Warrior General Games

I swear, so many less people would have problems with broken tackles if they would just understand this. At best, I see people having them about equal. But... why? There has nothing ever been proven that would at all suggest that strength is superior for making tackles than TACKLING is. It was a myth way back in seasons 3 and 4 and whenever, when powerbacks weren't really a problem... but I don't see why it's lingered. IMO tackling is a full cap better than strength.


And it's not like I'm some scrub, either. My level 49 LB has posted his best two tackling % seasons at the AAA level when broken tackles have skyrocketed. Even if you say my competition is weak, I've had a pretty good track record even in scrimmages, a couple of games aside.

i agree with this

i wouldn't discount str, i just think tackling can make up for low str more than people realize.

Tackling also increases your tackling radius. Which also implies that a player with high tackling who have a bunch of missed tackles are also attempting a bunch of tackles that strength based SS won't attempt. I also think that there's a difference between safety and linebacker in this debate. Safeties tend to have MUCH better angles on the ball carrier, meaning that it's not as necessary that you roll as high of a tackle score. LBs end up having to take a lot of different angles, especially OLB.

I also disagree with most of your reasons strength is better. Helps in game speed sounds like poop, forcing more fumbles is dubious at best, and I don't think it helps with sheding blocks at all. Not getting pancaked, yes. But that's it.


Either way... I could sit there and listen to this argument about Strong Safeties and probably concede it as a wash... but not at all for LBs IMO.

To me the problem with strength is that you just can't get it as high as a power back will, when he's loaded up with SAs and 90 strength and doesn't need vision or agility, having 70 strength is just as good as 55.

Originally posted by UnderDogs
Originally posted by Blamo

Tackling also increases your tackling radius. Which also implies that a player with high tackling who have a bunch of missed tackles are also attempting a bunch of tackles that strength based SS won't attempt. I also think that there's a difference between safety and linebacker in this debate. Safeties tend to have MUCH better angles on the ball carrier, meaning that it's not as necessary that you roll as high of a tackle score. LBs end up having to take a lot of different angles, especially OLB.

I also disagree with most of your reasons strength is better. Helps in game speed sounds like poop, forcing more fumbles is dubious at best, and I don't think it helps with sheding blocks at all. Not getting pancaked, yes. But that's it.


Either way... I could sit there and listen to this argument about Strong Safeties and probably concede it as a wash... but not at all for LBs IMO.

this is exactly why no one listens to your advice bro. you really have no clue,

What I said about str is absolute fact based on watching the sims. This season when str matters more it makes it that much easier to see. Kinda like when I got flamed for telling people jumping helped to get sacks. I think you were even there to flame and say diving sacks don't exist. Now the proof is in the sims. you see them daily.

My S.S. plays a run stuffing role. He is usually lined up like a linebacker on A LOT of running situation. he is either blitzing or stuffing the runner.

think what you want, but you are 100 percent wrong that Tackling > str. go on believing that I will still be pumping my str over tackling with any player any day. I will do it with my f.s. my linebackers my other s.s. and all my defensive players. period. Have fun with 70 tackling *twirls fingers*

I have no clue? How is it absolute fact? The only things that are absolute fact are things that testers have scientifically tested through the test server (which isn't that much so far, tbh. They have poor testing methods) and the things that bort has told us. Most of the things you listed aren't even generally accepted on the forums as truths. They're all conjecture on your part.

Also, as far as the diving sacks thing went... I don't think I denied their existence, I just noted that it never said [Diving Tackle] when you made a sack, and that I felt that if there WERE diving tackle sacks, that they should be noted as such.

Furthermore, under the assumption that tackling increases your tackle radius... a SS can be just as effective in a run stuffing role with high tackling. He may be blocked, but he'll still attempt to make a tackle. Which I think is much better than unsuccessfully trying to compare to O-line/FB/Blocking TE/Power back strength.


So basically you are claiming that tackling > strength is false, but can't back it up with hard facts other than your SS. Meanwhile, across basically all levels of play my LBs and SS have been successful, and every season my tackle made % increases. Not that that's enough for it to be fact, I suppose, but I'll take my data over yours. Especially when you factor in that my LB has played much better teams (and powerbacks) than your SS has... Look at that playoff loss, for instance.


edit: and FWIW... my last few games against good powerbacks.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=455053
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=454908
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=455701
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=453575


And those teams are hardly chopped liver...

It's all good. Successful is cool and all. I want to dominate. I understand your point of view completely. But there is no sense getting pissy about tackling. Like I said MY S.S. only has 44 tackling and I am perfectly happy with him. He plays on power tackling every game. YES. every single game.

Originally posted by Blamo
Tackling also increases your tackling radius. Which also implies that a player with high tackling who have a bunch of missed tackles are also attempting a bunch of tackles that strength based SS won't attempt. I also think that there's a difference between safety and linebacker in this debate. Safeties tend to have MUCH better angles on the ball carrier, meaning that it's not as necessary that you roll as high of a tackle score. LBs end up having to take a lot of different angles, especially OLB.

I also disagree with most of your reasons strength is better. Helps in game speed sounds like poop, forcing more fumbles is dubious at best, and I don't think it helps with sheding blocks at all. Not getting pancaked, yes. But that's it.


Either way... I could sit there and listen to this argument about Strong Safeties and probably concede it as a wash... but not at all for LBs IMO.

i agree thats why LB's need to get jumping and tackling up

Tackling > strength is fact, not a matter of opinion. But to be succesful, neither should be neglected.

Originally posted by UnderDogs
It's all good. Successful is cool and all. I want to dominate. I understand your point of view completely. But there is no sense getting pissy about tackling. Like I said MY S.S. only has 44 tackling and I am perfectly happy with him. He plays on power tackling every game. YES. every single game.

You're the one telling me I'm wrong and that's why nobody listens to me... When it turns out that people are listening to me, and that I'm probably right. Furthermore, your player isn't dominant. Your player is also successful, but he is also more flawed than my player. I play and do well against many pro caliber teams on a team that is currently 19-0 in EEAAA... and your player hasn't really seemed like a difference maker even in Africa AAA, at least not against the best teams. I will still say that he is successful and a good player, but to try and put yourself on some pedestal because of your accomplishments on a meh team in Africa AAA is silly.

Originally posted by Blamo
Originally posted by UnderDogs

It's all good. Successful is cool and all. I want to dominate. I understand your point of view completely. But there is no sense getting pissy about tackling. Like I said MY S.S. only has 44 tackling and I am perfectly happy with him. He plays on power tackling every game. YES. every single game.

You're the one telling me I'm wrong and that's why nobody listens to me... When it turns out that people are listening to me, and that I'm probably right. Furthermore, your player isn't dominant. Your player is also successful, but he is also more flawed than my player. I play and do well against many pro caliber teams on a team that is currently 19-0 in EEAAA... and your player hasn't really seemed like a difference maker even in Africa AAA, at least not against the best teams. I will still say that he is successful and a good player, but to try and put yourself on some pedestal because of your accomplishments on a meh team in Africa AAA is silly.

lol you're in EEAAA and insulting other leagues? It's widely known that EEAAA is pretty bad too.

Last season you had 46 tackles and 3 tackle for losses. Wow, you are awesome! you missed 5% of your tackles, in which I am sure you play on wrap up. your guy is not very successful even. I think he has way too much tackling. No sacks, No hurries. And you're talking about my guy being MEH? Your linebacker has been meh, his whole career. he will probably continue to be meh. Until you retire him. Here's to tackling folks! *raises glass*



http://goallineblitz.com/game/full_player_stats.pl?player_id=511505&playoffs=0 STR? plays on power tackling every game.

or tackling? http://goallineblitz.com/game/full_player_stats.pl?player_id=131569&playoffs=0 probably plays on wrap up every game.

I will let the general public decide from this. good day Blamo.

Originally posted by UnderDogs

I will let the general public decide from this. good day Blamo.

How'd that power tackling work for you in the playoffs?