Can your O-Linemen be TOO tall?

[mierk]

Fair enough. How about the flipside -- is there any more benefit to having a 6'10 guy over a 6'2 guy? I have heard that weight is an issue in Olinemen, which is why I've passed up some highly ranked players who were very interested in my team, but only checked in at 6'1, 275.

Is there sort of an ideal range in terms of size, or is it more based on ratings? How about speed, agility, or acceleration -- can a guy with higher ratings in these areas make up for being a little undersized, or will they actually fit better in certain types of offenses? I tend to pass the ball to get ahead, and then pound it in between the tackles on the ground to milk the clock. Can a Denver Broncos sized line make it in this game and still be effective running the ball?

[JimOttoFan]

Quote: Originally Posted by mierk

Is there sort of an ideal range in terms of size, or is it more based on ratings? How about speed, agility, or acceleration -- can a guy with higher ratings in these areas make up for being a little undersized...

How are you going to know about AGI or ACC when you are prioritizing for recruiting? AGI & ACC are not in the scouting reports.

Quote: Originally Posted by mierk

...is there any more benefit to having a 6'10 guy over a 6'2 guy?

Yes. wolverinejay prefers the tall guys with a difference greater than 210 points between BNC and SQT for run blocking. I might add, the higher the SQT, the better the RBK. There is a direct correlation.
The problem is this...the RBK score added to the PBK score seems to max out at ~180, with most linemen sums being 177 or less. Therefore, if your recruit has a squat of 720 (I think that is 93 RBK), the highest PBK will most likely be 84, no matter what the BNC is. This seems to affect the taller guys more, it is like the programmers believe that the taller a lineman is, the less skilled pass blocker he will be.

I try to recruit guys that have less than a 210 difference and are shorter (but still with high BNC and SQT). 490 BNC with 690 SQT are excellent numbers that translate to about 89 PBK and 88 RBK. Redshirt this guy, get him some game time in his second year, and he should be able to start as a redshirt sophomore with about 94 PBK and 93 RBK. In his junior year he would reach 99 in both and remain at 99 throughout his senior year. What a monster. Three of my five starting linemen are 99, 99 this year. Last year it was four of five.

[mierk]

Quote: Originally Posted by JimOttoFan

How are you going to know about AGI or ACC when you are prioritizing for recruiting? AGI & ACC are not in the scouting reports.

Obviously I won't know during recruiting, but for once they are in the program -- if I am comparing similar players competing for a playing time, how much of a difference does agi/acc make vs greater brute strength?

Also -- who is wolverinejay? And is there a table somewhere that illustrates the squat rating/run block correlation?

[JimOttoFan]

Quote: Originally Posted by mierk

-- who is wolverinejay?

woverinejay is a member of another forum who brought the ramifications of the 210 point difference between BNC and SQT to light. So rather than acting like this is my discovery, I am giving him credit for his insight.

Quote: Originally Posted by mierk

Obviously I won't know during recruiting, but for once they are in the program -- if I am comparing similar players competing for a playing time, how much of a difference does agi/acc make vs greater brute strength?

I do not know. That is an excellent question. Is there some sort of experiment we could do to test for blocking effectiveness? Maybe in practice mode we could hand pick guys and run the same play over and over to see who wins. Or better yet, go into "play now" and use the same lineman. Choose a play, modify the lineman's rating, only for height and weight, run the same play ten times, observe how the lineman behaves. Reset without saving, pick the same play, opponent, and lineman. This time do not modify his height, but his SPD, AGI, & ACC. Repeat & observe.

Quote: Originally Posted by mierk

...is there a table somewhere that illustrates the squat rating/run block correlation?

When you recruit people, keep records. Record their scouting data during recruiting. Then, during position changes, record their actual ratings (before any progression takes place). From your data, you will be able to make your own charts. Or go to many forums on EA's NCAA Football 2007 and do searches and trust the other peoples' work. Or wait until I can access mine, and I will post it later.

[JimOttoFan]

PBK:SQT
99...780
98
97
96
95
94
93...730
92...720
91...715
90...705
89...695
88...690
87...680
86...670
85...665
84...655
83
82...640
81
80...620
79...620
78...605
77
76
75...585
74
73
72...555
71
70...535
69
68...520
67
66
65...495
64
63
62
61
60...470
52...385
48...350
44...315

This also works for SQT to BTK in HB and SQT to TAK in defensive players.
This list is obviously incomplete, but it is what I have observed, without extrapolation. The pair that really bother me are 80...620, 79...620. Oh, well, maybe I made a mistake on one of those.

[JimOttoFan]

Here is a link to some other people's conversion charts:

http://www.ncaastrategies.com/utopia...ad.php?t=32964

[mierk]

Wow, thanks for that list. I will definitely keep that handy going into my next round of recruiting, which will be this weekend with any luck. I only wish I had the free time to run all the tests and gather data to get a deeper insight into all of this, but with a family and baby I'm lucky to get 4 games a week in, and even that is usually playing at a time when by all rights I should be getting precious sleep. I just have to surf the forums and trust the insights of the great folks who are able to devote more time to figuring out the nuts and bolts of the game.

Thanks for the link, definitely some good info there. Also found a TON of other good threads in a sticky over there. I had forgotten about that site, I may need to spend some time surfing through.

Great discussions of various NCAA related info

[JimOttoFan]

http://www.vgsportsinc.com/forums/sh...t=55665&page=5