logic aside, I believe the "The player will retain X% of his ratings" will change after TC, if I recall correctly

[Ben E Lou]

I believe you have to sign him on the 1st try to get a chance to change his weight.

If I'm wrong I'm sorry. I can remember thinking "Shit, I guess I had to have him signed BY this stage" with a few rookies and I think it was when I wanted to drop/gain weight.Well, yreah, that goes w/o saying. You gotta give him option 4 in FA2 in order to weight train in MP.

[isaccoubaldi]

Thanks for all the replies.

I signed him with the option 4 but I have another question: if it's not possible for him to lose weight the best solution is to change him anyway to WR or it's better for me to leave at RB???

[Ben E Lou]

At 207, I'd still switch him. But given how FOF's weight setup works odds seem pretty high that he'll be able to lose weight.

[Sgt Tomorrow]

I am beginning to see a pattern here, isacco!!!!

[aston217]

Man, I don't know...that is a hell of a RB there.

He'll be a great WR, but his BPR will probably just be in the 50s. So a 70s WR with his BPR in the 50s...still seems pretty lackluster in comparison to a RB of a lifetime like that.

[Dutch]

Man, I don't know...that is a hell of a RB there.

He'll be a great WR, but his BPR will probably just be in the 50s. So a 70s WR with his BPR in the 50s...still seems pretty lackluster in comparison to a RB of a lifetime like that.

Let me review the chart again....

100--WR
90--
80--
70--
60--
50--
40--QB
30--
20--RB/TE
10--CB/DE
05--BIG RED BARZ
00--P/K

I don't know, I still think Ben is suggesting a 70/70 WR is better than a 90/90 RB.

[aston217]

Eh, a 70/70 WR sure, but a 70/70 WR with only mediocre big play? OVR ratings can be misleading, the bar profile matters more I think, even to Ben.

He seems like a solid WR but not the kind of huge weapon that Ben loves in his WRs - so would you really take that over a RB that is maxed everything and will carry the ball 20+ times a game easily with a breakaway stick that looks like that?

[strickzilla]

i think this is an example of maybe being too rigid? a 70/70 WR hes gonna have a good GD bar so he should get tons of YAC plus lets face it if your playing in bens style offense your rb wont get 20 carries consistently and very few catches, ben keeps his backs into block, but a wr in that offense will get 10-15 targets and with that 40 time i wouldnt be suprised if his bpr bar goes up

i love running the ball but ID convert that guy

[isaccoubaldi]

I understand Aston' doubts but, like I said in the first post, I already have a good young RB on my roster and I drafted Davison because I think his dash was excellent to change him to WR ...

[Firefly]

Would be a tough choice for me, since I don't run Ben's Run 'n stun. I run a lot and I've found a star RB helps my offense a lot more than a regular RB does. But if he converts at 93%, that's hard to pass up. And if it was the plan all along, there's no question it's the way to go.

[cuervo72]

FWIW, RB->WR is something I'd like to see tweaked in some way to make the conversion less desirable.

(conversely, I'd kinda like to see QB->WR be a little more viable - Brad Smith types)

[aston217]

Ah, yeah. Julian Edelman also comes to mind.

QB->RB seems more doable than QB->WR. Do we really see that though in the NFL?

[isaccoubaldi]

Would be a tough choice for me ...

For me too ... :D

[Bako]

Keep him at RB. There is no Stun with out the Run.

[Alf]

I understand Aston' doubts but, like I said in the first post, I already have a good young RB on my roster and I drafted Davison because I think his dash was excellent to change him to WR ...

this.

He already got the Run. He needs the stun

[isaccoubaldi]

this.

He already got the Run. He needs the stun

Yes. And to be more clear I have a very good young QB who need some targets ... :D

[strickzilla]

Ah, yeah. Julian Edelman also comes to mind.

QB->RB seems more doable than QB->WR. Do we really see that though in the NFL?


sure thats why warren moon went to Canada

ronald curry, terrance mathis, pat white, matt jones, helll they had teabag in the slot in practice last week

[Dutch]

FWIW, RB->WR is something I'd like to see tweaked in some way to make the conversion less desirable.

Agreed, I can't believe Jim has never thought, "WTF? I gotta fix that." He's the one that sets the %'s afterall...I guess I'm not sure what his logic is here.

[cuervo72]

Well, he probably determined that at a time when RB was worth more in-game than it is now and also before he tweaked how WR/YAC work.

[Hammer]

I would keep him at RB, and trade the other RB. WR might be worth more than a RB in Ben's offense, but not necessarily in general. Depends on your approach.

[aston217]

sure thats why warren moon went to Canada

ronald curry, terrance mathis, pat white, matt jones, helll they had teabag in the slot in practice last week

What I meant was QBs in the NFL who move to RBs.

I mean, you know my guy from the OSFL, he looks like he would be a 50s RB with crazy near max breakaway speed and power inside and a bunch of other high running skills...but he'd be a garbage WR. I can't think of any FOFC QB ever that looked like he could convert to WR...but a few that *could* convert to RB, but you wouldn't want to because they are good QBs already.

[strickzilla]

What I meant was QBs in the NFL who move to RBs.

I mean, you know my guy from the OSFL, he looks like he would be a 50s RB with crazy near max breakaway speed and power inside and a bunch of other high running skills...but he'd be a garbage WR. I can't think of any FOFC QB ever that looked like he could convert to WR...but a few that *could* convert to RB, but you wouldn't want to because they are good QBs already.


with tom skeens recent 4.37 40 and the fact hes 245 lbs. maybe we could extend his career at RB lol