You seem to be missing the entire point of this conversation, or, at least, the latter half of the thread. The issue isn't whether bruiser or slippery work in the open field (they both do), but rather which most benefits WRs at the critical point that they catch the ball and are immediately faced with a tackler (YAC attack is taken as a given here) in the absence of built-up momentum. That's why your HB footage reel is irrelevant.
Wiseivan raised the crux of this issue directly -- since many WRs are most often concerned with breaking tackles immediately after the catch, the key question is whether bruiser or slippery is best suited for that task when coupled with YAC attack, and he suggests that bruiser is more effective because it's a 3% bonus/level rather than a 2% bonus. I am sympathetic to the numbers, but wonder how high strength/carrying need to be before that break-tackle bonus is modifying a reasonable base chance of breaking the tackle, and whether the absence of stiff arm, or power through, or lower the shoulder neutralize the benefits conferred by the extra 1%/vp.
I don't really give a crap whether you think my WR is built efficiently. It's built for a particular purpose, and it serves that purpose rather well. Clearly, it's not perfect or I wouldn't be here having these discussions.
I don't need to "know you" to suggest that your comments are inane and generally unhelpful. Telling me that lots of people on the internet are also inane and unhelpful (i.e., that certain phrases intended to belittle are "pretty typical internet sayings") doesn't change that fact. Don't take it personally though, I can't imagine that anything that I (or others) say will change how you feel
