Progression/Upgrading

[niftyjets]

Quick question do you guys always upgrade your players according to scheme? EX. for Qbs if Field General for QBs do you always pick FIeld General when upgrading?

Thanks

[PhillyPhanatic14]

Quote: Originally Posted by niftyjets

Quick question do you guys always upgrade your players according to scheme? EX. for Qbs if Field General for QBs do you always pick FIeld General when upgrading? Thanks

Not always. For young guys i will if they're close in scheme ratings and it's a position/player that I'm training. It's worth the extra 150 xp each week to have them be a scheme fit. If I'm not training them or their position, or if they're just very dominant at one scheme then I won't worry about fitting them into my scheme.

[infinite76]

I don't typically for my stars and above. Because they are elite in some areas, I try to build up where they are weak to make them beastly. Like if I have a big deep threat receiver, I will build up his catch in traffic (slot or route runner) to make him a problem on posts as well.

But for low level guys, I just build up to scheme so they get good at what I need them for. Sometimes they get so good, they end up in the upper tier of their skill. Like a DE who I have in a speed rush scheme as a bench player, I juiced him up so much that in his late 20s. he was terror off the edge, sucked against the run. But his block shedding and pass rush skills were in the 90s. He was always fast so if he got free. Heat seeking missile

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[timhere1970]

I do it different depending on the position and whether he is being developed to be role player or a starter. I like most of my regulars to be well rounded. I use my playbook and formation subs to get people in sets where they can be successful. I am currently using a 34 storm scheme on defense. I want both of my olb's to be speed rush guys but my rolb i develop speed rush and run stop. My lolb has to also have pass coverage skills. I won't have many plays in my playbook where that rolb will drop into coverage. My lolb will be developed +2 speed rusher over pass coverage and run stopper until everything 80 and then all to speed rusher. My rolb will be developed speed rusher +6 over run stopper. Once run stopper 80 then all to speed rusher. Of course, most players never develop that far. Then I might have somebody come in as a 65 overall speed rusher but with horrible other skills so I may develop him as a straight speed rusher and formation sub him into certain sets where his only responsibility is to pass rush if he ever gets good enough. My goal is to make my players do what I want them to do better, not chase an overall which is just a formula.

[ComfortablyLomb]

Nope, I try to keep young guys in scheme but it’s often worth boosting other archetypes. It really depends if you don’t mind a one-dimensional, or at least unbalanced, player though. Superstars dev up so fast it’s a lot easier to spread ratings around, normal and star not so much, so your mileage may vary.

I also believe salary demands are based off OVR so a more balanced player might sometimes be a better contract value.

[TheDominator273]

Really depends on the position and the difference between their top skill and the scheme fit.

For example I have the Ravens in an online CFM and Lamar Jackson's top archetype is scrambler at 79 and lowest is Field General at 74, I've been pumping skill points into Field General to make him more accurate which makes a bigger difference immediately since he's already a good scrambler.

Likewise I have Miles Boykin who is up to a 74 as a Deep Threat, but his biggest deficiencies were poor route running so I've spent a handful of skill points into Route Runner which is still only up to about 70.

When it comes to guys that are nearing or past the age where you can actually develop them I typically just spend skill points on their top archetype and then use them situationally if they are one dimensional. The exception is my user LB I pump everything into Run Stopper since I don't need coverage ratings, the block shed, tackle and pursuit ratings are what I'm after.

[garry1221]

I try to keep the top 2 archetypes within 3. Ideally i like em closer than that, but 3 keeps it within scheme fit, even if scheme fit isn't the top YET.

It can also depend on position/size. I try to keep things semi realistic at least. Example: I don't think of tiny receivers (sub 6' ~ 180 lbs) as built for slot, so i'll avoid actively boosting slot, even if its their top archetype at the moment. Mainly I just like the thought of dual threat types.

It can also depend on OVR. 65 OVR and lower, i'll build evenly. I haven't gone deep enough yet to determine my next steps for these players.

[Hockenson]

I prefer balanced players but make sure that the archetype I need for scheme is their best one. With LBs I usually put some effort into improving pass coverage. Receivers usually get route running improved since running god routes generally makes them better regardless of archetype.