Why does this RB kinda stink?

QuikSand · 04-13-2019, 04:49 PM

I'm half-invested in a MP team of mine, and drafted a first round RB a couple seasons ago. Seemed like it would help bring along a young QB on the same team, and he looked really good right away - ratings up, and bars in the places I like (to the extent I have any idea what matters for RBs in this game).

Anyway, here's the guy:
RB Terry Wells Player Details

Two years in, he's a 3.6 yards per carry guy. Admittedly, I dis-assembled some of the OL he was playing behind last season, but even in his rookie year he couldn't even put up replacement-level numbers behind a pretty decent and veteran (and cohesive) OL group.

Any thoughts?

Pyser · 04-14-2019, 08:57 AM

either your line or gameplan I think. He has bars in all the right places to at least hit 4.0 ypc to me.

Sharkn20 · 04-14-2019, 11:29 AM

Hard to say without watching the league and be in there, but I personally don't like the Elusiveness bar... His HR is really good but doesn't have much Breakaway speed and your OL isn't the best in the Business... Anyways 3.3 looks very low to me...

RGVicedo · 04-14-2019, 07:34 PM

IMHO, other than the C and LT the rest of the line is at or below average in the run-blocking department. Plus your TE & FB are 40-50isn in run blocking.

I personally like a RB with high elusiveness whereas some don't...

Firefly · 04-23-2019, 12:11 PM

I don't believe in line play for running the ball and I don't know anything about gameplanning in the last version, but I'm skeptical. The mysteries of RBs, however... the best one I've ever had and one of the best I've ever seen was about 55 and he never had a run blocker above 50, if that. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of 70s that never seem to be able to crack 4 ypc.

It just might be low-sample size, though.

nilodor · 04-23-2019, 04:26 PM

Does cohesion still play a major role in the new version? In the past I've had issues where stud RB's/lines combos have underperformed and the only thing I could point to was low group cohesion. After a couple of seasons things seemed to turn around.

Firefly · 04-24-2019, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nilodor

Does cohesion still play a major role in the new version? In the past I've had issues where stud RB's/lines combos have underperformed and the only thing I could point to was low group cohesion. After a couple of seasons things seemed to turn around.

I imagine it does, and yes, that could be a factor. Although, by definition, a rookie RB is going to lead to low-cohesion and still many do perform very well indeed.

conception · 05-01-2019, 01:17 PM

Running backs are just a huge mystery. There are a lot of well rated guys that can't crack 4 YPC even when other lower or similar rated RB's on the same roster can approach 5.

stevew · 05-01-2019, 07:45 PM

I give up on RB. Decent to good line, good qb, get like 2.7 ypc. I have played this version on and off since it came out but i much prefer the previous one. Sure it was more predictable but this is just random. Cant rex game plans with a tweak or two

TeamBills59 · 05-02-2019, 08:28 PM

I have a 65/65 running back in 1 of my 2 leagues. The first 2 years of his career he had a 4.28 and 4.49 average carry. This year he has a 3.51. The offensive line is almost the same as the previous years. The ratings for the offensive line I would consider average. Cohesion is average, and his volatility is 16. I have tried everything to get his average up and I can't.

My other league has a 69/73 running back in his second year with a 3.59 average. His volatility is 38. The offensive line overall ratings are 78-61-47-43-49.

So I am of no help on your dilemma.

RD · 05-08-2019, 09:43 PM

need less elusiveness and more power inside

QuikSand · 05-09-2019, 02:19 PM

So... decision time is approaching on this clown. 3 year stats are right on track for "replacement value" at 3.5 ypc and nothing really noteworthy beyond that. Based on his big bars he's asking for over $30m/yr, nearly 6% of the salary cap. In general, I likely wouldn't be willing to consider such an investment - but my too-frugal ways (and my missing a key stage and losing a star player) have made that... conceivable.

Spend the money to keep him in hopes of things getting better with some OL cohesion and whatnot?

TeamBills59 · 05-09-2019, 10:03 PM

Don't keep him

Squirrel · 05-10-2019, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

So... decision time is approaching on this clown. 3 year stats are right on track for "replacement value" at 3.5 ypc and nothing really noteworthy beyond that. Based on his big bars he's asking for over $30m/yr, nearly 6% of the salary cap. In general, I likely wouldn't be willing to consider such an investment - but my too-frugal ways (and my missing a key stage and losing a star player) have made that... conceivable.

Spend the money to keep him in hopes of things getting better with some OL cohesion and whatnot?

Trade him to someone who isn’t as thoughtful as you, Quik. No idea why this guy isn’t working out BTW

TeamBills59 · 05-11-2019, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Squirrel

Trade him to someone who isn’t as thoughtful as you, Quik. No idea why this guy isn’t working out BTW

Yeah that's actually a better idea.

QuikSand · 05-20-2019, 07:41 AM

Well, I let him walk into free agency, then in the first FA stage I put in a fairly lowball but bonus-heavy offer for him... and he came back. So, he'll be our RB1 for another three seasons, I reckon.

Curious twist... the only other offer for him was from... Ben's Falcons. Hmmmmm

garion333 · 05-23-2019, 10:31 AM

There's a RB glut in GML atm, so no surprise about the lack of offers.

He looks like a 3rd down back to me. Great in the passing game, but not powerful enough or or able to break away enough long runs to be an all down back. He's a weird one in that regard!

Might just be about volume as your QB is sucking up 100+ runs he could be having. Your RB is being used in run heavy situations, doing ok, and never breaking off big runs or pushing the pile. All the sweet passing down runs are being soaked up by your QB.

tzach · 05-23-2019, 10:48 AM

the RB looks fine to me, and should be a stud on outside runs. a few things to note.

1) offensive style makes a huge difference for play success. EP and spread are awful for running the ball. per manual, they both get a negative bonus (whatever modifier that means for play success). if you change coordinators, the performance will instantly improve for the same players.

2) in addition to run blocking, successful running teams tend to have OL with high endurance. check ben's teams.

TeamBills59 · 05-24-2019, 02:11 PM

"
1) offensive style makes a huge difference for play success. EP and spread are awful for running the ball. per manual, they both get a negative bonus (whatever modifier that means for play success). if you change coordinators, the performance will instantly improve for the same players."

Your post is really interesting. So, you're refering to coordinator style and not what is listed as the best fit for each individual play?

Dawgfan19 · 05-24-2019, 03:07 PM

One point of clarification, the spread formation receives a plus bonus for finesse runs (counter plays).

I have had much success running out of a spread, but with teams where the RBs have really good hole rec bars and the o-line is solid. My guess is that the offensive style, best fit, etc. are slight modifiers and that the big, red bars trump the other variables. However, I do try to avoid poor or fair fits as much as possible.

Firefly · 05-24-2019, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Well, I let him walk into free agency, then in the first FA stage I put in a fairly lowball but bonus-heavy offer for him... and he came back. So, he'll be our RB1 for another three seasons, I reckon.

Curious twist... the only other offer for him was from... Ben's Falcons. Hmmmmm

As far as I know Ben believes in big red bars; I suspect he would be in the camp of his bad performance as a statistical quirk. Which also goes to tzach's post, I think Ben doesn't like good endurance in particular, he simply likes good everything.

tzach · 05-25-2019, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dawgfan19

One point of clarification, the spread formation receives a plus bonus for finesse runs (counter plays).

I have had much success running out of a spread, but with teams where the RBs have really good hole rec bars and the o-line is solid. My guess is that the offensive style, best fit, etc. are slight modifiers and that the big, red bars trump the other variables. However, I do try to avoid poor or fair fits as much as possible.

i totally agree.

dawgfan has won something like 150 bowls in MP, so he knows a thing or two about this game :-)

Firefly · 06-01-2019, 11:53 AM

About line play, I can now verify I am wrong. I did some testing and line definitely matters in this version. Not in last version, though. You could totally ignore linemen in that one for running the ball.

So yeah, it could be line play.

QuikSand · 06-13-2019, 08:39 AM

Curious twist for him this year. Att-Yds-YPC for his career, all with the same team, but shifting sands at OL to be candid:

270-1,027-3.79
221- 736-3.33
129- 395-3.06
225- 950-4.22
221- 931-4.21
250-1,457-5.83

Curiously, I had more or less given up on my running game, despite spending the $ to keep this guy. Last season we went 13-3 with a replacement-level rushing attack, I hoped to do the same this season. Instead, we were 12-4 behind the league's most effective run game. Go figure.

OL changes could be an odd variable here. I let go our starting C (a position that seems very important to the rushing game in FOF) and replaced him with a very similar-bars veteran. I also (also for chemistry reasons) slotted in a new starter at RT and a rookie at LG. The RT is better in run blocking than his predecessor, but less experienced. Nothing about this lot would make you say "yeah, now the running game is really going to shine."

So, that's a fun twist.

stevew · 06-14-2019, 12:42 PM

I feel like we’d be hard pressed to find a real life guy with that much high end ups vs low end. Who knows though. Sort of seems like a Thomas Jones type maybe? I’d have to dig into Jones’s stats

QuikSand · 06-14-2019, 01:13 PM

First recent guy who came to mind for me: DeMarco Murray

View Poll Results: Why is this guy mediocre, rather than good?
It's just small sample size, he's fine	1	6.25%
It's your line, they must be bad	7	43.75%
It's your gameplan, it must be bad	1	6.25%
There's some specific bad bar profile at work	3	18.75%
There's just no way to figure out RB in this game	4	25.00%
He has a trout in his jockstrap (i.e. "other")	0	0%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

05-24-2019, 03:07 PM	#20
Dawgfan19 High School JV Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Cleveland, Ohio	One point of clarification, the spread formation receives a plus bonus for finesse runs (counter plays). I have had much success running out of a spread, but with teams where the RBs have really good hole rec bars and the o-line is solid. My guess is that the offensive style, best fit, etc. are slight modifiers and that the big, red bars trump the other variables. However, I do try to avoid poor or fair fits as much as possible. Last edited by Dawgfan19 : 05-24-2019 at 10:23 PM.

04-14-2019, 08:57 AM	#2
Pyser Pro Rookie Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Los Angeles	either your line or gameplan I think. He has bars in all the right places to at least hit 4.0 ypc to me.

04-14-2019, 11:29 AM	#3
Sharkn20 High School Varsity Join Date: Jul 2012	Hard to say without watching the league and be in there, but I personally don't like the Elusiveness bar... His HR is really good but doesn't have much Breakaway speed and your OL isn't the best in the Business... Anyways 3.3 looks very low to me...

04-14-2019, 07:34 PM	#4
RGVicedo n00b Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: San Diego, CA	IMHO, other than the C and LT the rest of the line is at or below average in the run-blocking department. Plus your TE & FB are 40-50isn in run blocking. I personally like a RB with high elusiveness whereas some don't...

04-23-2019, 12:11 PM	#5
Firefly High School Varsity Join Date: Dec 2007	I don't believe in line play for running the ball and I don't know anything about gameplanning in the last version, but I'm skeptical. The mysteries of RBs, however... the best one I've ever had and one of the best I've ever seen was about 55 and he never had a run blocker above 50, if that. On the other hand, I've seen plenty of 70s that never seem to be able to crack 4 ypc. It just might be low-sample size, though.

04-23-2019, 04:26 PM	#6
nilodor College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: calgary, AB	Does cohesion still play a major role in the new version? In the past I've had issues where stud RB's/lines combos have underperformed and the only thing I could point to was low group cohesion. After a couple of seasons things seemed to turn around.

05-01-2019, 01:17 PM	#8
conception n00b Join Date: Oct 2009	Running backs are just a huge mystery. There are a lot of well rated guys that can't crack 4 YPC even when other lower or similar rated RB's on the same roster can approach 5.

05-01-2019, 07:45 PM	#9
stevew Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the yo'	I give up on RB. Decent to good line, good qb, get like 2.7 ypc. I have played this version on and off since it came out but i much prefer the previous one. Sure it was more predictable but this is just random. Cant rex game plans with a tweak or two

05-02-2019, 08:28 PM	#10
TeamBills59 n00b Join Date: Jan 2014	I have a 65/65 running back in 1 of my 2 leagues. The first 2 years of his career he had a 4.28 and 4.49 average carry. This year he has a 3.51. The offensive line is almost the same as the previous years. The ratings for the offensive line I would consider average. Cohesion is average, and his volatility is 16. I have tried everything to get his average up and I can't. My other league has a 69/73 running back in his second year with a 3.59 average. His volatility is 38. The offensive line overall ratings are 78-61-47-43-49. So I am of no help on your dilemma.

05-08-2019, 09:43 PM	#11
RD n00b Join Date: Sep 2010	need less elusiveness and more power inside

05-09-2019, 02:19 PM	#12
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	So... decision time is approaching on this clown. 3 year stats are right on track for "replacement value" at 3.5 ypc and nothing really noteworthy beyond that. Based on his big bars he's asking for over $30m/yr, nearly 6% of the salary cap. In general, I likely wouldn't be willing to consider such an investment - but my too-frugal ways (and my missing a key stage and losing a star player) have made that... conceivable. Spend the money to keep him in hopes of things getting better with some OL cohesion and whatnot?

05-09-2019, 10:03 PM	#13
TeamBills59 n00b Join Date: Jan 2014	Don't keep him

05-20-2019, 07:41 AM	#16
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	Well, I let him walk into free agency, then in the first FA stage I put in a fairly lowball but bonus-heavy offer for him... and he came back. So, he'll be our RB1 for another three seasons, I reckon. Curious twist... the only other offer for him was from... Ben's Falcons. Hmmmmm

05-23-2019, 10:31 AM	#17
garion333 High School Varsity Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Near Cleveland	There's a RB glut in GML atm, so no surprise about the lack of offers. He looks like a 3rd down back to me. Great in the passing game, but not powerful enough or or able to break away enough long runs to be an all down back. He's a weird one in that regard! Might just be about volume as your QB is sucking up 100+ runs he could be having. Your RB is being used in run heavy situations, doing ok, and never breaking off big runs or pushing the pile. All the sweet passing down runs are being soaked up by your QB.

05-23-2019, 10:48 AM	#18
tzach High School JV Join Date: Mar 2015	the RB looks fine to me, and should be a stud on outside runs. a few things to note. 1) offensive style makes a huge difference for play success. EP and spread are awful for running the ball. per manual, they both get a negative bonus (whatever modifier that means for play success). if you change coordinators, the performance will instantly improve for the same players. 2) in addition to run blocking, successful running teams tend to have OL with high endurance. check ben's teams.

05-24-2019, 02:11 PM	#19
TeamBills59 n00b Join Date: Jan 2014	" 1) offensive style makes a huge difference for play success. EP and spread are awful for running the ball. per manual, they both get a negative bonus (whatever modifier that means for play success). if you change coordinators, the performance will instantly improve for the same players." Your post is really interesting. So, you're refering to coordinator style and not what is listed as the best fit for each individual play?

06-01-2019, 11:53 AM	#23
Firefly High School Varsity Join Date: Dec 2007	About line play, I can now verify I am wrong. I did some testing and line definitely matters in this version. Not in last version, though. You could totally ignore linemen in that one for running the ball. So yeah, it could be line play.

06-13-2019, 08:39 AM	#24
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	Curious twist for him this year. Att-Yds-YPC for his career, all with the same team, but shifting sands at OL to be candid: 270-1,027-3.79 221- 736-3.33 129- 395-3.06 225- 950-4.22 221- 931-4.21 250-1,457-5.83 Curiously, I had more or less given up on my running game, despite spending the $ to keep this guy. Last season we went 13-3 with a replacement-level rushing attack, I hoped to do the same this season. Instead, we were 12-4 behind the league's most effective run game. Go figure. OL changes could be an odd variable here. I let go our starting C (a position that seems very important to the rushing game in FOF) and replaced him with a very similar-bars veteran. I also (also for chemistry reasons) slotted in a new starter at RT and a rookie at LG. The RT is better in run blocking than his predecessor, but less experienced. Nothing about this lot would make you say "yeah, now the running game is really going to shine." So, that's a fun twist.

06-14-2019, 12:42 PM	#25
stevew Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: the yo'	I feel like we’d be hard pressed to find a real life guy with that much high end ups vs low end. Who knows though. Sort of seems like a Thomas Jones type maybe? I’d have to dig into Jones’s stats

06-14-2019, 01:13 PM	#26
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	First recent guy who came to mind for me: DeMarco Murray

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)