Warrior General Games

It's not all about your FB getting open. Him just running routes opens things up for others. Unless he's a threat, D's won't adjust much. If they don't adjust, he's wide open.

My FB picks up critical 1st down in big games. Some D's cover it better, but AI often overlooks the FB totally or it fails some plays. There are a few plays where the HB and FB run to the same side. Does your AI account for this??? Almost a bigger problem is our FB is wide open and our QB throws into coverage!! LOL

We're not world league or nothing, but we play tough D's. And I had lots of luck passing to a speed FB in Pro a few seasons ago.

It's more of a "keep the D honest" player. Plus he's a great outside blocker with the same build.

My FB only has 60 strength and 45 blocking, but with outside blocker VA he does fine when blocking on outside runs.
He is also good at picking up blitzers when pass blocking

I'm waiting to see how he does at 64 when he has 125 speed and 90 agility. (83/85 base) That will mean he runs routes at 137/102 when factoring in scat back.

You can be a threat without totally selling out your build (I.E. not taking any strength or blocking), that was my point.

A strictly receiving build FB is gimmicky and easily accounted for. When not accounted for they can have huge games, but that won't happen against good DCs.

A receiving/blocking build FB is not so easily accounted for, but not nearly as dangerous when unaccounted for as the strictly receiving build. DCs have a bit more guess work to account for them though.

An offensive build is a terror to account for. A decently built offensive FB will break a tackle every touch on average (or more often depending on the situation), this means that a DC has to figure on the FB consistently breaking the first tackle attempt... which means he has to have help where ever the FB is, thus giving someone else on the offense a favorable match-up (or just praying that his LB can contain the offensive FB more often than not).

What I'm trying to say is this... if you want to carry two FBs on your roster, why on earth would you not just take a blocking build and an offensive build over a blocking build and an receiving/blocking build? It would be one thing if you weren't giving up the ability to run the ball from the FB position, but a receiving/blocking FB is not much of a threat to run the ball (at least not anywhere near as effectively as giving those carries to a HB). If you carry three FBs on your roster, it doesn't matter much, as you can carrying whatever build tickles your fancy as the 3rd FB... although playing time will probably be an issue.

P.S. picking up 1st downs is something my FB does well. I picked up 70 first downs on 230 touches this season, the #1 HB picked up 90 first downs on 302 touches, the #2 HB picked up 39 first downs on 135 touches and the QB picked up 99 first downs on 384 passing attempts.

What if the 2 FBs you carry are

Inside rusher/inside blocker/pass blocker

Outside rusher/outside blocker/pass blocker/receiver

Originally posted by Rage Kinard
What if the 2 FBs you carry are

Inside rusher/inside blocker/pass blocker

Outside rusher/outside blocker/pass blocker/receiver

The simple answer is... you do not have the build resources to make a FB that is good enough of a runner to justify giving him carries, if you also want to be a good blocker.

Making a decent scat back is something that hardly takes any build resources (some trains to catching and 15 VA pts), this means that you can pretty much toss it on top of your FB to make him a viable receiving threat. Will he be WR like? No, but does he really have to be...

Making a decent blocker is also fairly easy to accomplish, but it requires more of your build resources to get there. This is why the only effective way to make a balanced FB IMO, is to make him offensive focus with blocking added as an after thought. If you do the opposite (a blocker that added running as an after thought), he'll be mostly ineffective as a rusher. This is because without the VAs/AEQ to support the rusher role, you'll suck balls.

Specialized roles is the best route to take... granted it means more work for the OC to keep the tagging in check though.

Originally posted by DiMo28
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=998078&pbp_id=20400792

Not sure what you're trying to say with this play, but...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=982151&pbp_id=8827062 that was against a pretty bad WEPL team in a scrimmage this season.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=799804&pbp_id=17893616 that was against a very good SAPL team two seasons ago (they went 12-4 in the world league the following season).

I'm not built to be a receiver, I've trained catching to 40+ and have 15 in scat back. My speed is 80 and my agility is 68, without decline factored in. Like I've been saying... you do not need to have crazy speed/agility to be an effective receiving threat.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=332906&playoffs=0 Duck Beard is a prolific offensive FB in the WL (~3400 rushing yards and ~2600 receiving yards in 3 seasons at the WL level) and he said that he doesn't have higher than 94 speed FWIW.

Can't see the first one as it's a closed scrimmage.

Originally posted by DiMo28
Can't see the first one as it's a closed scrimmage.

3:16 1st & 10 OWN 37 Tavares 'Drop Da Bomb' Erasmus pass to Marcus Alexander Kaye up the right side, caught [missed tackle: Sterling Weeks (Power Through)] [missed diving tackle: Jason Bricks (Power Through)] [missed tackle: Bucktown Lane (Power Through)] [TD] (63 yd gain)

Originally posted by Rage Kinard
My FB only has 60 strength and 45 blocking, but with outside blocker VA he does fine when blocking on outside runs.
He is also good at picking up blitzers when pass blocking

I'm waiting to see how he does at 64 when he has 125 speed and 90 agility. (83/85 base) That will mean he runs routes at 137/102 when factoring in scat back.

I like your fullback but I never saw a reason why you didn't take strength to 68.

For a receiving FB, I think an ideal 3rd cap progression would be agility/carrying/strength/speed. That'd give you a 75 strength by the end of his career...which is better than most receiving HBs, and would also be serviceable for sweeps and strong-I weakside dives. Agility would reach 85, carrying would reach about 80, and speed can be taken to a natural 83 over time. An 80 carrying would certainly help on contested passes with a 48 catching and 15 in Scat Back.

Originally posted by shull
I like your fullback but I never saw a reason why you didn't take strength to 68.

For a receiving FB, I think an ideal 3rd cap progression would be agility/carrying/strength/speed. That'd give you a 75 strength by the end of his career...which is better than most receiving HBs, and would also be serviceable for sweeps and strong-I weakside dives. Agility would reach 85, carrying would reach about 80, and speed can be taken to a natural 83 over time. An 80 carrying would certainly help on contested passes with a 48 catching and 15 in Scat Back.

That is fine if you do not plan to take power thru to any considerable level. I would rather go agility > strength > carrying > speed or strength > carrying > agility > speed.

MACK II will have over a 90 natural strength at his plateau. That is to go along with over an 80 natural carrying and 75 natural agility. It really doesn't matter though, unless you plan to put the majority or all of your EQ into a single attribute... my potential max agility will be lower than someone who capped agility sooner, but do we really need over 105 agility on a FB? I see more of a reason to take strength or carrying past 105.

I like the options better with EQ swaps having the set-up I planned. I can switch between bull-dozing power and break-away speed with a couple of clicks. Maybe I'll never be able to have elusive back level of speed/agility, but an agility based FB will never be able to achieve bull-dozing power either. But then again, a FB doesn't have the supporting SAs/VAs to really make elusiveness a strength.

That's just my take on the subject anyways. I'd much rather take advantage of the inherent abilities of the position, than try and iceskate uphill.

Originally posted by Warlock
That is fine if you do not plan to take power thru to any considerable level.

I've taken all 4 above 68 on Impractical...speed to 81, and have 8 in power through and 8 in quick cut.


It's not iceskating uphill though. I understand your point that a fullback is a natural for breaking tackles using his strength/carrying/weight, etc. But as far as a receiver is concerned, there's not a better way to catch contested passes than a high carrying, high strength, with a good amount of speed and agility to get open. 3 out of 4 attributes for a good receiving back are the highest natural gains of any offensive player. Just one way to skin the cat.

Maybe it's not iceskating, but it's definitely going uphill as opposed to going downhill (as in counter intuitive).

As for the receiving argument, there's indeed two types of ways to catch passes... uncontested (speed/agility/etc... to get open) and contested (strength/carrying/jumping/etc... to fight for the ball). Optimally, you want a little both of both, to increase the situations where you're a capable receiver. Although, that doesn't necessarily mean that you not a receiving threat, if you lack in one area. It comes down to what you sacrifice to gain that ability...

Looking at Impractical and Duck Beard, I see Impractical as having sacrificed tackle breaking ability to be a complete receiver. He breaks about 50% less tackles compared to Duck and runs for about 2 less yards per rush. On the flip side though, he gets open more often (higher number of receptions) and burns people on more routes (4 more yards per catch). Both are effective in their roles, but accomplish their jobs differently.

Here's the problem though, is Impractical more valuable than having a 3rd WR on the field? Even if you wanted more protection, you could leave the TE in to block and field a 3rd WR instead of a receiving FB. The play selection kind of sucks for FB routes and it's a nightmare to get the QB to throw to them (even when wide open), in the current sim anyways. Against good defenses, you will be accounted for as well (for example, HHW shut down Impractical as a receiver in the play-offs).

Scat back makes up for a lot of these things, but I expect scat back to get adjusted once Bort actually figures out QB logic. In the current state of the sim, I would rather have a 3rd WR on the field over a receiving FB... although I might actually want an offensive FB on the field over a 3rd WR... due to the tackle breaking threat that an offensive FB carries with him, it forces defenses to position differently and over-commit players.

Originally posted by Warlock
Maybe it's not iceskating, but it's definitely going uphill as opposed to going downhill (as in counter intuitive).

As for the receiving argument, there's indeed two types of ways to catch passes... uncontested (speed/agility/etc... to get open) and contested (strength/carrying/jumping/etc... to fight for the ball). Optimally, you want a little both of both, to increase the situations where you're a capable receiver. Although, that doesn't necessarily mean that you not a receiving threat, if you lack in one area. It comes down to what you sacrifice to gain that ability...

Looking at Impractical and Duck Beard, I see Impractical as having sacrificed tackle breaking ability to be a complete receiver. He breaks about 50% less tackles compared to Duck and runs for about 2 less yards per rush. On the flip side though, he gets open more often (higher number of receptions) and burns people on more routes (4 more yards per catch). Both are effective in their roles, but accomplish their jobs differently.
It's a tough comparison to Duck Beard, who certainly has the skins on the wall. I wouldn't pass up having him on my offense, and would be happy with both.

Originally posted by Warlock

Here's the problem though, is Impractical more valuable than having a 3rd WR on the field? Even if you wanted more protection, you could leave the TE in to block and field a 3rd WR instead of a receiving FB. The play selection kind of sucks for FB routes and it's a nightmare to get the QB to throw to them (even when wide open), in the current sim anyways. Against good defenses, you will be accounted for as well (for example, HHW shut down Impractical as a receiver in the play-offs).
I'm the OC, so I've seen how defenses adjust to cover Impractical and try to use it to my advantage. For that game in particular, Impractical intentionally went out on a low amount of routes...5 or 6, and I'll often choose routes where he's not the primary receiver, hoping to draw double coverage to him so others get one-on-one. In our first game we ran a lot of strong-I weakside dives for a decent degree of success. The second meeting you can see where I went, although obviously not enough. He's also had very few receptions since that game as I haven't change the AI.

Originally posted by Warlock

Scat back makes up for a lot of these things, but I expect scat back to get adjusted once Bort actually figures out QB logic. In the current state of the sim, I would rather have a 3rd WR on the field over a receiving FB... although I might actually want an offensive FB on the field over a 3rd WR... due to the tackle breaking threat that an offensive FB carries with him, it forces defenses to position differently and over-commit players.
It may be adjusted...may not. Too speculative.

Originally posted by shull
I like your fullback but I never saw a reason why you didn't take strength to 68.

For a receiving FB, I think an ideal 3rd cap progression would be agility/carrying/strength/speed. That'd give you a 75 strength by the end of his career...which is better than most receiving HBs, and would also be serviceable for sweeps and strong-I weakside dives. Agility would reach 85, carrying would reach about 80, and speed can be taken to a natural 83 over time. An 80 carrying would certainly help on contested passes with a 48 catching and 15 in Scat Back.

I made some mistakes with the build, although part of that is team wanted him to be a blocker on ST and pitches when we are done so I started out training agility/blocking rather than agility solo. I also thought we were going to start trying to compete last season, so I started on speed way too early. By the time we realized we were going to wait until season 14 to compete, I'd already wasted the benefit of capping some of my other attributes earlier.

Still, I only have 18 more sp to spend in attributes other than speed, so that allows me to get speed to 128 by 64 if I decide to go that high. I'll also have 3 pieces of AEQ with a total of +5 agility bonus which will push agility to 90.

The next one I make (if I do another) will be much more efficient, but this should be a good first experiment. With 140 speed and 102 agility on routes and +52% catch ball chance, I should get a good look at what kind of matchup problems a FB like this can cause. The best will be seeing offensive sets that allow him to run routes to strong or weak side, which will be very rough on any defense that wants to try and cover him with a CB.