Warrior General Games

I've heard that it's worth soft-capping, that it's useless, and everything in between.
What exactly is the effect of jumping for a WR? If it's just for catching a jump ball, then I don't see the point of raising it. Wouldn't it be more worth it to softcap Strength instead? Let me know what you think. Thanks.

It factors into catching passes. How much I dont know. Is it worth soft capping, probably not. Is it worth raising some, probably so. Do you want to spend skill points into it or just train it. Your choice.

If you are a possession receiver or you plan on pointing the Jumping Catch SA then I would soft cap it. I have not done so, but you'd think that with an SA boosting your jumping catch chance that a higher jumping attribute would make the SA function better.

It also depends on how accurate your QB is. if he throws every pass right on the money you dont need high jumping, but for most QBs they'll throw balls that your WR needs to jump or dive for and jumping helps both.

Last season my WR did not do much of anything he had about 350 yards total, I soft capped jumping during the offseason and have led the team in catching both preseason games and have gained about 140 yards. He is the 4th string WR

Originally posted by 4th Quarter
It also depends on how accurate your QB is. if he throws every pass right on the money you dont need high jumping, but for most QBs they'll throw balls that your WR needs to jump or dive for and jumping helps both.

also wondering though if your qb has high throwing maybe he will then throw it to where he knows you can jump and get it, making it so either the reciever catches it or no one does. maybe then we can see some fade routes in the endzone

Thinking out loud:

Hate seeing those PDs on balls that could look like jump-balls , is jumping the answer ?

I don't know .....

Depends how high, i've seen more PDs this season with the change, was something like 22 of 122 attempts last season, is closer to half the passes this season, and that's with 56 jumping.