Lineup: Player at out of assigned position

[tophardtjr]

They already specified they don't do it on a player by player basis. Also safety and linebacker are not the same thing. I'm not putting Richard Sherman at LB but he's definitely been at S. It doesn't make sense to code player by player, year by year, position by position, in this format.

There are safeties turned into LB'S every year, and LB'S are turned into safeties every year it happens!

[Reggy]

I’m gonna start a punter at QB and see if he can throw more picks than Dak

[Kingswood]

In case you did not notice LB Simmons of the AZ Cardinals made the switch to CB last season.

And he was dominant.

Box safeties can definitely play LB, what do you think the 46 defense is?

The safety #46 was walked into the box to play LB while the two OLB blitzed.

Also, didn't NFL linebacker Brian Urlacher play A lot of Safety At New Mexico?

I'm just saying, if it's stats based, the stats should be the determining factor.

If one guy is a beast, and performs well above average at one position, such as Aaron Donald, he would probably play very well at another position based on effectiveness of snap count.

Is there anyone here who doesn't think AD would be a pretty good MLB? His stats would make him a pretty good MLB at best, great in the run game, great as a blitzer and trash in pass coverage, isn't that exact what AD would be as A MLB in real life?

Why would there be an added penalty needed?

JJ Watt can do it, Reggie White could do it.
The guys who had the stats to do it, did it, and the guys who did not have the stats to do it couldn't do it.

What am I missing?

Help me understand, I am not being sarcastic, I am really trying to get my mind around this particular issue.

I get it.

I'm not denying the ability for some to make the transition. I'm just saying that from what they've described they didn't go into detail with each individual. Most either play one position or another. Urlacher, Watt, Reggie White, these are the exceptions. Since Sandbox positions are based on snap count, I believe it's their way to minimize GM's taking advantage of players with overblown percentages. That being said, perhaps a snap count penalty would be better than a positional one.

[UmmBerrto]

I get it.

I'm not denying the ability for some to make the transition. I'm just saying that from what they've described they didn't go into detail with each individual. Most either play one position or another. Urlacher, Watt, Reggie White, these are the exceptions. Since Sandbox positions are based on snap count, I believe it's their way to minimize GM's taking advantage of players with overblown percentages. That being said, perhaps a snap count penalty would be better than a positional one.

From what you are saying, it's already based on Snap counts and production.

You say these great players are the exception, but that is exactly the case I am making, for those that are the exception, it should play out, and for those in the category of the norm, it should also play out.

Players can play "out of position" and the game today actually requires it for many players.

I would suggest position penalties be removed, there is no place for them in a game like this.

Leatherwood was an absolute disaster at tackle, but he was able to get hundreds of snaps at Guard for the Raiders.

He was still pretty bad as a guard, but way much better as a guard than a Tackle.

So then, why should he be penalized for playing out of position, when in reality it helped his production, as with any Tackle that moves to guard?

I remember the 90's when Dave Wannstedt would blitz his two corners and drop his two DT into zone coverage.

This game is cool and all, however, if you continue to institute unilateral position penalties, there is no real ingenuity left in the hands of the GM/HC.

At that point, it really isn't a game a chess any longer, it's a child's game of tic tac toe.

We are all left with the only option to try and do the exact same thing the other guy is trying to do.

What kind of alternative reality is that?

What's the point?

Each team is an attempt to make a carbon copy of what the program says will work and then the random program picks a winner each week.

Might as well play Tecmo Bowl.

Give the human client back the ability to build "his" team, rather than make the player figure out an acceptable combination that pleases the algorithm, which therefore pleases the programmer.

I understand that there was a lot of things that happened over the last decade, that I have no idea about to make the game we all enjoy today.

I understand that those things contributed to the changes that were made.

I understand that as the programmers, Mr. Cox/Kevin and any others, know why they've made those changes five, six, or seven years ago.

All I am saying, is that some of those changes must needs be revisited and adjusted to the realities of today, and the benefits of game play in this alternative reality.

Again, I ask, do tackles playing guard get penalized or do they get a performance boost?

Because the reality of NFL football is that a Tackle who moves inside to guard plays better as a Guard.

Does a Center who moves to Guard get penalized or does he get a boost?

Because the NFL game shows that a Center is usually a bit more athletic than a guard because he has to move quicker and usually much more intelligent, because he has to read the defense and call out blocking adjustments.

Does a DT playing DE get penalized, somehow making him a less effective run stuffer?

Justin Fields just Broke many records running the football as a QB, and his passing stats are already what they are, is the program going to reduce Justin's passing profile if he runs for a thousand yards in the sim? Because that is what happened last year with Lamar...


So again, when was the last time these position penalties were laid out for analysis?

Also, when that does happen, I would like to be involved.

Infact, many others should be involved.

"That's just my opinion, I could be wrong."

-Dennis Miller -