Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Challenge Everything
Originally posted by UnderDogs

Originally posted by Challenge Everything

Originally posted by UnderDogs

Neither Safety position needs 60+ vision. that's a myth. they both should have 60+ str instead.Any empirical evidence to back this up? What is this, Star wars?
Well, it is a valid concern since you are making an absolute claim. In order to do so, you should have data backing up your assertion. It appears you have no data thus making your claim null & void. TIA

Um . . . what? Even if we were going to be as stodgy as you seem to be, a lack of providing concrete data does not indicate a claim "null and void." Just because you use the terminology doesn't mean you understand the process.

Originally posted by Challenge Everything

Well, it is a valid concern since you are making an absolute claim. In order to do so, you should have data backing up your assertion. It appears you have no data thus making your claim null & void. TIA

Personally I don't care how you build a safety. In the end your build reflects your attributes.

Originally posted by SunshineMan89
Originally posted by Challenge Everything
Originally posted by UnderDogs
Originally posted by Challenge Everything
Originally posted by UnderDogs
Neither Safety position needs 60+ vision. that's a myth. they both should have 60+ str instead.Any empirical evidence to back this up? What is this, Star wars? Well, it is a valid concern since you are making an absolute claim. In order to do so, you should have data backing up your assertion. It appears you have no data thus making your claim null & void. TIAUm . . . what? Even if we were going to be as stodgy as you seem to be, a lack of providing concrete data does not indicate a claim "null and void." Just because you use the terminology doesn't mean you understand the process.
If I make an absolute claim, which others have done, and that claim has no data to back it up, that claim is null, or worth zero, and is thrown out of any discussion. If that same claim has any evidence backing it up, then there is some merit, however there has been no evidence in pro or con to back the claim.

Originally posted by UnderDogs
Originally posted by Challenge Everything
Well, it is a valid concern since you are making an absolute claim. In order to do so, you should have data backing up your assertion. It appears you have no data thus making your claim null & void. TIAPersonally I don't care how you build a safety. In the end your build reflects your attributes.
This is genius.

Originally posted by Kayoh
Imagine a safety as a hybrid between a linebacker and a CB. A FS is 75% CB, 25% LB. A SS is 25% CB, 75% LB. Basically just what they play better; the run or the pass. SSs are usually the thumbers, like Polamalu, Landry, and Milloy (Urlacher was a SS in college). FSs are usually that deep center fielder, like Ed Reed or Reggie Nelson.

Or Sean Taylor (R.I.P).