Warrior General Games

i have a belief that tackling helps deny extra yardage while tackling not missing tackles.

both attributes are important and it depends on what type of SS you want to build, tbh.

Originally posted by quantofsol2008
My point applies to all positions. I'm not going to cap things like tackling just to not miss 5 tackles per year or something like that. Same applies to WRs who triple cap catching just to avoid dropping 3-4 balls per year.

And you can not miss tackles with 40-50 tackling, even playing on normal or power tackling. The payoff you're getting from not missing those tackles is minimal when compared to the payoff you're getting for forcing more fumbles, being better able to break blocks, and being better in pass coverage.

Your point doesn't apply to all positions. If you really think that, then this argument was over before it even began. It's wildly different between positions, in fact. And the WR argument is also stupid, since it's at least been confirmed that a higher catching score implies a higher catching radius. In fact, a higher catching score often means a higher amount of drops since your player attempts higher degree catches with much more frequency. Thank you for proving that you don't understand the sim, though.

Originally posted by SunshineMan89
Originally posted by Blamo

And honestly... Sunshineman, if you're following UDs philosophies, I would stop. If the best that can do for you is backup on a EEBBB squad... I would find a new direction. My SS also has been better statistically in every way than yours. If people are trying to disagree with my philosophies, I would expect them to have a better player than mine. I'm not trying to pick fights (well, other than with UD) or anything... but maybe there's a little more to what I'm saying than you guys think.

My safety has primarily played FS throughout his career, and has been slowbuilding. I wouldn't try and base too much off of his stats, as his PT/position has been wildly inconsistent. If you really want to try and read into his build etc . . ., then watch some replays . . . I've never spent an SP in tackling and yet I virtually never miss tackles (playing on wrap-up) versus powerbacks with 100+ strength. But this really isn't about my guy--his build won't fill out for another 10 levels or so. If you want to attack my player/my knowledge of the game ("If the best that can do for you is backup on a EEBBB squad"), find a more relevant point.

I'm not "following" UD's philosophies . . . I've independently come to the same conclusion myself. I don't think Tackling is bad--in fact if you're primarily a run-stuffer it's better than strength--but IMO for the most effective safety taking tackling past 48 is a really bad use of your SPs.

It's not like my experience is limited to EEBBB . . . I've coordinated for teams at every level short of Pro. My opinion is based on which safeties' build have seemed to me to be the most effective from watching replays, assessing builds, etc.

And as a side note, I'm perfectly happy with my guy, and his lack of stats thus far doesn't particularly disappoint me.

Again... not trying to start shit, but my SS is a slowbuild too. And his tackling isn't even near where I want it to be yet. Even still, I'd imagine that a competent slow build would be able to start on a EEBBB team when I'm starting on a Africa AA team. My player is about a season older than yours, but even without that edge I'd say I'm more impressive.... And either way I've shown that my SS has had a better career arch than a player with UDs builds. Since most WRs and receiving TEs don't really have anything more than 35-40 strength... I don't see the benefits of going much beyond the softcap for a SS. The gains you get in pass coverage are minimal, and it's unproven whether or not strength is > tackling for forcing fumbles. And with the recent evidence proving that carrying > strength for breaking tackles, I think it's a decent bet to assume that tackling > strength for forcing fumbles. I guess that's just me, but it really just seems like people want to wildly overrate strength just because it's a physical ability.

Blamo you really have no idea what you're talking about. That whole "theory" about dropping catches because you attempt harder ones with a bigger radius that catching makes is redundant. It's completely false, and was proven false in like season 5.

Your S.S.'s arch doesn't matter to me.mine wasn't slow built at all. Matter of fact he sucks, compared to how I build players now. He was among the first I built. I know he isn't perfect. You can't argue with pure results though. You just cant. My S.S. dominated AAA last season. When he was in A. everyone said wait till you get to AA. When He was in AA everyone said wait till you get to AAA. Now that he dominated AAA it's wait till he gets to the pro's.

He plays more in run support than he does in pass support. The fact that he has so much str makes Him dominant in both.
Whether he is stuffing a run, on a coverage assignment, in cover 2, coming across the field on a missed assignment. whatever he is called to do. He does it, and he does it well. And I can tell you with 44 tackling, it's the last thing I am going to put any Sp in at this point. Sorry. you're just not going to convince me putting 20-30 sp's in tackling to not miss 10 tackles on a season is worth it. When I could spend those points on more valuable attributes, s.a's or stop playing on Power tackling.

Dude, you have no clue.

I've seen guys with 70s in catching. I've played on the same teams as them. They don't drop more passes. They don't pull in passes that are farther away more frequently than other receivers. What I see them doing, however, is catching the ball well when a defender is all over them or after a defender has tipped the ball.

Still, whoop-dee-do - WRs with more catching can catch maybe 5-6 more passes per season that are thrown far away from them. That's great, but I'd rather see WRs invest into something that will make them a better player overall. Once you get to a certain point with attributes like catching (and tackling IMO) it's not really worth it anymore.

For a safety, I don't understand the need to take tackling above 48. My guy missed like 5 tackles last season and I don't think a single one of them led to a huge gain after the missed tackle. I'd rather spend my SP in something that will make my guy more of a playmaker when he does succeed than spend my SP in something that will make him fail 5 fewer times per season.

Originally posted by UnderDogs
Blamo you really have no idea what you're talking about. That whole "theory" about dropping catches because you attempt harder ones with a bigger radius that catching makes is redundant. It's completely false, and was proven false in like season 5.

Your S.S.'s arch doesn't matter to me.mine wasn't slow built at all. Matter of fact he sucks, compared to how I build players now. He was among the first I built. I know he isn't perfect. You can't argue with pure results though. You just cant. My S.S. dominated AAA last season. When he was in A. everyone said wait till you get to AA. When He was in AA everyone said wait till you get to AAA. Now that he dominated AAA it's wait till he gets to the pro's.

He plays more in run support than he does in pass support. The fact that he has so much str makes Him dominant in both.
Whether he is stuffing a run, on a coverage assignment, in cover 2, coming across the field on a missed assignment. whatever he is called to do. He does it, and he does it well. And I can tell you with 44 tackling, it's the last thing I am going to put any Sp in at this point. Sorry. you're just not going to convince me putting 20-30 sp's in tackling to not miss 10 tackles on a season is worth it. When I could spend those points on more valuable attributes, s.a's or stop playing on Power tackling.


It's not a theory... Bort has flat out said that higher catching gives you a bigger catch radius. So, I mean... You can go ahead and try and tell me that I'm wrong and have no idea what I'm talking about... but this is the word of Bort. Unless you're suddenly trying to say that you know better than Bort.

And hell, I'm not even trying to convince YOU. I think your build is flawed and that in the end it'll be a pretty big mistake... but I would also agree that it's a little late in his career to try and completely change your build philosophy. In the future, though, I think any SS would benefit more from having tackling than strength. I may underrate strength, but seeing as my guy is still somewhere between above average and excellent in both run defense and coverage, I don't think I'm missing much either. And if it's ever confirmed that higher tackling increases your tackling radius (which is reasonable considering how catching works) and that it helps increase fumbles more than strength (which is reasonable considering how carrying works), it becomes an even better investment.

Originally posted by quantofsol2008
Dude, you have no clue.

I've seen guys with 70s in catching. I've played on the same teams as them. They don't drop more passes. They don't pull in passes that are farther away more frequently than other receivers. What I see them doing, however, is catching the ball well when a defender is all over them or after a defender has tipped the ball.

Still, whoop-dee-do - WRs with more catching can catch maybe 5-6 more passes per season that are thrown far away from them. That's great, but I'd rather see WRs invest into something that will make them a better player overall. Once you get to a certain point with attributes like catching (and tackling IMO) it's not really worth it anymore.

For a safety, I don't understand the need to take tackling above 48. My guy missed like 5 tackles last season and I don't think a single one of them led to a huge gain after the missed tackle. I'd rather spend my SP in something that will make my guy more of a playmaker when he does succeed than spend my SP in something that will make him fail 5 fewer times per season.

Jesus. I don't like UD, but at least he's not a complete idiot. Again, word of Bort. I don't care what you see, since it's what the game code is. And 5-6 passes? That's all? lol. Higher catching factors into catching balls in stride, catching bad passes, avoiding tipped balls, etc. if you don't think high catching really matters... Well I'm sorry. And since we know that there's a "quality" roll for things like making catches and making tackles... You're also ignoring the amount of times that you're making "poor" catches and tackles into your thinking. But meh. The WR argument is lulzy, so I'll just leave it be.

Anyways, you and UD both believe that tackling just helps you tackle. Well, that's fine. But so far it's been confirmed that two of the football skills do a good deal more than people first thought, so I don't see why it's so far fetched to believe that tackling does too. So that's fine, whatever. And again, this thread isn't about FS anyways... Did you notice on the first page that I said that much tackling is worth it if you make 50+ tackles a season? And do you notice how your player doesn't make that criteria? Your player is completely irrelevant to anything I'm trying to say.

Originally posted by UnderDogs
Blamo you really have no idea what you're talking about. That whole "theory" about dropping catches because you attempt harder ones with a bigger radius that catching makes is redundant. It's completely false, and was proven false in like season 5.

Your S.S.'s arch doesn't matter to me.mine wasn't slow built at all. Matter of fact he sucks, compared to how I build players now. He was among the first I built. I know he isn't perfect. You can't argue with pure results though. You just cant. My S.S. dominated AAA last season. When he was in A. everyone said wait till you get to AA. When He was in AA everyone said wait till you get to AAA. Now that he dominated AAA it's wait till he gets to the pro's.

He plays more in run support than he does in pass support. The fact that he has so much str makes Him dominant in both.
Whether he is stuffing a run, on a coverage assignment, in cover 2, coming across the field on a missed assignment. whatever he is called to do. He does it, and he does it well. And I can tell you with 44 tackling, it's the last thing I am going to put any Sp in at this point. Sorry. you're just not going to convince me putting 20-30 sp's in tackling to not miss 10 tackles on a season is worth it. When I could spend those points on more valuable attributes, s.a's or stop playing on Power tackling.




don't take this the wrong way, and i'm not saying i'm better than you at all, but if you take away the blowout games against inferior competition, your SS didn't 'dominate" based on the stats alone. They were pretty common stats.

I won't comment on how he played overall because I didn't watch his games. It's hard to say when an SS dominates. if he's barely thrown at cuz the QB is afraid to throw where he helps or he allows other players come in to make a tackle, that could be dominating as well. He may have lots of tackles cuz of the D-line being poor or his poor help defense. PDs might be up because he's thrown at a lot or because he's just really good at it. hard to say w/o watching.

Originally posted by quantofsol2008
Dude, you have no clue.

I've seen guys with 70s in catching. I've played on the same teams as them. They don't drop more passes. They don't pull in passes that are farther away more frequently than other receivers. What I see them doing, however, is catching the ball well when a defender is all over them or after a defender has tipped the ball.

Still, whoop-dee-do - WRs with more catching can catch maybe 5-6 more passes per season that are thrown far away from them. That's great, but I'd rather see WRs invest into something that will make them a better player overall. Once you get to a certain point with attributes like catching (and tackling IMO) it's not really worth it anymore.

For a safety, I don't understand the need to take tackling above 48. My guy missed like 5 tackles last season and I don't think a single one of them led to a huge gain after the missed tackle. I'd rather spend my SP in something that will make my guy more of a playmaker when he does succeed than spend my SP in something that will make him fail 5 fewer times per season.

A WRs catching number factor's into a QB's decision to throw to him (bort changed to this a long time ago). I would say on the teams i've played for and seeing the WRs on the team, the ones with speed and higher catching seemed to be the more productive WRs. Catching is about not dropping, catching radius, and the decision to be thrown at, not just the first thing. Also, i think it helps with catching in stride.

109 tackles
23 hurries
9 sacks
20 TFL's
78 pass deflections
6 INT's
3 defensive touchdowns
10 Forced fumbles
1 safety.

This is common stats for a S.S. in AAA ball?

I know it's certainly not common for your little S.S. down in AA ball, that's for sure.

Were you in A ball in season 8? who are you to even talk GTFO. haha

Originally posted by UnderDogs
Common stats for a Strong safety in AAA is

109 tackles
23 hurries
9 sacks
20 TFL's
78 pass defelctions
6 INT's
3 defensive touchdowns
10 Forced fumbles
1 safety.

This is common stats for a S.S. in AAA ball?

Please pull up the myriad of S.S's in AAA ball that have these stats.

If it's common pull up to S.S's right now. who aren't on any leader board.

My S.S. was on the leader board in almost every defensive category last season. and that's common?


His point was that your build is conductive to piling up a lot of stats against poor competition, and against legit competition your stats are a lot less extraordinary. 43 of your PD, all of your INTs and defensive TDs, six of your sacks, and seven of your forced fumbles came in five blowout victories. Suddenly you go from having a great season to one that's simply good.


Also, just to throw it out there...

Originally posted by Bort
I wouldn't mind seeing a few more fumbles overall, tbh, especially since a lot of people have gimpy carrying ability. I don't think right now is the best time to toy with it though, because honestly I think if more defenders had higher tackling skill (and I don't mean ~50), we'd see more fumbles anyway. That would be the point to getting tackling skill near 100, imo.

this is from a few seasons ago, but nothing leads me to believe this has changed.

Originally posted by Blamo

Jesus. I don't like UD, but at least he's not a complete idiot. Again, word of Bort. I don't care what you see, since it's what the game code is. And 5-6 passes? That's all? lol. Higher catching factors into catching balls in stride, catching bad passes, avoiding tipped balls, etc. if you don't think high catching really matters... Well I'm sorry. And since we know that there's a "quality" roll for things like making catches and making tackles... You're also ignoring the amount of times that you're making "poor" catches and tackles into your thinking. But meh. The WR argument is lulzy, so I'll just leave it be.

Anyways, you and UD both believe that tackling just helps you tackle. Well, that's fine. But so far it's been confirmed that two of the football skills do a good deal more than people first thought, so I don't see why it's so far fetched to believe that tackling does too. So that's fine, whatever. And again, this thread isn't about FS anyways... Did you notice on the first page that I said that much tackling is worth it if you make 50+ tackles a season? And do you notice how your player doesn't make that criteria? Your player is completely irrelevant to anything I'm trying to say.

Whatever, Bort said it's in the game code so now everyone is making a big deal out of it, but it just doesn't have that big of an effect, whether it's in the game code or not. Like I said, I've seen guys with 70+ catching. They're good at catching the ball with DBs all over them, when they're well covered, but I haven't noticed a single one that's better at running after the catch or anything else.

And honestly, the whole "catching balls in stride" thing seems ridiculous to me. I've seen very few WRs with 48 catching who have to stop to catch the ball. The guys with 70 catching don't seem to run any better immediately after catching the ball than do the guys with 48 catching.

Originally posted by Blamo

His point was that your build is conductive to piling up a lot of stats against poor competition, and against legit competition your stats are a lot less extraordinary. 43 of your PD, all of your INTs and defensive TDs, six of your sacks, and seven of your forced fumbles came in five blowout victories. Suddenly you go from having a great season to one that's simply good.


Are you seriuosly going to go there? From the guy whose S is playing in Africa AA against half a league filled with gutted teams, that seems a bit hypocritical. We could say most of your stats for your S came in blowout wins as well, but I think that argument is just unfair.

It's obvious that most peoples' builds will do well against poor competition. This happens IRL too. I mean, you look at the numbers from UD's safety even in the non-blowout games, and those are pretty good numbers for a safety. Extrapolate those numbers over an entire season and the guy still put up grat stats for a SS. But every agent's dots are going to have big jumps in production when they play blowout games.

Originally posted by Blamo

Again... not trying to start shit, but my SS is a slowbuild too. And his tackling isn't even near where I want it to be yet. Even still, I'd imagine that a competent slow build would be able to start on a EEBBB team when I'm starting on a Africa AA team. My player is about a season older than yours, but even without that edge I'd say I'm more impressive.... And either way I've shown that my SS has had a better career arch than a player with UDs builds. Since most WRs and receiving TEs don't really have anything more than 35-40 strength... I don't see the benefits of going much beyond the softcap for a SS. The gains you get in pass coverage are minimal, and it's unproven whether or not strength is > tackling for forcing fumbles. And with the recent evidence proving that carrying > strength for breaking tackles, I think it's a decent bet to assume that tackling > strength for forcing fumbles. I guess that's just me, but it really just seems like people want to wildly overrate strength just because it's a physical ability.

Alrighty, if you still really want to judge guys by stats I'm going to go through your guy's record. Out of the 18 games he played last year, only 6 were reasonably competitive (within 40 points). In those six games, this is how your line looked:

32 Tackles 5 Missed Tackles 4 PDs . . . 0 Sacks, INTs, or FFumbs . . .

I don't think your guy is a bad player--in fact, I'm sure he's a very solid player, and I think in general you know what you're talking about, as I respect the team you GM for. But looking at stats in isolation for a DB isn't a useful way to measure builds.

But I happen to disagree with you on this, and "my SS is better than your SS" isn't a particularly productive argument, especially when there's not much basis for comparison. If you want to actually judge either player, watch some tape, don't tell me my opinion is invalid because I don't demand that my guy start. In fact, one of the reasons I initially became intrigued with the strength/tackling debate was because when making an imbalanced slowbuild it seemed that you can pretty much safely ignore strength/tackling for a long time simply by having high vision. High vision actually helps quite a bit with missed tackles.

As for the actual argument, I've run tests with low-level players building strength in isolation to experiment with strength as a cause of PDs. The results would seem to indicate that strength actually doesn't help much in the tackling department (as I've said, when it comes to fumble-forcing/tackling, Tackling>Strength), but that it has a major impact on pass defense.

It really shouldn't be particularly controversial anymore (what with the strength requirement for Jackhammer, etc . . .) that strength leads to PDs. It's also much more important on a safety than a CB, as when you're flying in from a cover-2 it will lead to a ton of "knocked loose" type PDs.

In the end, we'll have to agree to disagree. At some point, it depends on what type of player you want your safety to be. I don't think that you need 60+ tackling to not missed tackles (and I think that you need more than 60+ tackling in isolation if you want to cause fumbles), and while I wouldn't take strength as high as UD seems to have it I think the benefits of having strength at 60+ are greater. My SS doesn't have close to 60 strength--yet another reason why he's not really relevant.

As a side note, I'm a big fan of both catching for WRs and carrying for HBs. I have no idea where that argument got started but I'm not getting in the middle of it--I've probably hijacked this thread enough already.

Underdogs

How high should a SS take strength in your opinion?

Originally posted by UnderDogs
109 tackles
23 hurries
9 sacks
20 TFL's
78 pass deflections
6 INT's
3 defensive touchdowns
10 Forced fumbles
1 safety.

This is common stats for a S.S. in AAA ball?

I know it's certainly not common for your little S.S. down in AA ball, that's for sure.

Were you in A ball in season 8? who are you to even talk GTFO. haha




I started in Africa AAA #2 last year, while you were in #1. My team also went 16-0 in the regular season. A significant portion of those stats were accumulated against gutted or cpu teams or teams who just shouldn't be in that conference. My guy played a few of those games, too. I don't care about those games.

My team is now disbanded so I needed a new home and Canada AA has comparable levels to africa AAA. I wanted to stay in Africa AAA#2 but every team already was set at SS.

In games with the score difference under 55 points, or in other words, games that matter, your stats were:

10 games, 68 tackles, 5 MsTkls, 9 TFL, 0 ints, 3 sacks, 3 FF, 33 PDs,

Not seeing what is that dominating about that line. It's good, but not 'dominating.'

Here are my stats against 10 closest games, also all under 55.

37 tackles, 4 Mstkls, 5 TFL, 1 int, 0 sacks, 1 FF, 12 PDs.

Statline is certainly worse. But on the flip side, we never got run on the outside, our D-line shut down the run, and our LOLB was the best in the league, IMO, and shut down all TEs and my half of the field rarely got thrown at. Again, not saying my guy is better than yours, and his stats aren't as impressive, but I think it depends on how those stats come. Why do you have so many more tackles? Is it cuz your d-line isn't that good? Is it cuz TEs catch a lot against your defense? Maybe WR2's exploit your CB2?

But really man, you're way too defensive about your guy. It's like your child, or something. It's a dot, calm down.

Originally posted by quantofsol2008
Originally posted by Blamo


His point was that your build is conductive to piling up a lot of stats against poor competition, and against legit competition your stats are a lot less extraordinary. 43 of your PD, all of your INTs and defensive TDs, six of your sacks, and seven of your forced fumbles came in five blowout victories. Suddenly you go from having a great season to one that's simply good.


Are you seriuosly going to go there? From the guy whose S is playing in Africa AA against half a league filled with gutted teams, that seems a bit hypocritical. We could say most of your stats for your S came in blowout wins as well, but I think that argument is just unfair.

It's obvious that most peoples' builds will do well against poor competition. This happens IRL too. I mean, you look at the numbers from UD's safety even in the non-blowout games, and those are pretty good numbers for a safety. Extrapolate those numbers over an entire season and the guy still put up grat stats for a SS. But every agent's dots are going to have big jumps in production when they play blowout games.


It's a good statline, no one denies this. But I don't think it's so "dominating" as he tries to pump it up to be. Also, a safety with a lot of stats...is this a good thing?

think of corners. We want them to have less tackles because that means they're being thrown at less. It all depends on how those stats are coming, not that they're there.

Would you rather have a corner with 50 PDs, 70 tackles or a corner with 25 PDs, 30 tackles, playing the same amount of plays against the same competition (with same teammates/tactics)

The latter, quite obviously.