Aggression Ratings for most realistic gameplay

[puja21]

i agree wholeheartedly guys lose more than a step (see my comments on Edge)... im just curious where the times come from.

under the tom donahoe regime in buffalo, there were no annual 40 times taken for new free agents or otherwise. im sure there are other teams who dont care about the 40 either (Bills didnt even look at it back then; as Dwight Adams puts it, when are you going to run 40 yards in a straight line during a FB game... they cared about COD, 10 yard dashes, etc)

i just wonder who is taking these times. did you see that anyone can submit times for any player to that site? i dont know if they'l get upped w/o confirmation but it is a flag that raises eyebrows nevertheless

[kyser01]

I see where you have Adrian Peterson and Brandon Jacobs at 90 and 86 for broken tackles. Well you might want to rethink that because Stats Inc. said that this was the top 5 guys in broken tackles.

1.Marion Barber
2.Adrian Peterson
3.Fred Taylor
4.Marshawn Lynch
5.Jamal Lewis

So it seems you were in right neighborhood with A.P. but Jacobs not even in the top 5.

[puja21]

sometimes youve gotta go beyond the #'s

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by kyser01

I see where you have Adrian Peterson and Brandon Jacobs at 90 and 86 for broken tackles. Well you might want to rethink that because Stats Inc. said that this was the top 5 guys in broken tackles. 1.Marion Barber 2.Adrian Peterson 3.Fred Taylor 4.Marshawn Lynch 5.Jamal Lewis So it seems you were in right neighborhood with A.P. but Jacobs not even in the top 5.

You would have to take into account # of carries as well.

[kyser01]

Yea you do have to look beyond the numbers, I totally agree, but numbers give us a way of measuring a person ability in a certain area. Just like the combine. Now we know that's not an exact science but there has to be some way of trying to seperate average players from better players; or at least who they believe are better. Hence the combine is a necessary evil. I personally believe that to much is put into combine numbers. I'll take the guy who keeps showing up on film making plays over the guy who did well in combine drills. what I was saying about the broken tackle stats, was to use them like the combine but that these hold a little more credence because it isnt a drill at the combine. It's numbers from live games. And far as carries...What are you gonna say that a guy who has less broken tackles but has less carries than another guy, that he would have more broken tackles than the other guy if he had the same amount of carries...not necessarily. And a guy who has more broken tackles but less carries than another guy is better at breaking tackles...not necessarily either. The guy could be better at avoiding tackles so even though he had more carries, he has less broken tackles. That would skew the numbers. So dont get me wrong; you do have to look beyond the numbers but there the best tool we have in determining a players ability.

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by kyser01

Yea you do have to look beyond the numbers, I totally agree, but numbers give us a way of measuring a person ability in a certain area. Just like the combine. Now we know that's not an exact science but there has to be some way of trying to seperate average players from better players; or at least who they believe are better. Hence the combine is a necessary evil. I personally believe that to much is put into combine numbers. I'll take the guy who keeps showing up on film making plays over the guy who did well in combine drills. what I was saying about the broken tackle stats, was to use them like the combine but that these hold a little more credence because it isnt a drill at the combine. It's numbers from live games. And far as carries...What are you gonna say that a guy who has less broken tackles but has less carries than another guy, that he would have more broken tackles than the other guy if he had the same amount of carries...not necessarily. And a guy who has more broken tackles but less carries than another guy is better at breaking tackles...not necessarily either. The guy could be better at avoiding tackles so even though he had more carries, he has less broken tackles. That would skew the numbers. So dont get me wrong; you do have to look beyond the numbers but there the best tool we have in determining a players ability.

I agree with the last sentence but then would have to say to take broken tackles per attempt for numbers sake.

I totally agree with you on the combine thing.I was always against taking it as law. Vernon Davis,while a great physical speciman,certainly isn't the best tight end in the game.Players don't always play to their timed speed as well.Some players are 'quick' more than fast.This is where agility comes into play.Even though,for instance,Devin Hester isn't the fastest player in the NFL,you have to treat him as such because of the amazing things he does on the field.

[puja21]

i would add that i dont like to have any RBs over 85 BTK... it just seems too easy to use multiple charge up moves (shoulder charge) & break 5-6 tackles on a single play when RBs are 90+ BTK

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by puja21

i would add that i dont like to have any RBs over 85 BTK... it just seems too easy to use multiple charge up moves (shoulder charge) & break 5-6 tackles on a single play when RBs are 90+ BTK

agreed.I'd have to check my file but I believe I didn't go higher than 86.

yeah,I have Peterson,Barber and Jacobs at 86.