 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » Gamma talent analysis
redcped
POS....92+....84-91....76-83....68-75....27-under A- or better
QB........0.........9.........17.........25........5
RB........0.........0.........8.........33........3
WR.......0.........4.........35........39........14
C.........0.........9.........16........14........8
G........0.........17........38........39........18
T.........0.........4.........21.........28........9
TE.......0........2.........20.........26........6
DT.......2.........9........37.........47........17
DE.......1........9........29.........30........19
LB........0.......20........67........79.......30
CB.......0........5.........47........43........14
S.........0........1........20........43........9
K........4........15........27........11.......29
P........0.........7..........10........11........7
[Edited on 10-15-2011 by redcped]
Gamma talent analysis
October 15, 2011 at 04:25PM View BBCode
Thinking about the talent inflation in Gamma and thought I'd chart out a few numbers to see how it all looks ...POS....92+....84-91....76-83....68-75....27-under A- or better
QB........0.........9.........17.........25........5
RB........0.........0.........8.........33........3
WR.......0.........4.........35........39........14
C.........0.........9.........16........14........8
G........0.........17........38........39........18
T.........0.........4.........21.........28........9
TE.......0........2.........20.........26........6
DT.......2.........9........37.........47........17
DE.......1........9........29.........30........19
LB........0.......20........67........79.......30
CB.......0........5.........47........43........14
S.........0........1........20........43........9
K........4........15........27........11.......29
P........0.........7..........10........11........7
[Edited on 10-15-2011 by redcped]
tworoosters
October 15, 2011 at 04:31PM View BBCode
It's kind of funny there's so much talent on the defensive side of the ball yet nine teams had QB ratings of 100 or better last year .
redcped
So here are things that jump out at me in terms of talent development:
--QB seem about right to me at the moment, but we need to see how well these guys keep playing as they hit their mid-30s.
--There aren't enough good young RB in the draft pools. The talent there is aging quickly. (FB are hard to measure this way, so i can't really say how they're doing)
--WR seem right to me, as do TE.
--Guards are developing much better than Tackles, and there are way too many good Guards coming out of the draft in proportion. Maybe we need to convert more of them to T?
--Center grades are too high in general, as there are too many red-letter guys there who actually can't block.
--The defensive front 7 is loaded with red-letter talent. The average team should have 3 red DT, 2.5 red DE and 5.4 red LB. Wow! No wonder you can find so many on WW.
--There are too many good CB in relation to S (but I also caution that overall grade on CB isn't a perfect measure as guys with great speed are in lower supply)
--The K are out of control. Way too many of them are coming out in the draft already very skilled. If you don't have an A-rated kicker, it's just because you don't want one. Or maybe CLE has all of them ...
--Punters are more in line, but it's still possible for every team to have a red one (of course, here too we have hoarding by CAR, but there are 5 red-letter P on WW)
October 15, 2011 at 04:39PM View BBCode
It's not the neatest chart, but it will do. I separated by grade range with overall ratings, which I realize isn't the perfect measurement for many positions but will have to do for these purposes.So here are things that jump out at me in terms of talent development:
--QB seem about right to me at the moment, but we need to see how well these guys keep playing as they hit their mid-30s.
--There aren't enough good young RB in the draft pools. The talent there is aging quickly. (FB are hard to measure this way, so i can't really say how they're doing)
--WR seem right to me, as do TE.
--Guards are developing much better than Tackles, and there are way too many good Guards coming out of the draft in proportion. Maybe we need to convert more of them to T?
--Center grades are too high in general, as there are too many red-letter guys there who actually can't block.
--The defensive front 7 is loaded with red-letter talent. The average team should have 3 red DT, 2.5 red DE and 5.4 red LB. Wow! No wonder you can find so many on WW.
--There are too many good CB in relation to S (but I also caution that overall grade on CB isn't a perfect measure as guys with great speed are in lower supply)
--The K are out of control. Way too many of them are coming out in the draft already very skilled. If you don't have an A-rated kicker, it's just because you don't want one. Or maybe CLE has all of them ...
--Punters are more in line, but it's still possible for every team to have a red one (of course, here too we have hoarding by CAR, but there are 5 red-letter P on WW)
redcped
Yes, but it's dropping. After two seasons of league rating over 100, it dropped to 94.8 this season. I'd expect it to land somewhere below 90 within two more seasons, and that's probably about where it should go.
October 15, 2011 at 04:43PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tworoosters
It's kind of funny there's so much talent on the defensive side of the ball yet nine teams had QB ratings of 100 or better last year .
Yes, but it's dropping. After two seasons of league rating over 100, it dropped to 94.8 this season. I'd expect it to land somewhere below 90 within two more seasons, and that's probably about where it should go.
tworoosters
Despite the massive amount of talent on the defensive side of the ball we still can't stop the passing game .
October 15, 2011 at 04:56PM View BBCode
The league overall rating dropped but that's primarily driven by small declines at the top end and how atrocious the bottom 3 teams were, there were actually more teams with ratings of 100+ in '67 than in '66 .Despite the massive amount of talent on the defensive side of the ball we still can't stop the passing game .
Admin
--Chris
October 15, 2011 at 04:57PM View BBCode
The K and S issues should be dealt with, but the changes wouldn't have affected the existing K's and S's. I hadn't noticed the G vs T issue yet. C's are being graded at their ability to be C's. not just blockers, but I need to make this actually mean something by having poor C's start muffing snaps.--Chris
lancereisen
Safties haven't had the time to grow since the generator change so their #s may be a bit low.
DTs are thriving since the code change. Could it be too high? Also, many A- DTs tackle at A/A+ but only run defend at C+. This may not matter but I find C+ run defend worrisome.
On passing, the Spiders high octane pass attack is now pinging along on regular. It seems down alot to me. Defenses are tipping away more passes and shortening my yards per catch.
The hands thing is over rated in centers. If you don't use the shotgun, he only needs B hands. Use a LS for FGs. Many FBs can fill this need.
October 15, 2011 at 06:59PM View BBCode
Ariz Ts are converted Gs.Safties haven't had the time to grow since the generator change so their #s may be a bit low.
DTs are thriving since the code change. Could it be too high? Also, many A- DTs tackle at A/A+ but only run defend at C+. This may not matter but I find C+ run defend worrisome.
On passing, the Spiders high octane pass attack is now pinging along on regular. It seems down alot to me. Defenses are tipping away more passes and shortening my yards per catch.
The hands thing is over rated in centers. If you don't use the shotgun, he only needs B hands. Use a LS for FGs. Many FBs can fill this need.
RichNYC1
October 15, 2011 at 10:48PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Why dont these guys who´ve changed position actually become those positions? If a G has been playing tackle, he´s a tackle....
redcped
It would have prolonged the career of my RB who played RT all these years, since he was 49 overall for RB and 78 for RT.
October 15, 2011 at 11:09PM View BBCode
Originally posted by RichNYC1
Why dont these guys who´ve changed position actually become those positions? If a G has been playing tackle, he´s a tackle....
It would have prolonged the career of my RB who played RT all these years, since he was 49 overall for RB and 78 for RT.
RichNYC1
October 16, 2011 at 12:21AM View BBCode
Two, three years, whatever it takes, thats what they are. As well, you should pay the price. The guy who is a 76 T and a 56 RB should be billed at the higher position, the way they are at RB´s are at FBPages: 1