 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Football Game & Site Questions » Keys to winning
chbutt
http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7516
http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7351
http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7382
I have more A- rated players although Buffalo and Michigan both have A rated DT. I've played both teams and there are no major differences in strategy that I can see. I also play baseball and can usually tell who the best teams are by viewing the rosters. In football I don't have a clue. It appears that QB ratings don't mean much but what the key positions are is a mystery.
Keys to winning
February 12, 2014 at 11:50PM View BBCode
Why is my team (SF) doing so poorly compared to Buffalo and Michigan? Not complaining just curious.http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7516
http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7351
http://football.simdynasty.com/roster.jsp?teamid=7382
I have more A- rated players although Buffalo and Michigan both have A rated DT. I've played both teams and there are no major differences in strategy that I can see. I also play baseball and can usually tell who the best teams are by viewing the rosters. In football I don't have a clue. It appears that QB ratings don't mean much but what the key positions are is a mystery.
dirtdevil
so much that happens here is dictated by personnel use and strategy that just looking at a roster isn't always enough to tell how that team will perform. it also means that there is no one (or two or three) right way(s) to build a team or strategy to follow. there are some here that will tell you that the way to win is to just pass out of shotgun all the time and that those teams can neither be stopped or beaten. in my experience, they're wrong. shotgun teams win a lot. they also lose a lot. I've seen guys win with all out passing attacks, run-first attacks and balanced ones. some guys have a lot of success blitzing a great deal on defence. I never have. the nice thing about this game is that there is a path for everyone and very few hard rules.
having said that, some of the 'hard rules' that I've found (and please do keep in mind that these are my own subjective opinions only. other may disagree.):
1) conditioning matters. a lot. fresh backups are better than tired starters, most of the time. use your fatigue settings and depth charts to keep as many of your players as rested as possible.
2) offensive lines win championships. no matter what offence you want to run, the o-line is the engine that drives the bus. neglect it at your peril.
3) potential is overrated. imo, potential is the second most overrated skill a player has. never draft someone based on his potential making him significantly better than he already is. most of the time it won't. keep in mind that what happens to players in the minors on the baseball side has already happened in college here by the time you draft guys. with the sometime exception of QB and K/P, I find that the player I draft is, most often, the player I have long term. potential is a nice tiebreaker, but it's not a good idea to base your team's future on it.
4) execution is even more overrated than potential. there are some positions where I value execution. three of them. for the rest, I pretty much ignore it.
5) think outside the box. I find that unorthodox usage of players gets rewarded more often than not. for instance, if you have 3 stud G, 1 solid T and 1 crappy T, play one of the G at T. the same goes for DT/DE, CB/FS and so on.
6) overall grade is irrelevant. even more so than for hitters in baseball. I find that most positions have a select few skills that really matter. overall rating gets pumped up by things that don't, like EXE and POT.
when I look at our rosters and yours (for those who don't know I have the MIC team in that league) I see significant superiority in the skills that matter, particularly at WR and OL. no one in that league has a decent secondary really but yours is shallower than ours. also, and this is just one of my things, I know lots of guys who love them and do well with them, but I cannot stand high-POW/low-ACC quarterbacks.
I play shbo in two different leagues and he's always at or near the top in both. we also both run a very similar offensive package most of the time. if you don't mind me saying, your offence is pretty one dimensional. imo, that makes it easier to defend. I would say that the largest difference between your team and ours (with the aforementioned exceptions) is schematic.
February 13, 2014 at 03:04AM View BBCode
the nice thing about football is it's more complicated than the baseball side. the frustrating thing about football is it's more complicated than the baseball side.so much that happens here is dictated by personnel use and strategy that just looking at a roster isn't always enough to tell how that team will perform. it also means that there is no one (or two or three) right way(s) to build a team or strategy to follow. there are some here that will tell you that the way to win is to just pass out of shotgun all the time and that those teams can neither be stopped or beaten. in my experience, they're wrong. shotgun teams win a lot. they also lose a lot. I've seen guys win with all out passing attacks, run-first attacks and balanced ones. some guys have a lot of success blitzing a great deal on defence. I never have. the nice thing about this game is that there is a path for everyone and very few hard rules.
having said that, some of the 'hard rules' that I've found (and please do keep in mind that these are my own subjective opinions only. other may disagree.):
1) conditioning matters. a lot. fresh backups are better than tired starters, most of the time. use your fatigue settings and depth charts to keep as many of your players as rested as possible.
2) offensive lines win championships. no matter what offence you want to run, the o-line is the engine that drives the bus. neglect it at your peril.
3) potential is overrated. imo, potential is the second most overrated skill a player has. never draft someone based on his potential making him significantly better than he already is. most of the time it won't. keep in mind that what happens to players in the minors on the baseball side has already happened in college here by the time you draft guys. with the sometime exception of QB and K/P, I find that the player I draft is, most often, the player I have long term. potential is a nice tiebreaker, but it's not a good idea to base your team's future on it.
4) execution is even more overrated than potential. there are some positions where I value execution. three of them. for the rest, I pretty much ignore it.
5) think outside the box. I find that unorthodox usage of players gets rewarded more often than not. for instance, if you have 3 stud G, 1 solid T and 1 crappy T, play one of the G at T. the same goes for DT/DE, CB/FS and so on.
6) overall grade is irrelevant. even more so than for hitters in baseball. I find that most positions have a select few skills that really matter. overall rating gets pumped up by things that don't, like EXE and POT.
when I look at our rosters and yours (for those who don't know I have the MIC team in that league) I see significant superiority in the skills that matter, particularly at WR and OL. no one in that league has a decent secondary really but yours is shallower than ours. also, and this is just one of my things, I know lots of guys who love them and do well with them, but I cannot stand high-POW/low-ACC quarterbacks.
I play shbo in two different leagues and he's always at or near the top in both. we also both run a very similar offensive package most of the time. if you don't mind me saying, your offence is pretty one dimensional. imo, that makes it easier to defend. I would say that the largest difference between your team and ours (with the aforementioned exceptions) is schematic.
chbutt
Thanks. I appreciate the thoughtful response. I'll work on the one-d offense next season. And congrats on the success of your team.
February 13, 2014 at 02:49PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
the nice thing about football is it's more complicated than the baseball side. the frustrating thing about football is it's more complicated than the baseball side.
so much that happens here is dictated by personnel use and strategy that just looking at a roster isn't always enough to tell how that team will perform. it also means that there is no one (or two or three) right way(s) to build a team or strategy to follow. there are some here that will tell you that the way to win is to just pass out of shotgun all the time and that those teams can neither be stopped or beaten. in my experience, they're wrong. shotgun teams win a lot. they also lose a lot. I've seen guys win with all out passing attacks, run-first attacks and balanced ones. some guys have a lot of success blitzing a great deal on defence. I never have. the nice thing about this game is that there is a path for everyone and very few hard rules.
having said that, some of the 'hard rules' that I've found (and please do keep in mind that these are my own subjective opinions only. other may disagree.):
1) conditioning matters. a lot. fresh backups are better than tired starters, most of the time. use your fatigue settings and depth charts to keep as many of your players as rested as possible.
2) offensive lines win championships. no matter what offence you want to run, the o-line is the engine that drives the bus. neglect it at your peril.
3) potential is overrated. imo, potential is the second most overrated skill a player has. never draft someone based on his potential making him significantly better than he already is. most of the time it won't. keep in mind that what happens to players in the minors on the baseball side has already happened in college here by the time you draft guys. with the sometime exception of QB and K/P, I find that the player I draft is, most often, the player I have long term. potential is a nice tiebreaker, but it's not a good idea to base your team's future on it.
4) execution is even more overrated than potential. there are some positions where I value execution. three of them. for the rest, I pretty much ignore it.
5) think outside the box. I find that unorthodox usage of players gets rewarded more often than not. for instance, if you have 3 stud G, 1 solid T and 1 crappy T, play one of the G at T. the same goes for DT/DE, CB/FS and so on.
6) overall grade is irrelevant. even more so than for hitters in baseball. I find that most positions have a select few skills that really matter. overall rating gets pumped up by things that don't, like EXE and POT.
when I look at our rosters and yours (for those who don't know I have the MIC team in that league) I see significant superiority in the skills that matter, particularly at WR and OL. no one in that league has a decent secondary really but yours is shallower than ours. also, and this is just one of my things, I know lots of guys who love them and do well with them, but I cannot stand high-POW/low-ACC quarterbacks.
I play shbo in two different leagues and he's always at or near the top in both. we also both run a very similar offensive package most of the time. if you don't mind me saying, your offence is pretty one dimensional. imo, that makes it easier to defend. I would say that the largest difference between your team and ours (with the aforementioned exceptions) is schematic.
Thanks. I appreciate the thoughtful response. I'll work on the one-d offense next season. And congrats on the success of your team.
Hodor
You need data to back up that claim.
:P
February 13, 2014 at 08:52PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
2) offensive lines win championships. no matter what offence you want to run, the o-line is the engine that drives the bus. neglect it at your peril.
You need data to back up that claim.
:P
Pages: 1