Weight Training
 

Quick question on weight training. Is it better to optimize the weight or the weight/height ratio?

For example, if my CB is below average height and below average weight, but about average weight/height, should I ask him to bulk up to get to average weight even if that pushes his weight/height ratio to an above average level?

Do you mean above average height and below average weight? Because having both below avearge will not show as average weight/height.

I'm not looking at a real example at the moment (I'm currently in the middle of the season), so you may be right. In any case, do you know which is better to optimize? Just weight or weight/height?

This is a bit tricky. In my experience, sometimes changing the weight of the player can have a negative effect to how they play. I tend to shift weights on players who have average rating/stats but I don't really do that too much with starters if they are perfoming well. In the case of rookies, it may help to change the weight if you don't plan on starting them in the position they are skilled at.

Gotcha, so it sounds like I should take the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" mentality when it comes to weight training.

Right, but there are going to be a number of situations where it won't matter because the player is not capable of bulking up or slimming down.

I've never messed with weight training.

So should I revise my original conclusion to read, "If it ain't REALLY broke, don't fix it"?

To put that in plain English, unless a player is significantly off the mark in terms of weight AND is performing at just an average level OR I want to move a rookie to a new position that requires a significant weight adjustment, I shouldn't mess too much with weight training. Is that correct?

Well I left out an important part. If you plan to move the player to a new position, this can be a very important way to do so. I don't do it that often, but when that need arises, it is good to bulk up or slim down a player to play in a position you are deficient at. Otherwise if you are stictly looking at weight/height ratio, it is sometimes a gamble.

I have no idea which is better, but I try to optimize the ratio, rather than just weight. I feel as if it didn't matter, Jim wouldn't have put it in. But, who knows.

I checked, and this is from the help file.

"The screen shows the player's current height and weight, and how his body mass compares to the average player at his position. Players who are at the ideal weight for the their positions will perform better."

This seems to say just weight matters, so go figure.

Does it affect Endurance?

I pretend that some of my guys are on The Biggest Loser. I try to get them to lose weight every year so they don't get diabetes and sleep apnea in the future.

Seriously, I try to either get every player's weight or body mass (whichever makes the most sense) to be average at that position.

I'm assuming that by weight/height he means the BMI, which is a formula based on weight / height. So yes, below average in both can mean average BMI.

Some of this gets very confusing.

6'0" 193 lb FL, convert to SS: weight is significantly below average for the proposed position

6'0" 198 lb FL, convert to SS: weight is below average, should gain weight first

Interesting that the 193 pounder does not need to gain weight, while the 198 pounder does. Same height. I wonder how much of this comes from the feature where different players can accept weight differently...

I think there is probably just clear cutoff from the ideal position weights. For SS, perhaps up to 2 lbs under is average, 5 is below average and anything 10 or more is significantly below average.

Me either, but I just started and it seems to me increasing a players weight in certain situations tends to help quite a bit, espeically for OL and DL - where it should, obviously.