What's the least important position in FOF MP?

[Ben E Lou]

Just curious what people think...

[MIJB#19]

I went with FB, but I've got a feeling there are many positions where you can plug a random 'replacement value' player, that you kept around for 5+ seasons and will play up to par with a 'slightly above average starter'.

In the end I think there are a lot of positions where you can find a filler from the FA pool, make him start and have near-zero effect to your overall performance. Mostly because there are many positions where there usually are acceptable fillers.

[ozias]

I said FB as well. I think it's not a position that's heavily used, and you can use a TE or RB for the blocking that a FB can do.

[MacroGuru]

I can't go with the FB, I have used many of them in my game plans and have had positive effects of screens and if they are a blocker, opening up holes.

I went with DT...I run a 3-4 and I typically can rotate a DT without it hurting me.

But as a second to DT I would go FB.

[MRL17]

I said FB but I thought about it some more, and I change my vote to Punter. This is mostly because of where they go in the draft. I've seen stud FBs go in the late 1st round, but a stud punter isn't going to be taken until the late 2nd round at the earliest. Also, I feel like you can generally replace a good punter with a below average one and not see any difference in wins for your team.

[gstelmack]

Well, if you play a 4-3 defensive scheme, the OLBs can be pretty darn useless. I've watched a hurt FB kill my running game, while I just won the Doggie Bowl with scraps at OLB. Punter comes close, but then again a lousy punter can lead to some big returns in the overlooked special teams game. Center seems to have waffled from weak to super-important and back.

So I think the answer heavily depends on scheme and how you gameplan. You can gameplan around nearly any weakness.

But I guess I'll have to vote for Punter in the end.

[Alf]

P : you could plug any FA and be decent

[Pyser]

in a 4-3 id say wlb is utterly useless. in a 3-4 wilb doesn't seem to do all that much

but a fb would be the obvious vote offensively.

[Rizon]

Kicker, because only pussies kick field goals.

[Dutch]

BTW -- This poll is a setup, we are about to have some knowledge dropped on us.

[Ben E Lou]

Not at all. I was genuinely curious.

[Disturbed]

I don't see why people don't find the fullback useful. I find them to be vastly underrated and very useful.

Kickers are extremely valuable. Especially when it comes to field position on kick offs. Also I put Punters here, they can make a big difference with field position.

I picked Center.

[RedKingGold]

I did NOT vote wide receiver.

[stevew]

I spend no effort on obtaining a WILB at all. I usually try to find a good blocking back, so WILB slightly ahead of FB.

[Hammer]

I had a RB go for 2299 @5.8 per carry in a season with a scrub RB playing FB.

[Sef0r]

FB is definitely not the least important, helps in run blocking and receiving in the west coast offense and can really be a force if you have a stud. WILB and RDE in a 3-4 are the least important imo.

[gstelmack]

I had a RB go for 2299 @5.8 per carry in a season with a scrub RB playing FB.

Again, it depends on your approach and gameplan on offense. Just like defense effects the value of LBs.

So really this is down to P, FB, WLB/WILB, and some jokers think K (who have never lost games due to missed FGs regularly apparently). I think you could make arguments for any of those 3 positions.

[Kozure]

Defensive tackle. Usually easy to get good ones in a draft in most rounds, and typically don't get a lot of sacks. It's a boon if you can get sacks out of one, but I've found that it's hit and miss each season.

I usually go with my most tenured DT to boost cohesion, that way it's easier to mix and match and boost the play of the more important positions in the front seven: SILB, left and right DE and both OLB spots.

So I guess a DT's most valuable attribute to me is his years spent on a team. :)

[Antmeister]

Looks like there is one other person, besides myself, that believes that Center is the least important. Even with an elite center, they may get a few pancakes here and there, but they don't seem to boost the inside running game at all. And as already stated before, there is more success when running to the outside. I usually only pick for that position mainly for cohesion and chemistry purposes, but it appears you can plug any other position in that spot without much ill effect.

[gstelmack]

Looks like there is one other person, besides myself, that believes that Center is the least important. Even with an elite center, they may get a few pancakes here and there, but they don't seem to boost the inside running game at all. And as already stated before, there is more success when running to the outside. I usually only pick for that position mainly for cohesion and chemistry purposes, but it appears you can plug any other position in that spot without much ill effect.

There was a thread here a while back that talked about how having a good Center seemed to boost overall O-Line play.

[Antmeister]

There was a thread here a while back that talked about how having a good Center seemed to boost overall O-Line play.

I'll believe it when I see it. And cmon, you just won the Doggie Bowl without an elite center and Ben E Lou also won without a great center and put up ungodly numbers in the passing game. In fact, right now he has a 30-something center as a starter if I remember correctly.

[Ben E Lou]

There was a thread here a while back that talked about how having a good Center seemed to boost overall O-Line play.Agreed. Check out this guy, for example:

theFOFL.com : Player >> Matthew Austin (http://www.thefofl.com/players/player.php?player=20944)

Just loaded up Game Plan Analyzer. Charleston only ran 68 plays between the tackles all year long, but my center led the team in KRBO and OPct (http://www.thefofl.com/teampages/summary.php?t=16&y=2035), both by significant margins. If you believe that the OL has anything to do with helping/hurting the running game in FOF, then the stats strongly lead you to the conclusion that a stud center is a big help to outside running, and perhaps even the most important single position, since he apparently influences outside running in either direction.

[Ben E Lou]

I'll believe it when I see it. And cmon, you just won the Doggie Bowl without an elite center and Ben E Lou also won without a great center and put up ungodly numbers in the passing game. In fact, right now he has a 30-something center as a starter if I remember correctly.Nope. (http://108.59.255.76/%7Ebenelou/woof/ben/playercard.php?playerid=16001) I always go for good centers.

[Antmeister]

Yeah, but didn't you use him for a guard for a good part of the season.

[Ben E Lou]

I don't think so. Another center started five games, but looking at his bar profile, it's likely that I would have started him at guard and my main guy at center during those games.

[Antmeister]

Ok, so what would be the reason to start a 30+ guy over a 60+ center? If the center is the most important part for the running game, why would you move him to that position ever? Because even upon opening the game now, I see that he is slotted for Guard. And for what it is worth, Stuggart had a 48/48 running back (averaging 5 yards a carry) rush for over 1600 yards with a 43/43 Center. And mainly what I am talking about is an elite center (80+). For any other position, if I placed an elite player there, you can a dramatic difference in how that can help your team. For me, an elite center doesn't seem to be much more different that a 40+ to 60+ guy if he has decent run/pass block bars.

BTW -- This poll is a setup, we are about to have some knowledge dropped on us.
I should have known I couldn't just come in here and just have an opinion. But I may have learned something nonetheless.

[Antmeister]

And yeah, it looks like the 30+ Center has 5 starts. So no, not the majority of the season, but still not sure why he would ever be the starter if that helps with the outside running game.

[Ben E Lou]

Ok, so what would be the reason to start a 30+ guy over a 60+ center? If the center is the most important part for the running game, why would you move him to that position ever?My guess is that someone was hurt, or that I simply didn't export for a particular stage and the AI did that and I just didn't notice. (I don't export all that often during the season.) Because even upon opening the game now, I see that he is slotted for Guard. And for what it is worth, Stuggart had a 48/48 running back (averaging 5 yards a carry) rush for over 1600 yards with a 43/43 Center. And mainly what I am talking about is an elite center (80+). For any other position, if I placed an elite player there, you can a dramatic difference in how that can help your team. For me, an elite center doesn't seem to be much more different that a 40+ to 60+ guy if he has decent run/pass block bars.Come on, Ant, you can't use Stuttgart as an example. We've been over this: Fonzie games the heck out of the system, and people don't adjust for it. He uses players with a particular skill set at RB, and then runs when people don't expect him to run. He'll always have high ypc doing what he does. If he had a stud center, it would be even higher. But much of that high ypc is just fluff. An 8-yard run on 3rd and 11 doesn't help you much, and he gets tons of those.


I should have known I couldn't just come in here and just have an opinion. But I may have learned something nonetheless.Quite honestly, I've said this stuff about Centers in several places, so it didn't really occur to me that people still might rank that as the worst position in FOF. I was assuming it'd be FB/WILB/P/K/S. (I wasn't thinking about the fact that some people still play 4-3 on a regular basis, so I'd agree that WLB there should be in the conversation.)

[Antmeister]

Man, you assume that people see everything. I am only in one league (WOOF) and I don't recall seeing anything on Centers. On FOFC, I am mainly on Off-Topic with the occasional look in this area. So if it is something that is off the first 10 topics of the first page, I am most likely not going to see it unless I was specifically looking for something.

Could I be wrong? Hell yes! But I thought this was simply a poll to go along with opinions. Because each opinion seems to be based on the personnel you have/prefer. I wouldn't have bothered writing in this thread if I wouldn't have believed that you were simply curious to see everyone's response (and nothing more), because I am well aware of what happens to people if you think their 'opinion' is wrong.

And I wouldn't call what Fonzie does 'gaming the system' anymore than what you do with the passing game. Both take advantage of doing things that make a vanilla defense less successful. So not sure why that would be considered fluff, if you can do the same thing with a sub-par QB.

[davehibb]

I've got to go with the FB/WILB/WLB thinking here.

The two LB positions are throw away positions in the 3-4 and 4-3 respectively where you can get away with pretty one dimensional guys off the street if need be and unless you have a real stud at FB you can get away with playing a 2nd or 3rd strinf RB there without too much difference.

A stud FB though can be a sneaky good weapon in the short passing game.

[Kozure]

I've always meant to look into this, but does a full back factor into passing cohesion when a formation that uses a FB is on the field? I've meant to sim some games in a test league to figure it out, but never think of it when I'm eff'ing with the game.

[Ben E Lou]

Man, you assume that people see everything. I am only in one league (WOOF) and I don't recall seeing anything on Centers. On FOFC, I am mainly on Off-Topic with the occasional look in this area. So if it is something that is off the first 10 topics of the first page, I am most likely not going to see it unless I was specifically looking for something. Ah, that's fair. Yeah, I'm pretty into FOF MP, so I don't miss a thread in this sub-forum.

Could I be wrong? Hell yes! But I thought this was simply a poll to go along with opinions. Because each opinion seems to be based on the personnel you have/prefer. I wouldn't have bothered writing in this thread if I wouldn't have believed that you were simply curious to see everyone's in response to Dutch (and nothing more), because I am well aware of what happens to people if you think their 'opinion' is wrong.Now hold on a second. I wasn't the one who started down this road. Greg pointed out polite disagreement regarding centers, and you pushed back pretty hard:I'll believe it when I see it. And cmon, you just won the Doggie Bowl without an elite center ...and drug my name into it with some inaccurate data....and Ben E Lou also won without a great center and put up ungodly numbers in the passing game. In fact, right now he has a 30-something center as a starter if I remember correctly.




And I wouldn't call what Fonzie does 'gaming the system' anymore than what you do with the passing game. Both take advantage of doing things that make a vanilla defense less successful. So not sure why that would be considered fluff, if you can do the same thing with a sub-par QB.Oh, I don't deny for a moment that a good chunk of what I do is gaming the system. For the most part, gaming the system, shooting the angles, computer-game thinking--or whatever you want to call it--is what works best in FOF MP. I'm just saying that Fonzie will have some measure of running success even with mediocre players. But with *better* players, he'd have more success. And I will have passing success even with mediocre players. But with *better* players, I'll have more success. That's all I'm saying with that. When I say the someone "games the system" in FOF MP, it's a compliment, essentially an acknowledgement that the person I speak of is particularly good at that aspect of the game.

[Yoda]

I really think it depends on your style of play.

If you run a single back offense, it's easily FB. If you run a ball control offense, then it is NOT FB. If you run a 3-4, then WILB is it....

[Kozure]

I also run mainly 3-4 defenses and figure a NT isn't in on as many run play tackles do to him being boxed in the middle front of a defense. I'm just assuming that. And I also assume that a WILB is in on more run play tackles, similar to how centers are in on more key run blocks. But WILBs get the leftover tackles that the SILB doesn't get, making him lesser in value, but not as low value as a NT.

[gstelmack]

I'll believe it when I see it. And cmon, you just won the Doggie Bowl without an elite center and Ben E Lou also won without a great center and put up ungodly numbers in the passing game. In fact, right now he has a 30-something center as a starter if I remember correctly.

My C is a converted Guard (a bit light so I switched him) who has pretty good bars but is light on long snapping (which is why I have a specific Long Snapper). Not elite, but he's not a scrub either, rated in the upper-50s by the commish scout and low 60s by mine. It's certainly not my most important position, but I try very hard to have solid players across the O-Line.

[Antmeister]

Now hold on a second. I wasn't the one who started down this road. Greg pointed out polite disagreement regarding centers, and you pushed back pretty hard
Okay, but if you look at his center, he seemed to do okay for himself, so how am I suddenly wrong. Once again, this is just an opinion, but if he won without an elite center, I bet he could have put a Guard in there with familiarity with the Center position and got the same results. Say what you will, but that is not an elite center as I stated before.


...and drug my name into it with some inaccurate data.

Actually the portion your quoted isn't inaccurate. He is a starter now. The only inaccurate part came in a later post in how many games were started by your 30/30 center. Yet I am still perplexed how you are even arguing the fact that out of close to 1/3 of the season, you didn't even know the 30/30 center even started and your team didn't seem to miss a beat in terms or running success.

So how am I supposed to know what is going on with your other teams if you don't even know where they line up most of the time. That one center you shown me had some awesome stats, but that could be another case where he was placed in the guard position because you had injuries that year.

And still, even if we brought your other long-time center (in WOOF) in the topic of discussion, he has never been above 65 (currently 60) and you seemed to do just fine as well and his stats look no different than a 50 rated center. So yeah, good, but I mentioned great and elite.

[Antmeister]

My C is a converted Guard (a bit light so I switched him) who has pretty good bars but is light on long snapping (which is why I have a specific Long Snapper). Not elite, but he's not a scrub either, rated in the upper-50s by the commish scout and low 60s by mine. It's certainly not my most important position, but I try very hard to have solid players across the O-Line.
Not saying he was a scrub. What I am saying is that it wasn't even the most important position for your team in relation to success. In my opinion, once again, I believe that you still would have done well with a decent pass blocking center.

Now I haven't read this data on how centers boosts the overall performance of the line, so I could very well be wrong, yet I don't see people with 60+ running backs having a hard time running behind a sub-par to average center.

[gstelmack]

If a position is NOT least important, that doesn't mean we feel we need an ELITE guy to fill it. I'm certainly not arguing it's anywhere near the most important position, so I'm fine without having an 80+ guy there, but I also spent a decent pick on Grove explicitly to convert him to Center. I would certainly prefer to spend my money on a QB, WR, DE, or CB, but I also don't want to plug a minsal scrub in at Center, that's all.

[gstelmack]

Looks like there is one other person, besides myself, that believes that Center is the least important. Even with an elite center, they may get a few pancakes here and there, but they don't seem to boost the inside running game at all. And as already stated before, there is more success when running to the outside. I usually only pick for that position mainly for cohesion and chemistry purposes, but it appears you can plug any other position in that spot without much ill effect.

Not saying he was a scrub. What I am saying is that it wasn't even the most important position for your team in relation to success. In my opinion, once again, I believe that you still would have done well with a decent pass blocking center.

These two statements are contradictory. Even you admit I need decent pass blocking skills at this position, unlike FB/P/OLB being discussed elsewhere where folks are talking about plugging in a scrub and getting away with it.

I am not arguing that he needs to be elite, but I am certainly trying to plug that hole if I have one, and I had a pretty decent one when I won the Doggie Bowl.

[Ben E Lou]

Okay, but if you look at his center, he seemed to do okay for himself, so how am I suddenly wrong.There's no evidence that he did or didn't do ok. He has a nice KRB%, but that's very likely more a function of the RB's skills (he uses high elusiveness) and the shenanigans he employs than any actual positive impact of the center. Once again, this is just an opinion, but if he won without an elite center, I bet he could have put a Guard in there with familiarity with the Center position and got the same results. Say what you will, but that is not an elite center as I stated before.Sure, he won. But I don't think you're following me here. I'm saying that he got 5.something ypc with the guy he had, but if he'd had an elite center, he gets 5.3 or 5.5 or 5.7 or some incremental improvement (not sure how much).

Actually the portion your quoted isn't inaccurate. He is a starter now. The only inaccurate part came in a later post in how many games were started by your 30/30 center. Semantics. I don't consider an injury-replacement guy a "starter." Evidently you do. I didn't realize that at the time.

Yet I am still perplexed how you are even arguing the fact that out of close to 1/3 of the season, you didn't even know the 30/30 center even started and your team didn't seem to miss a beat in terms or running success. In only five games, anything can happen with rushing, especially with some of the things people try defensively against me. We put up like 7 ypc one game, but that was because the defense was in pass or pass aggressive with a bunch of nickel and dime all game long. Heck, I've seen crazy-wide variations in 16-game sims, backs getting 3.9 ypc one time, and 4.8 the next against Rex. Also, it seems like this must have been in the latter part of the season if what you're saying about the backup being slotted to start is true. If that's the case, then there's also the fact that for the last few games of the regular season, we went extremely heavy on formations with the FB and TE (and 2 TE) on the field to get LaBrosse the rushing record. You can't judge the line's performance by those games, especially if people were continuing to be worried about the long pass. Finally, there's a stud RB in play in WOOF. Stud RB >>>> OL.

So how am I supposed to know what is going on with your other teams if you don't even know where they line up most of the time. That one center you shown me had some awesome stats, but that could be another case where he was placed in the guard position because you had injuries that year. Nah, in the FOFL there aren't many trades, so I tend to rack up good offensive linemen at the bottom of the first. I don't typically need to play linemen out of position there. Plus, again, I am 100% certain that the Center makes a difference in outside running, and my FOFL RBs aren't good, so I'm much less inclined to skimp at center there than in other leagues.

And still, even if we brought your other long-time center (in WOOF) in the topic of discussion, he has never been above 65 (currently 60) and you seemed to do just fine as well and his stats look no different than a 50 rated center. So yeah, good, but I mentioned great and elite....and once again, if I had a great/elite Center for most of LaBrosse's career, I'm quite sure he would have broken the record before now, would have a higher ypc, etc. etc. etc. And Fisk was masked, going +23 that we saw in his career. For all anyone outside of Ann Arbor knows, he might be great or elite with that much masking.

[Antmeister]

These two statements are contradictory. Even you admit I need decent pass blocking skills at this position, unlike FB/P/OLB being discussed elsewhere where folks are talking about plugging in a scrub and getting away with it.

I am not arguing that he needs to be elite, but I am certainly trying to plug that hole if I have one, and I had a pretty decent one when I won the Doggie Bowl.

No..not contradictary at all. If I focus on a pass blocking C with little to no run blocking and/or blocking strength, he is going to be rated pretty low. And if I happen to have a backup guard/tackle with these qualities, I can plug in that position if he has familiarity with the position. And if he has good cohesion/chemistry, even better.

Importance to me is how much do I want to invest money in a player. After looking at what my current center is doing, he is just as successful as a below 50 center I had in the past.

For those other positions you listed, to me a good punter helps in terms of field position, especially inside the 20 where a lot of people have very conservative play calls. I happen to like pass catching FBs so that would never be my opinion. And I can't say OLB because, at least, with my teams, they seem to get a large percentage of my tackles.

This is how I am looking at it. If I had a team of average players and I had to which one I would want to be below average, the C position would be the spot for me.

[gstelmack]

For those other positions you listed, to me a good punter helps in terms of field position, especially inside the 20 where a lot of people have very conservative play calls. I happen to like pass catching FBs so that would never be my opinion. And I can't say OLB because, at least, with my teams, they seem to get a large percentage of my tackles.

This is how I am looking at it. If I had a team of average players and I had to which one I would want to be below average, the C position would be the spot for me.

Fair enough.

[Antmeister]

Ok, good lord, I mentioned that for me it is the C and I got kicked in the nuts from the front and the back. Part of it was my fault for actually mentioning their teams, so next time I will just remember to remain anonymous. I wasn't stating that anything I was saying was a fact. It is just from what I observed through tinted WOOF glasses. Clearly it is not the Center folks.

[Antmeister]

I am talking to you, anonymous, other guy who picked Center.

[gstelmack]

Ok, good lord, I mentioned that for me it is the C and I got kicked in the nuts from the front and the back. Part of it was my fault for actually mentioning their teams, so next time I will just remember to remain anonymous. I wasn't stating that anything I was saying was a fact. It is just from what I observed through tinted WOOF glasses. Clearly it is not the Center folks.

I wasn't trying to kick you in the nuts. I just disagreed with your original assertion that a Center has no impact (you specifically mentioned the running game) by pointing out there had been a (surprising for the time) analysis that disagreed with that, and then I disagreed with your assertion that my WOOF team contradicted what I was saying.

Your last post with your reasoning makes plenty of sense, which is why I said "fair enough" because I can't disagree with that. My first post in this thread pointed out the fallacy of making this a poll because the answer depends on strategy, which can depend on how a specific team is built. Different personnel available will switch my strategy and change what positions are worth what to me.

[Ben E Lou]

I wasn't trying to kick you in the nuts. I just disagreed with your original assertion that a Center has no impact (you specifically mentioned the running game) by pointing out there had been a (surprising for the time) analysis that disagreed with that, and then I disagreed with your assertion that my WOOF team contradicted what I was saying.Same here.

[isaccoubaldi]

I am talking to you, anonymous, other guy who picked Center.

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - What's the least important position in FOF MP? (http://operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=2543701&postcount=12)

[isaccoubaldi]

I picked FB but it's a contradiction because I like to have a good FB in my team ... ;)

[Antmeister]

Front Office Football Central - View Single Post - What's the least important position in FOF MP? (http://operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=2543701&postcount=12)

I don't see why people don't find the fullback useful. I find them to be vastly underrated and very useful.

Kickers are extremely valuable. Especially when it comes to field position on kick offs. Also I put Punters here, they can make a big difference with field position.

I picked Center.

LOL....I didn't even see Disturbed's post. Smart man for not stating his reasons.


I wasn't trying to kick you in the nuts. I just disagreed with your original assertion that a Center has no impact (you specifically mentioned the running game) by pointing out there had been a (surprising for the time) analysis that disagreed with that, and then I disagreed with your assertion that my WOOF team contradicted what I was saying.

Well, to be fair, I never said no impact, I just said that he didn't boost the inside running game and knew nothing about boosts to the offensive line. I figured that a subpar O-lineman with good pass blocking would just be as effective so I don't know what to tell you.

It may be surprising to you, but I don't look in this area too often unless I am looking for some specific area I need help on. Was/Is this info in the Reference thread? I also use that quite a bit. And I wouldn't be surprised if others didn't know about this too.

As for the other part, yeah that is why I said I should not have mentioned anyone's team in the conversation and left it at that.

[Dutch]

(I wasn't thinking about the fact that some people still play 4-3 on a
regular basis, so I'd agree that WLB there should be in the conversation.)


If I don't have a dominant WLB, I want to use 4-3, even though it's usually more expensive to do so.

[Disturbed]

LOL....I didn't even see Disturbed's post. Smart man for not stating his reasons.

My reasons are simple...

I think all positions are important in some way. Just in my mind if I had to get by without one, the Center is the first that comes to mind.

[scorp]

WILB in a 3-4 vs any team that passes alot.