Lineup: Player at out of assigned position

[PaperLions]

I’m not referring to something crazy like a QB playing DE4 or something obvious like playing a “Guard” only at either right or left Guard…..is it ok to move players to positions that my defensive/offensive lineup “suggests” in the drop down menu - for example, when selecting an OLB, the drop down menu lists any SS and FS not already in my starting lineup.

The bigger more general question I have is….is it an acceptable option to use any out of position player that is listed in the drop down menu for that position? I understand there is a performance “penalty” for starting a SS at OLB. Is it a good guideline to only start players out of position that are on the drop down menu or am I better off using a Street Free agent.

[UmmBerrto]

Good question.

To date, street free agents have performed well above the expected average.

I once thought about stripping a team and starting all SFA at every position just to see what would the outcome be.

Having said all that, Mr. Cox has been sighted as saying he plans to reduce the effectiveness of said SFA in this coming update.

So, only he could really answer the question, because he is the only one who has any idea what the actual SFA performance scale will be from now on.

Good thing is once it's all ready to go, we can run the challenge game simulations and get an idea.

[PaperLions]

Good info…..thank you.

[ddeyarman]

Yeah. And wha is really interesting is players who bounce between positions during the season, such as DT/DE, or T/G. It feels like they shouldn't be penalized, but maybe they are somewhat?

[Kevin]

Yeah. And wha is really interesting is players who bounce between positions during the season, such as DT/DE, or T/G. It feels like they shouldn't be penalized, but maybe they are somewhat?

Yeah, unfortunately that's how it works. Otherwise we would have to manually make judgments on each player. So we have to assign them to a position, and then they face a performance degradation if they play somewhere else. The good news is that we base the degradation on the position similarities. Moving a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DE or a SS to a FS isn't a huge degradation.

The challenge is the one or two guys who play really disparate positions, like Taysom Hill. We can't really reflect his performance at both positions.

[Samdarnoldsucks21]

I might suggest using pff and basing the penalties on how many snaps a player played at that position

[UmmBerrto]

I will say this.

I do not understand why you feel the need to institute penalties.

Won't the natural abilities and skills play themselves out?

For instance, a tackle playing TE.

Won't the tackle naturally be a much better blocker and a much worse receiver without any adjustments made by you?

Or a DT a poor LB with nothing adjustable by you?

What are you penalizing and why?

[Kingswood]

I will say this.

I do not understand why you feel the need to institute penalties.

Won't the natural abilities and skills play themselves out?

For instance, a tackle playing TE.

Won't the tackle naturally be a much better blocker and a much worse receiver without any adjustments made by you?

Or a DT a poor LB with nothing adjustable by you?

What are you penalizing and why?

You don't understand why a program code simulating a DT should perform worse at LB?

[UmmBerrto]

You don't understand why a program code simulating a DT should perform worse at LB?

What I am asking is, I don't see why Mr. Cox needed to add a specific penalty?

Should not the DT automatically be slower?

Should not the DT automatically be a liability in pass coverage.

Let me see if I can step away from the assumption of arrogance, because I know men look at men in assuming ways.

Let's take basic Madden ratings.

Speed is speed, it doesn't matter the position, all the speeds of all the players are on the same 0-99 scale.

Clearly a CB a LB and a DT have different speed ratings automatically.

But a CB that is a 99 in speed, is a 99 wherever he plays.

A DT that is a 65 speed is a 65 speed whenever he plays.

Subsequently a CB may be a 45 in strength
While a DT may be a 99 in strength.

So I understand why they play different at different positions.


What I am asking Mr. Cox, is why is there a separate programed penalty?

That sounds like Mr. Cox has mandated that because a player is out of position he must be penalized extra....

I may be miss understanding what is being said.



Because, on the flip side.

If the SF 49ers decided to change Trent Williams's number and play him as a TE and run what would be a six man offensive line all season.

Yes, Trent would certainly be a liability as a receiver, compared to Kittle, however, If the 9rs use him as a blocker, would not the TE position he is playing instantly become the absolute best and most dominant pass and run blocking TE in the game?

What extra penalty is there to be assessed in this situation?

I am asking, do not the numbers play out on their own?

[tophardtjr]

I 100% agree with Umberto on this