Warrior General Games

Saw some gosh awful tackle and strength numbers in coverage dots this season, and am seeing them sign with World League teams - good ones.

I kinda thought a FS should have tackle 80+, CBs 75+.

Wrong?

huh?

Usually the top WL defenses are also those with the lowest amount of missed tackles.

So tackling may actually be underrated, lol. I think what you are seeing is tackling losing the opportunity cost battle, specifically with the recent love of INT-focused dots. Can't have everything unless you mildly nerf your big 3 (speed/agility/vision) as guys like LHF do.

Originally posted by InRomoWeTrust
Usually the top WL defenses are also those with the lowest amount of missed tackles.
Top WL defenses rarely rank among the highest missed tackles, but a lot end up in the middle due to KL and FF focus. And no, secondary tackling is not overrated. The more you have, the better.

Originally posted by yello1


I kinda thought a FS should have tackle 80+

The one's I've seen have within a couple points of the 80 mark one direction or the other.

Originally posted by yello1
Saw some gosh awful tackle and strength numbers in coverage dots this season, and am seeing them sign with World League teams - good ones.

I kinda thought a FS should have tackle 80+, CBs 75+.

Wrong?

What do you consider gosh awful?

Originally posted by InRomoWeTrust
Usually the top WL defenses are also those with the lowest amount of missed tackles.

So tackling may actually be underrated, lol. I think what you are seeing is tackling losing the opportunity cost battle, specifically with the recent love of INT-focused dots. Can't have everything unless you mildly nerf your big 3 (speed/agility/vision) as guys like LHF do.

Is going 150/90/90 spd/agi/vis really mildly nerfing your big 3?

I used the word 'mildly', you can breathe easy.

Originally posted by InRomoWeTrust
I used the word 'mildly', you can breathe easy.

Just a confusing statement. 150/90/90 is pretty much standard for CB builders who don't over-value the big 3.

What I 'nerfed' on that build was strength, confidence, and PD% (though my younger INT CBs will have PD%). Normally I'd go with mid-60s strength and 40 confidence. Big 3 stayed the same as normal.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
Just a confusing statement. 150/90/90 is pretty much standard for CB builders who don't over-value the big 3.

So you could certainly make the lower speed argument for an INT CB's purpose, but 150 speed is not standard for a coverage dot. 'Standard' would be closer to 156-158.

The "over-valuing" is all subjective and I don't have any desire to hear you try and justify your poor building practices so I won't even go there.

i think he just went there

Originally posted by InRomoWeTrust
So you could certainly make the lower speed argument for an INT CB's purpose, but 150 speed is not standard for a coverage dot. 'Standard' would be closer to 156-158.

The "over-valuing" is all subjective and I don't have any desire to hear you try and justify your poor building practices so I won't even go there.

Originally posted by Bane
i think he just went there

lol. Romo trying to be more like bollick.

Standard for a coverage CB is absolutely 150 speed. Of course builds fluctuate, but going 150 is certainly not mildly nerfing anything. I know that having an elite WL CB is something that you dream of but have not yet and probably never will achieve, but your dreams don't make you an expert here.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
Standard for a coverage CB is absolutely 150 speed.
The very vast majority of WL CBs have 155+.

vast majority of CB's I build are 158 speed

Originally posted by Bane
vast majority of CB's I build are 158 speed

Me too.