Most likely would be
3 STOP's (what most people carry)
2nd blocking TE
One of the FB's
5th WR
4th OT
4th OG
2nd C
A CB
3 STOP's (what most people carry)
2nd blocking TE
One of the FB's
5th WR
4th OT
4th OG
2nd C
A CB
Forum > Pro Leagues > Congrats to HHWC
jdbolick
offline
offline
2 QB, 2 HB, 2 FB, 7 OL, 3 TE, 4 WR, 3 DT, 4 DE, 5 LB, 6 CB, 2 SS, 2 FS, K, P, RET? That is cutting things awfully tight. Unfortunately I think snakes is right that top builders would simply make fewer players rather than smaller rosters meaning more dots would go to other teams. The only real benefit to smaller rosters would be forcing builds to be less specialized.
snakes22
offline
offline
I wouldn't have a KR/PR, just let a FB or HB do the job.
STOPs
4th DE
4th TE (rec or blocker)
Oline if above 7
5th WR
Would have to choose blitz LB or blitz CB
I don't think it would change a lot except ST units would be terrible
STOPs
4th DE
4th TE (rec or blocker)
Oline if above 7
5th WR
Would have to choose blitz LB or blitz CB
I don't think it would change a lot except ST units would be terrible
How many people make as many dots as they can afford to make? I think most people make as many as are needed for their teams and maybe an extra one or two if someone they know needs a dot. Reducing roster size is not going to increase the number of players available. It will simply reduce the number of players made.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Plankton
How many people make as many dots as they can afford to make? I think most people make as many as are needed for their teams and maybe an extra one or two if someone they know needs a dot. Reducing roster size is not going to increase the number of players available. It will simply reduce the number of players made.
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw. The player market draw is just a nice little extra.
How many people make as many dots as they can afford to make? I think most people make as many as are needed for their teams and maybe an extra one or two if someone they know needs a dot. Reducing roster size is not going to increase the number of players available. It will simply reduce the number of players made.
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw. The player market draw is just a nice little extra.
Originally posted by bhall43
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw. The player market draw is just a nice little extra.
I understand. Was just responding to a post earlier, but forgot to hit quote which makes my post completely out of context....yeah me!
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw. The player market draw is just a nice little extra.
I understand. Was just responding to a post earlier, but forgot to hit quote which makes my post completely out of context....yeah me!
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw.
How does that make the game any better? Seems like it would just make things worse.
Less players is more about forcing choices than creating a better player market draw.
How does that make the game any better? Seems like it would just make things worse.
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Originally posted by Fumanchuchu
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Kinda where my head is at
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Kinda where my head is at
snakes22
offline
offline
Originally posted by Fumanchuchu
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Offense could just give powerback 70 stamina and runs sweeps all game leaving other HB's off the depth chart.. Next game just use scat back and pass all game
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Offense could just give powerback 70 stamina and runs sweeps all game leaving other HB's off the depth chart.. Next game just use scat back and pass all game
Originally posted by foshizzel17
why dont you guys go to casual if its too hard for you
Planning on it
why dont you guys go to casual if its too hard for you
Planning on it
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by Fumanchuchu
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Having customs slots actually makes DCing a ton easier. I'd much rather go up against someone with strong personnel tendencies than someone like CerNeT who gives you no clue what he'll call based on who is in the game.
Seems like removing all the custom slots and tags would help. If the offense couldn't dictate exact personnel on every play then the defense wouldn't need to build a different set for every personnel grouping.
Would also force teams to have an identity much like roster limits would.
Having customs slots actually makes DCing a ton easier. I'd much rather go up against someone with strong personnel tendencies than someone like CerNeT who gives you no clue what he'll call based on who is in the game.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
How does that make the game any better? Seems like it would just make things worse.
Well ya..it probably would get worse for a guy who literally can't go without any customized position available.
You made that abundantly clear the last time we had this conversation.
Making hard choices are fun for me though.
How does that make the game any better? Seems like it would just make things worse.
Well ya..it probably would get worse for a guy who literally can't go without any customized position available.
You made that abundantly clear the last time we had this conversation.Making hard choices are fun for me though.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
Having customs slots actually makes DCing a ton easier. I'd much rather go up against someone with strong personnel tendencies than someone like CerNeT who gives you no clue what he'll call based on who is in the game.
He gives pretty good clues...people are just too lazy to look at them.
Having customs slots actually makes DCing a ton easier. I'd much rather go up against someone with strong personnel tendencies than someone like CerNeT who gives you no clue what he'll call based on who is in the game.
He gives pretty good clues...people are just too lazy to look at them.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
