Home

I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

This is a discussion on I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE within the NCAA Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > NCAA Football
FIFA 21 Review
Tennis World Tour 2 Review
Doug Flutie's Maximum Football 2020 Review
Poll: Which next-gen console are you going to purchase? (Click to vote)
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-02-2009, 01:36 PM   #65
MVP
 
jdrhammer's Arena
 
OVR: 19
Join Date: Feb 2008
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrevJo
Man, I have to say, I am even more glad about this today than I was before.
I hardly been doing hardly any recruiting of ATHs, but I just finished a recruiting class with 4 ATH signings. Two of them I could tell were default WRs and one was a default HB. But I had needs for them at CB and FB. As position changes I was glad to see their OVR was just as good at the positions I needed them at, as it was at their default positions.
I knew some particular attributes would take a hit but I had no idea how bad it would be. The WR->CBs didn't lose any SPD but one of them had his ACC drop from 91 to 73 and his STR from ~40 to 33. Now, I can kind of see some logic with the ACC thing because you're going from accelerating forward (as a WR) to accelerating on the backpedal as a CB. But the FB example blew that logic away. The guy dropped from 88 SPD to 68 SPD (which makes some sense and I expected it), but what blew me away was he dropped from 65 STR to 50 STR! That makes no sense! If anything the guy is going to be bulking up for the position, which presumably would be why he loses speed.

Anyway I just wanted to rant (a little later than most players!) about the position changes thing, and at the same time applaud EA in advance for fixing this in 10.
The STR thing gets me the most. A guy keeps his strength, not lose it. Anytime you go from DE to DT, the str goes way down. STR should be universal, and shouldn't really ever drop.
jdrhammer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 04-02-2009, 07:45 PM   #66
Rookie
 
OVR: 6
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Quote:
Originally Posted by randers
alot of teams line up on Defense based on the offensive formation strength. There isn't a 'left' or 'right' LB but a 'Sam' or 'will'. Same with the Ends. Some option teams have strong and weak guards and tackles...but not as prevalent in the bigger programs
Exactly. This further demonstrates why they should remove the R and L on some of the positions. If they change the depth charts to better reflect how real depth charts are set up, then you could have your list of OLBs and then put who you want at SLB and WLB. Same goes for Tackles. The strong side tackle would always cover the QBs blindside.
mikeveli20 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 09:25 PM   #67
MVP
 
youALREADYknow's Arena
 
OVR: 28
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: DC
Posts: 3,630
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

None of the LOLB/ROLB/etc is more important than rating players based on scheme.

I should not be able to take some 6'4" 211lb DE with 75 SPD and 70 STR and have him be more effective in a 3-4 scheme than the 6'2" 301lb DE with 60 SPD and 85 STR. I also shouldn't be able to take some pass rushing DT and put him at the Nose Tackle position and be more effective.

NFL Head Coach had a good method for rating talent based on scheme and it should be applied to all EA football games.

Realistic position conversions like fast DE's to OLB in a 3-4 scheme should be rewarded, not punished. Bad position conversions like MLB's to DT in a 3-4 scheme should be crucified by the ratings system and gameplay engine.

More on topic, player attributes and weight should change based on scheme and the role the player needs to fill. Given the DE to OLB switch in a 3-4 scheme, that player will need different skills than a 4-3 OLB.
youALREADYknow is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2009, 09:42 PM   #68
MVP
 
OVR: 9
Join Date: Jan 2003
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Quote:
Originally Posted by rudyjuly2
You can have both imo. I agree with AA that they should get rid of the left/right designations for T, G, DE, OLB, and CB. They could probably do it with safety as well. But they have to make the attributes be meaningful to create the difference so you want to put the right player in the right spot. A slow fat tackle is someone you wouldn't want exposed at LT for most teams so when the cpu re-orders depth charts, they should pick the quicker player to play LT rather than RT. Same goes for a position like safety - the better run defender plays SS and the better pass defender plays FS.

I do think football is getting a bit away from these specializations. Many teams are putting good pass rushers at LE or moving them around. Your RT can't be a complete slob anymore. One reason to have your RT as the better run blocker is that in a traditional set, your TE is over there and the majority of your run plays will be to the strong side. But with the spread and ACE sets, that is no longer the case since the field is often balanced. There isn't as much of a difference between the LT and RT in those situations.
I've been watching football all my life, but I never gleaned any of this stuff. Good post, thanks for explaining.
Rebel10 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 06:02 PM   #69
Rookie
 
OVR: 6
Join Date: Jul 2008
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Finally got reading this thread after a while, and it seems like most people have generally the correct gripe. However, position changes come BEFORE cut players, so the LOLB/ROLB gripe is a non-issue for anyone who isn't mentally challenged. The gripe that needs to be made is switching an OLB to MLB, WR/RB to DB, OL to DL and vice versa, WR to TE, etc. Many people have made the most excellent point that no physical hits should take place moving from position to position. You don't just randomly get slower, weaker, or less agile just because your position changes, although you may not know how to play the new position. In '09 I recruited a 6'4" 240 lb WR with 94 speed and 89 ACC, but only 73 AGI. He was strong and a good blocker, so I moved him to tight end. Suddenly he drops to 30 strength and can't block for schidt. So what I had was a really fast TE who warmed the bench for 4 years, whereas I should have had one of the best receiving tight ends in the country. And I think this is the kind of thing that they have fixed for '10. The bigger fix that I would like to see, however, is the freshman position change. You can't really change from running back to DB after playing for 4 years as a RB and expect to have a guy who performs well on the field. But coming out of high school you often have players recruited as DBs or RBs who are changed to another position their first season, and since they aren't good enough to start already, don't take a giant AWR hit since they have played multiple positions in high school anyway, and don't even know their position in college yet either.
UnderRatedCoast is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 07:59 PM   #70
Pro
 
TrevJo's Arena
 
OVR: 10
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderRatedCoast
The gripe that needs to be made is switching an OLB to MLB, WR/RB to DB, OL to DL and vice versa, WR to TE, etc. Many people have made the most excellent point that no physical hits should take place moving from position to position.
Russell_Kiniry_EA has already said that he got that fixed.
TrevJo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2009, 08:03 PM   #71
Pro
 
TrevJo's Arena
 
OVR: 10
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: I think it's time to eliminate RT/LT, RG/LG, LOLB/ROLB, LE/RE

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderRatedCoast
The bigger fix that I would like to see, however, is the freshman position change. You can't really change from running back to DB after playing for 4 years as a RB and expect to have a guy who performs well on the field. But coming out of high school you often have players recruited as DBs or RBs who are changed to another position their first season, and since they aren't good enough to start already, don't take a giant AWR hit since they have played multiple positions in high school anyway, and don't even know their position in college yet either.
I'm not sure if I followed this, but they did say they are going to make athletes be more true athletes. I'm guessing if you recruit an RB he probably won't have any defensive skills. But there should be more ATH prospects that have skills for both offense and defense (and hopefully--if they did it right--you won't take an AWR hit when switched before their first year).
TrevJo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > NCAA Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:59 AM.

Top -