Yeah, honestly however much we might debate it SS is a pretty good position to be creative with . . . jack of all trades to some extent. Good luck man. 
Blamo
offline
offline
Originally posted by Challenge Everything
Originally posted by SunshineMan89
"Know" and "believe" are different things.
If as a SS your vision is actually as high as your speed, you're either slow enough that you simply can't make the plays a quicker safety could (especially behind the line) or you've wasted a ton of points taking vision way past the point where it starts to yield diminishing returns.
By no means is speed "everything," but it is clearly still more important than vision. It doesn't matter how well you see a play if you aren't quick and agile enough to sniff it out.
Sure, but safeties with 100:60:60 / speed:agility:vision... after all equipment is done and vet points are assigned... talking upper 30's in level... are, in my opinion, not as effective as a safety that has 90:70:70 after all of that stuff.
If a safety had as close to a 1:1:1 ratio of each of those, that safety would be much better than one safety that has an outlier of one skill. And, you mentioned in your post about agile and quick... that is agility, not speed.
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
Originally posted by SunshineMan89
"Know" and "believe" are different things.
If as a SS your vision is actually as high as your speed, you're either slow enough that you simply can't make the plays a quicker safety could (especially behind the line) or you've wasted a ton of points taking vision way past the point where it starts to yield diminishing returns.
By no means is speed "everything," but it is clearly still more important than vision. It doesn't matter how well you see a play if you aren't quick and agile enough to sniff it out.
Sure, but safeties with 100:60:60 / speed:agility:vision... after all equipment is done and vet points are assigned... talking upper 30's in level... are, in my opinion, not as effective as a safety that has 90:70:70 after all of that stuff.
If a safety had as close to a 1:1:1 ratio of each of those, that safety would be much better than one safety that has an outlier of one skill. And, you mentioned in your post about agile and quick... that is agility, not speed.
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
UMRocks
offline
offline
^^^exactly what i was going with 120/90/80 was a conservative estimate. level 45 is a long way down the road, but those stats are more than attainable, i'd almost say they're necessary
PollardsVision
offline
offline
for the OP, i'd get all that VIS EQ into SPD.
i'd get AGI to 60 next , then work on getting SPD/AGI both to 68 naturally.
for the 1:1:1 debate, i'm not sure how there's much argument. it's hard to imagine that type of build not being too slow.
i'd get AGI to 60 next , then work on getting SPD/AGI both to 68 naturally.
for the 1:1:1 debate, i'm not sure how there's much argument. it's hard to imagine that type of build not being too slow.
Bladnach
offline
offline
Originally posted by UMRocks
^^^exactly what i was going with 120/90/80 was a conservative estimate. level 45 is a long way down the road, but those stats are more than attainable, i'd almost say they're necessary
I still don't understand. At 120/90/80 would you have any tackle/jumping/catching/strength/confidence/SAs?
^^^exactly what i was going with 120/90/80 was a conservative estimate. level 45 is a long way down the road, but those stats are more than attainable, i'd almost say they're necessary
I still don't understand. At 120/90/80 would you have any tackle/jumping/catching/strength/confidence/SAs?
UMRocks
offline
offline
by level 45 you'd have 240 SP's to have spent over your career, more with bonus tokens.
My level 26 SS has 70+speed, 65+vision, 55+agility already - i havent spent a point elsewhere to date. Once agility and vision are up to 68 naturally, i'll start diversifying with SP's, diversifying with training now. With all equipment is speed (CE in agility) along with VA's, +15% to spd/agi/vis by lvl 45. So you can see that with VA multipliers and natural levelling it is fairly easy to get a skill to 80 naturally if you get it to 68 fast enough.
Also, by level 48, just in normal equipment, you can have +7 to an attribute x 4. hope that clarifies things a little more. the only thing i havent really figured out how to get in there is confidence and SA's, but im not entirely sold on confidence and really only see a ton of benefit out of SuperVision
My level 26 SS has 70+speed, 65+vision, 55+agility already - i havent spent a point elsewhere to date. Once agility and vision are up to 68 naturally, i'll start diversifying with SP's, diversifying with training now. With all equipment is speed (CE in agility) along with VA's, +15% to spd/agi/vis by lvl 45. So you can see that with VA multipliers and natural levelling it is fairly easy to get a skill to 80 naturally if you get it to 68 fast enough.
Also, by level 48, just in normal equipment, you can have +7 to an attribute x 4. hope that clarifies things a little more. the only thing i havent really figured out how to get in there is confidence and SA's, but im not entirely sold on confidence and really only see a ton of benefit out of SuperVision
Blamo
offline
offline
Originally posted by PollardsVision
for the OP, i'd get all that VIS EQ into SPD.
i'd get AGI to 60 next , then work on getting SPD/AGI both to 68 naturally.
for the 1:1:1 debate, i'm not sure how there's much argument. it's hard to imagine that type of build not being too slow.
The 1:1:1 is fine if we're talking about natural attributes. Then you just use equipment to bring speed/agility/vision to where you'd like them to be.
for the OP, i'd get all that VIS EQ into SPD.
i'd get AGI to 60 next , then work on getting SPD/AGI both to 68 naturally.
for the 1:1:1 debate, i'm not sure how there's much argument. it's hard to imagine that type of build not being too slow.
The 1:1:1 is fine if we're talking about natural attributes. Then you just use equipment to bring speed/agility/vision to where you'd like them to be.
mogs01gt
offline
offline
Originally posted by Blamo
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
I do not agree with this. Would you agree power backs were the big thing in season 7? How are you going to tackle any power back with so little invested into tackling and strength? Now maybe your DC played you in cover2 so you built your SS more as an FS and that is fine;however, I have almost always been in cover1, you cannot stop power backs when you get into the level 30 range with nothing invested into tackling.
Its not logical as an SS not to invest points into tackling. Now I understand why some people do not want to invest in Tackling or Strength, but Im used to playing against ball carriers that out level my SS by 5 levels. Tackling is needed in that scenario. There is something weird going on in GLB. People think that you need 100 speed to chase down the ball carrier from behind, if they are behind you, you've already lost.
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
I do not agree with this. Would you agree power backs were the big thing in season 7? How are you going to tackle any power back with so little invested into tackling and strength? Now maybe your DC played you in cover2 so you built your SS more as an FS and that is fine;however, I have almost always been in cover1, you cannot stop power backs when you get into the level 30 range with nothing invested into tackling.
Its not logical as an SS not to invest points into tackling. Now I understand why some people do not want to invest in Tackling or Strength, but Im used to playing against ball carriers that out level my SS by 5 levels. Tackling is needed in that scenario. There is something weird going on in GLB. People think that you need 100 speed to chase down the ball carrier from behind, if they are behind you, you've already lost.
Last edited Feb 10, 2009 10:21:14
Blamo
offline
offline
Originally posted by mogs01gt
Originally posted by Blamo
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
I do not agree with this. Would you agree power backs were the big thing in season 7? How are you going to tackle any power back with so little invested into tackling and strength? Now maybe your DC played you in cover2 so you built your SS more as an FS and that is fine;however, I have almost always been in cover1, you cannot stop power backs when you get into the level 30 range with nothing invested into tackling.
Its not logical as an SS not to invest points into tackling. Now I understand why some people do not want to invest in Tackling or Strength, but Im used to playing against ball carriers that out level my SS by 5 levels. Tackling is needed in that scenario. There is something weird going on in GLB. People think that you need 100 speed to chase down the ball carrier from behind, if they are behind you, you've already lost.
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
Originally posted by Blamo
As a side note... a safety who only has 100:60:60 AFTER VP/equipment and is the upper 30s is a terrible SS who needs to retire immediately.
When my guy hits level 32 he'll be at 92/64/68 without VP. Stam/Tackling/Strength/Jumping will all be in the 30s, too, so it's not like my secondaries are completely getting the shaft, either. So once I hit level 40 I'm looking at probably about 100/70/70, which is much better than the 100/60/60 guy and the 90/70/70 guy you were talking about
I do not agree with this. Would you agree power backs were the big thing in season 7? How are you going to tackle any power back with so little invested into tackling and strength? Now maybe your DC played you in cover2 so you built your SS more as an FS and that is fine;however, I have almost always been in cover1, you cannot stop power backs when you get into the level 30 range with nothing invested into tackling.
Its not logical as an SS not to invest points into tackling. Now I understand why some people do not want to invest in Tackling or Strength, but Im used to playing against ball carriers that out level my SS by 5 levels. Tackling is needed in that scenario. There is something weird going on in GLB. People think that you need 100 speed to chase down the ball carrier from behind, if they are behind you, you've already lost.
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
mogs01gt
offline
offline
Originally posted by Blamo
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
We arent talking about LB's here, we are talking about SS's who normally are the last line of defense. Their tackling percentage needs to be above 90%.
I'd also would rather have a linebacker that can create more FF's in their career than what yours has done. Doesnt make much sense to have a linbacker who can only sack or chase down the ball carriers. That is what DE's are for. Linebackers should be play makers.
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
We arent talking about LB's here, we are talking about SS's who normally are the last line of defense. Their tackling percentage needs to be above 90%.
I'd also would rather have a linebacker that can create more FF's in their career than what yours has done. Doesnt make much sense to have a linbacker who can only sack or chase down the ball carriers. That is what DE's are for. Linebackers should be play makers.
Blamo
offline
offline
Originally posted by mogs01gt
Originally posted by Blamo
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
We arent talking about LB's here, we are talking about SS's who normally are the last line of defense. Their tackling percentage needs to be above 90%.
I'd also would rather have a linebacker that can create more FF's in their career than what yours has done. Doesnt make much sense to have a linbacker who can only sack or chase down the ball carriers. That is what DE's are for. Linebackers should be play makers.
lol. You basically insinuated that making sacks and TFLs aren't "making plays". Nobody is sure how to get FFs on a consistent basis, and even the ones who are close get maybe 6 FF a year. Then again, how to pass rush and get to the ball carrier is something that's easy, and effective. My level 23 LB just finished a season where he had 15 sacks, 29 hurries, and 28 TFL. Do you think those didn't make him a play maker?
And a SS built like mine won't miss a lot of tackles if built right. My SS was 94/100 in the regular season and is 21/23 in the playoffs so far... Good for marks of 94% and 91%. Not bad when you consider my high tackle numbers indicates that I'm one of the leaders of my defense. One point of Wrap-Up Tackle goes a lonnnnnnng way. And one point of it definitely counts for more than one point of tackling.
edit: My SS just won a championship today. Tackling totals for the playoffs: 25 tackles made (4th most of anyone in the playoffs) with two misses. 25/28 is a 92.6% success rate.
And if you want to take it a step farther, my level 23 OLB just played in a championship game today and ended up with 22 tackles (7th most in the playoffs... at ROLB) and missed four tackles. 22/26 is a still okay 84.6%. And his strength/tackling are under 25 each.
Powerbacks and missing tackles in general isn't really a problem except for against a very small handful of players at lower levels. Once powerbacks can add good speed/agility/SAs to the mix, that's when they become trouble. Until then they don't have the right combination of stats to be something you need to shake in your boots about.
Originally posted by Blamo
Wah wah wahhhhh. You don't need that much speed to do decent against powerbacks if you have the right defensive scheme, as teams like ALB have shown, and either way there's no chance that tackling/strength are going to be my "main" skills, and using the early levels to boost up support skills is proven as a waste of time. My level 44 LB didn't have a huge problem with powerbacks this year and he has under 100 strength/tackling. So it's safe to say I'm not worried about it just yet. There's a time when I will be (and I've already trained both into their mid 30's) but I'm not going to go overboard and try and get them to 60 by level 35 or anything. If I end up doing that, then I'm worthless as a pass rusher, in pass defense, and against elusive backs. Speed has a LOT more utility than tackling does, and I'm not going to completely change my philosophy due to powerbacks. It will cause me to change things a little, but to completely change things because of them would be asinine.
We arent talking about LB's here, we are talking about SS's who normally are the last line of defense. Their tackling percentage needs to be above 90%.
I'd also would rather have a linebacker that can create more FF's in their career than what yours has done. Doesnt make much sense to have a linbacker who can only sack or chase down the ball carriers. That is what DE's are for. Linebackers should be play makers.
lol. You basically insinuated that making sacks and TFLs aren't "making plays". Nobody is sure how to get FFs on a consistent basis, and even the ones who are close get maybe 6 FF a year. Then again, how to pass rush and get to the ball carrier is something that's easy, and effective. My level 23 LB just finished a season where he had 15 sacks, 29 hurries, and 28 TFL. Do you think those didn't make him a play maker?
And a SS built like mine won't miss a lot of tackles if built right. My SS was 94/100 in the regular season and is 21/23 in the playoffs so far... Good for marks of 94% and 91%. Not bad when you consider my high tackle numbers indicates that I'm one of the leaders of my defense. One point of Wrap-Up Tackle goes a lonnnnnnng way. And one point of it definitely counts for more than one point of tackling.
edit: My SS just won a championship today. Tackling totals for the playoffs: 25 tackles made (4th most of anyone in the playoffs) with two misses. 25/28 is a 92.6% success rate.
And if you want to take it a step farther, my level 23 OLB just played in a championship game today and ended up with 22 tackles (7th most in the playoffs... at ROLB) and missed four tackles. 22/26 is a still okay 84.6%. And his strength/tackling are under 25 each.
Powerbacks and missing tackles in general isn't really a problem except for against a very small handful of players at lower levels. Once powerbacks can add good speed/agility/SAs to the mix, that's when they become trouble. Until then they don't have the right combination of stats to be something you need to shake in your boots about.
Last edited Feb 10, 2009 21:15:40
UMRocks
offline
offline
FFUM's??? you really want to place a players success on FFUMs? sorry, but i dont think thats ever been logical in my 5 seasons of GLB. I've seen people get 6 FFUM's in a year on 35 tackles and i've seen players go 130 tackles with 1 FFUM, with not a whole lot of difference btwn their builds. i tend to base my players success on TFL, sacks, hurries, PDs - because those show that you are actually reacting and getting to the play when it matters, whereas i see FFUMs as flukes at this point. its not that you dont need strength or tackling, but as blamo said, the marginal returns on them are a lot lower than that on speed/agi/vis
SunshineMan89
offline
offline
Agreed . . . while forced fumbles aren't random, it's much more marginally effective to make a safety who can defend the pass and get TFLs than be a mediocre fumble-forcer and suck in coverage and in sniffing out run plays.
Jediknight120
offline
offline
Gonna re-fuel the debate, lol. What should the first VA I max be? I've narrowed it down to:
Track Star
Quick
Football Genius
I'm leaning towards Track Star first.
Track Star
Quick
Football Genius
I'm leaning towards Track Star first.
Challenge Everything
offline
offline
Originally posted by Jediknight120
Gonna re-fuel the debate, lol. What should the first VA I max be? I've narrowed it down to:
Track Star
Quick
Football Genius
I'm leaning towards Track Star first.
I would go with the skill that you have the fewest points in to raise that skill up... or... throw a point in each of them as you get them and raise them all up by 1 point as you go. If you do this when you are level 25, or whenever they begin, you can't get to 15 anyway until 40, so raise them up equally as you go.
Gonna re-fuel the debate, lol. What should the first VA I max be? I've narrowed it down to:
Track Star
Quick
Football Genius
I'm leaning towards Track Star first.
I would go with the skill that you have the fewest points in to raise that skill up... or... throw a point in each of them as you get them and raise them all up by 1 point as you go. If you do this when you are level 25, or whenever they begin, you can't get to 15 anyway until 40, so raise them up equally as you go.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
