Why is the ath position even in this game?

[splff3000]

I'm being serious here. Here's the deal. I find a athlete with a 76 ovr rating. While I was recruiting him, the stats shown were the same as a WR. He only has B+ speed, which is kinda slow for a WR, but has B+ acceleration, D+ run blocking, and C- strength. I figure he'll be pretty good at TE or FB, both of which I need, and he's an athlete so I gave him a scholly. When I assign him to TE on pos changes he drops down to a 69 and when I move him to FB he drops down to 67. WTF!!! He is supposed to be an athlete, why is he dropping in ratings? Why didn't they just call him a WR and get it over with? Now I got this slow WR that I can't do anything with. Sorry........rant over. Now seriously, what is the difference between this guy and a WR with the same stats? I mean what is the advantage of calling this guy an athlete and not a WR?

[BoomerSooner11]

He's not Tebow..that's basically what he is missing.

[Hellisan]

I agree with you. I feel that the whole Athlete thing is a waste of time this year. If his ratings include Tackle, he'll be a defensive player most likely. If they have THP/THA, QB. If they have RTE, WR, and down the line. I have seen a few VERY rare instances of players that could go either way, and I'm talking rare.

I hate how if I search for guards, it includes athletes in the search. You can always sort the findings by position to weed them out, but I wish it would at least include big, fat athletes and not the 160 lb. guys.

[jdrhammer]

This is another thing that has been screwed up since making the leap to next-gen. They are set up right on PS2 but not on PS3 versions. I've been complaining about it for a while myself. One drawback to the old way is there were way too many good QB's so they'd have to scale that down a little. When you go to the ATH database you should have a pick of guys that can play 2-3 positions minimum.

I remember the massive ones that were stud DT or OL.

[Andrews85]

If you draft an ATH and he ends up being a WR then 9 time out of 10 he's going to be a equally good CB, FS or SS. Same goes with OL and DL ATH's.

The last time I landed a LB ATH he ended up being a decent FB too, but I think thats rare.

[TrevJo]

Quote: Originally Posted by Andrews85

If you draft an ATH and he ends up being a WR then 9 time out of 10 he's going to be a equally good CB, FS or SS. Same goes with OL and DL ATH's.

Yep. Most ATH in NCAA 09 are equally good or close to equally good at their best 2-4 positions.

[infablak]

Kinda like it. I mad one killing off of it on my UNC dynasty. Recruited a 4* RB that ended up being 83 ovr. 6'3 255lbs 92spd 94 acc and 72 str. I was licking my chops thinking i had a Brandon Jacobs build. Shifted him to LE, then he became 89ovr. But WR 74 and as a FB 62 TE 65

[turner46]

I recruited a ATH that was slightly better at CB, FS or SS but could also play QB, RB and WR.