Originally posted by Hukton Vioxx
Originally posted by Modok
TSE, the point is that you seem to think depth makes a difference in the scheme of things. While it may have a small impact, it isnt as powerful as you seem to let on.
You don't think having most of your offense and defense not have to play STs makes a difference? I don't want to turn this thread into a debate about that, but higher energy = better performance for about 10 calculations per player per play. If you don't think that matters tremendously you should probably reconsider. I actually added several STers many seasons ago (unfortunately for me, non-booster types) specifically to save our offense and defense some energy. However, I think the most players we have ever had was 53. One of the main goals we have this season is to increase the size of our roster because Bort won't limit roster sizes and we have no choice because our STs got mauled this season, particularly against bloated teams.
If you don't think roster sizes should be limited, that is fine. But you are just plain wrong if you don't think it provides a significant advantage to have 10+ more players than the team you are playing.
All that said, I'm picking Vegas to win by less than a TD with a STs TD being the difference.
This argument makes a lot of sense, and was the reason I added so much depth to begin with. Regretably, it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt this season that stamina/energy means almost nothing. This is why one RB can run the ball 60 times with no noticeable decline in performance.
If Bort increases the decline in performance when tired, it would make this point more valid.
In my opinion, the only real difference to added ST depth, is that you can customize the players to play STs. So you get an advantage on kick returns and kick offs, not on real offensive and defensive plays.
