Changing positions to help your running game?

[glucklich]

OK, as many of you are aware creative substitutions was a way to increase the effectiveness of your run blocking. If you are a team that runs 80% of the time its little wonder that you would want a good blocker at WR over a receiving threat (maybe slow but with good hands). Because perimeter blocking is dependant on AW (dont you hate it when your FB doesnt pick up the safety) I was looking at other positions that could be converted to WR and FB. It seems to me that RBs and LBs have the highest AW for this although I think they are more deficient in the RBK category. I almost think the AW, STR, AC combo outweighs the RBK in this regard though. Has anyone else tinkered with this? I am going to look at it more extensively this evening but the experiences others have had with this can help me not reinvent the wheel. It looks like the LBs would make better FBs and the RBs could possibly be put at WR. While you could do formation substitution in the past Im really liking this new ability to switch positions with players. Ive already converted a few Olineman with over 50 catch to TE. Maybe my low AW FBs could now go there since AW doesnt matter as much when you engage a defender immediately on every play unlike blocking the CBs and safeties? What have you guys found in this regard?

[Heel_Fan]

I crap you not, in my BC dynasty I recruited a tackle that was an 80 overall as a freshman, I didnt pay attention to his weight when I recruited him and was dissapointed that he only weighed between 270-280. I did my depth chart prior to moving on to the next season and noticed he was an 82 or 84 at tight end. His speed was something like a 59 or so, so I thought yeah right. I red shirted him and then next year I was messing with the change posistion and toyed with the idea of making him a tight end due to a lack of talent at that posistion, then I tried him at full back, I crap you not he was a 94! So I moved him to full back after training he was a 99 rated redshirt freshman fullback, 280 pounds with pass block and run block in the upper 80s to lower 90s. This guy paved the way for my 95 rated tail back, and he made the cover of the intial sports illustrated, they commented on my rushing attack. A fullback with the number 75, funny that makes him an ineligible receiver doesnt it?

[rgmiller2k]

I believe as long as he lines up in the backfield he is eligable. Not 100% sure on that though.

[skrmetti]

I think that in college it only matters where you line up not your number. You may notice some CPU tightends that were numbers in the 60's or 70's.

[Heel_Fan]

Not to sound like a jerk but I was kidding about him being ineligible. I agree I dont think it matters in college football I've seen tight ends with numbers in the 90s. I just thought it was funny having a fullback with a number like that.

[sportsdude]

I absolutely love the position changing thing this year. I had a good class come in, including two good CBs who were going to start. After them I had some bad players, I decided to convert this FS who was just an add-on into the class, to CB, and now he's rated an 80 headed into his soph season. He's 6'3 205, perfect to match up against the bigger receivers!!

[skrmetti]

I hear ya. I think it is kinda wierd though. In junior high we had to switch our jerseys if we were going to be a reciver on a certian play.

[Heel_Fan]

I never had that problem always wore 32. I like that about college seeing MLB with the number 4 or something like that, seems more like college football somehow you know.