Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

General discussion and team advice concerning IDP Leagues.
User avatar
bruiser
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3158
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:37 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby bruiser » Sun May 14, 2017 7:30 am

Agreed. [wait what? did I just type that?]
Just a guy who loves fantasy football - specifically defense.

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Sun May 14, 2017 10:14 am

breeze wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 5:55 am
If you want the EDGE linebacker to simply have more flexibility in positions then this is something you should work to do with your commish and leaguemates.

It's irrational to think multiple sites will spend a large amount of time to make custom settings that so few people want. Also where does it end? Making edge linebacker is now making sub-categories to a position which is done nowhere else in FF. Do you also was Power/3rd-down RB, outside/slot WR and blocking/move TE designations?

I still think this is all stemmed from people being upset that they have OLBs on their team and they want to play them at DL. The argument of "I want 3-4 OLB to be valuable as they are in real life" has a lot of holes in it. I've never once heard of someone say something like "MFL should make separate SS/FS designations so FS have as much IDP value as real value". Earl Thomas the last decade has been an All-Pro safety, in discussion of top 5 player in the entire league but his IDP value is nowhere near and why is that? He plays a position that isn't as valuable as a in-the-box strong safety.

So why do people care so much about 3-4 OLB but not positions like CB (in non CB required), NT and FS? It's obvious to me.

Regardless what you want to admit, if you want an extremely complicated league with a million position designations and something not like any other leagues then you need to put in the work. Making FF more complex and confusing is the last thing anybody wants to do to grow in popularity.
I think you're grossly understating the "problem" with pass-rushing OLBs. Any new IDP player struggle to understand why pass-rushing OLBs have little value in most leagues when they are pretty much THE most important and valuable defensive position in real life NFL. Comparing them to power backs, slot WRs and blocking TEs is quite silly when those guys are typically drafted late or picked up off the street whereas a top pass-rusher can easily go in the top 5.

IDP would be better and more easily accessible for new players if the value of pass-rushing OLBs made more sense. You seem to think that making any changes here will make IDP less mainstream, I believe the opposite; I think IDP would be more popular if our game did a better job of accurately reflecting game performance and real life impact.

FS and SS hardly exist any longer the way they did 10 years ago so it's kind of a pointless argument, but I would love for the more centerfield safeties and CBs to be more valuable in IDP. The problem with those roles/positions is, like you very well know, that the available statistics to properly evaluate their on-field performance is lacking. Tackles, INTs and passes defended is more a sign of targets rather than skill. We'll probably have to wait until more advanced stats to measure cover skills become a real-time thing before we can give CBs and FS their proper value. This is not the case with pass-rushing OLBs; with tackles, sacks, ff/fr, safeties and QB hits the stats give a pretty good picture of a pass-rushing OLBs game performance and impact. So why not make them a more important part of IDP?

It's similar to DT premium. DTs have very little value when bunched together with DE so we single them out and use premium scoring. We have pretty much the exact same scenario with edge linebackers so why not single them out and fine-tune their scoring so it can be truly balanced versus DEs and ILB/MLB/WLBs? Right now we have to drastically increase the LB sack and big play scoring or depress the LB tackle scoring for them to compete with inside linebackers which kind of works...but it's definitely not ideal. It would be a much better solution to have them score like DEs but perhaps with less of a tackle premium in order to balance the scoring vs DEs, and have a way to set starting position requirements which is a very important factor in order to create position value and adjust for position scarcity.

I hardly have a single pass-rushing OLB on my team so your assumption that everyone that is arguing for edge LBs have teams stacked with OLBs is quite narrow-minded, to be honest. Are you against edge LB because you don't have any on your roster? Neither do I, but believe it or not; there are plenty of us that can look outside of our own rosters and selfish interests and rather focus on trying to find ways to make this game better. I love IDP and I've pretty much stopped playing in leagues without IDP, but let's not pretend that this game is without any flaws...

To me it is about adjusting to the way the game is evolving. Nickel is clearly already the new base and the forecast is quite clear; we seem to be moving towards small nickel and dime being the new base formations, in college they're already there. So we can start adjusting the way we play IDP and prepare for the future or we can keep using the same old system that is out of touch with how the game is evolving.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)

User avatar
Death_From_Above
Role Player
Role Player
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:46 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Death_From_Above » Sun May 14, 2017 2:15 pm

breeze wrote:
Fri May 12, 2017 11:43 am
Everyone is upset with Mack being a LB and not giving any thought on how something like this effects IDP.

Making an EDGE position not only is a blurry designation but it essentially doubles the DL pool therefore taking away value of all true DL. Double the supply mean way less demand. Not to mention 3-4 OLB play in coverage much more than 4-3 DEs so they get more tackles and rack up more tackles.

In PPG, only JPP and Wake scored more than Nick Perry and Markus Golden in 2016. In PPG, only 11 DL scored more than Shane Ray last year.

You are increasing the value of 3-4 OL but the damage you are doing is much greater. Making an EDGE decreases all elite DL values significantly and makes DL2/3 practically useless. Bud Dupree, Whitney Mercilus and Dee Ford are now superior assets to guys like Fletcher Cox, Cam Jordan and Leonard Williams.

All the EDGE position is going to do is kill the DL (pass rusher) position as a whole. Doubling the player pool of any position is a disastrous idea.

This is scary similar to changing RB to "Guy that sometimes carries the ball" and it will include all QBs that run over 150 per year as well. You essentially give massive value to guys that didn't have it before while significantly decreasing players that did and increasing supply without changing demand.

I cannot stress how much this is a bad idea for IDP. We need to look at all the factors, not just "I have Khalil Mack and his value went down. I want whatever is best for me!"
:clap: :clap: :clap:
I failed to explain it to my leaguemates as well as this. Will be using this argument/point as a reference if this talk re-surfaces. Bravo

User avatar
FiremanEd
Legend
Legend
Posts: 6296
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 12:51 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby FiremanEd » Sun May 14, 2017 4:22 pm

Oslo Oildrillers wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 10:14 am
This is not the case with pass-rushing OLBs; with tackles, sacks, ff/fr, safeties and QB hits the stats give a pretty good picture of a pass-rushing OLBs game performance and impact. So why not make them a more important part of IDP?
Back to previous responses, and the statement you made yourself, why not make these accurately refelect the OLBs game importance and impact? You seem to be blindly going over this piece. If you give fair point totals to things like QB Hits and TFL, you're giving the added value to LBs that rush the passer. You create the better equality your speaking about. It is a simple adjustment. Both Bruiser and I have stated this, and have leagues where pass rush LBs have the value you speak of relative to the Paul Worrilows of the world, but you seem bent on another method to address it. You feel others need to broaden their scope to reach where you have gone, but the fact is that many of us have actually addressed the issue you're speaking to...you just seem to want it done in a different method. The concept you want is 100% correct in that pass rush should be valued accordingly. Simple tackle based IDP scoring is silly...so don't use it and use all the scoring methods available today to address it.

And to be clear, I am in no way AGAINST additional classifications that provide the flexibility, as I don't really see any downside to this. I just want to be clear that the issue can be addressed with better league setup and scoring and doesn't require a wholesale change to reach the desired destination.

Howat
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:22 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Howat » Mon May 15, 2017 2:57 am

FiremanEd wrote:
Fri May 12, 2017 9:04 pm
Sounds like a terrible idea. Von clearly does not play DE.
Last year Von Miller had an amazing season but the year before he was streaky at best while still being considered one of the best defensive players in the game. When you watch him on passing downs (nickel) he always has his hand in the dirt and with the Nickel being played over fifty percent of the time for the last few years. I believe every teams base defence is the nickel.

Howat
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:22 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Howat » Mon May 15, 2017 3:00 am

Why change anything but the base defence to nickel? It seems so simple.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnm86bN ... e=youtu.be

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Mon May 15, 2017 3:09 am

FiremanEd wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 4:22 pm
Oslo Oildrillers wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 10:14 am
This is not the case with pass-rushing OLBs; with tackles, sacks, ff/fr, safeties and QB hits the stats give a pretty good picture of a pass-rushing OLBs game performance and impact. So why not make them a more important part of IDP?
Back to previous responses, and the statement you made yourself, why not make these accurately refelect the OLBs game importance and impact? You seem to be blindly going over this piece. If you give fair point totals to things like QB Hits and TFL, you're giving the added value to LBs that rush the passer. You create the better equality your speaking about. It is a simple adjustment. Both Bruiser and I have stated this, and have leagues where pass rush LBs have the value you speak of relative to the Paul Worrilows of the world, but you seem bent on another method to address it. You feel others need to broaden their scope to reach where you have gone, but the fact is that many of us have actually addressed the issue you're speaking to...you just seem to want it done in a different method. The concept you want is 100% correct in that pass rush should be valued accordingly. Simple tackle based IDP scoring is silly...so don't use it and use all the scoring methods available today to address it.

And to be clear, I am in no way AGAINST additional classifications that provide the flexibility, as I don't really see any downside to this. I just want to be clear that the issue can be addressed with better league setup and scoring and doesn't require a wholesale change to reach the desired destination.
Yeah, I agree that there is a way to work the current system and achieve a decent result. QB sacks, hits and TFLs can do a fairly good job at leveling out the playing field, but I still have issues with that solution:

- The current system we have gives limited control in how to handle pass-rushing OLBs since you can't use starting position requirements as effectively as you could if pass-rushing OLBs were it's own position. I guess it depends if you're an owner that prefers flexibility or if you prefer more rigid position requirements. If you prefer position flexibility (like those leagues that are start 1-5 LB) it doesn't really matter, but to me starting position requirements is a very important component in creating position value and account for position scarcity. If you have mandatory start 1 or start 2 pass-rushing OLBs that creates a totally different situation, and a totally different market, than simply balancing scoring and grouping them together with ILBs.

- It is illogical that we are bunching these pass-rushers together with ILB, MLB and run-and-chase WLBs since they play completely different roles. Balancing scoring for all LBs is pretty close to balancing DE and LB scoring and putting them all in the same position group. We're used to it, so it's normal to us, but it doesn't really make any sense. It's more than just a position sub-category. The role of pass-rushing OLBs and how they line up is pretty much the same as a 4-3 DE in nickel and dime which are the new base formations, but we're comparing them to ILBs...?

- In most big play leagues I have been in the result of balancing the scoring of LBs creates a situation with very high weekly variance since you have to excessively pump up the big play stats or depress the tackle scoring. This is a matter of preference, I'm sure many people like the way pass-rushing OLBs can have 3 pts one week and 38 pts the next week, but I would prefer if the scoring was handled more similarly to DE; that part of the premium scoring is big play but part of the premium scoring comes through tackle premiums. I like inside LBs being the engine of your team with high scoring for tackles so I don't want to depress the tackle scoring, but I also like how an elite pass-rusher will give you a weekly advantage over a team that chooses to focus their team in other areas. In the end I'm looking for more ways to win, more avenues to create an advantage, more ways for the late rookie draft rounds to matter. That's why I like DT premium, TE premium, start 2RB and rigid starting position requirements. When positions become less important and you don't have to invest in them they become boring and neglectable.

- Maybe you have the perfect scoring system, but pretty much 90% of IDP leagues out there don't value pass-rushing OLBs adequately. Is it realistic that big play scoring will ever catch up? I doubt that unless we separate pass-rushing OLBs into it's own category.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)

breeze
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4380
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby breeze » Mon May 15, 2017 4:34 am

So say EDGE Linebacker is made as a separate position "to value OLB accordingly" (which I don't agree with but will for the sake of hypothetical situations) and is a separate lineup requirement. Now your league starts two DE and two EDGE Linebacker.

What's gunna happen when a team switches from a 3-4 to a 4-3 and your prized Edge Linebacker turns into a DE?

More whining! And people will argue exactly the opposite of they are now. Currently it's "not fair"" that OLB can't be used as DE and in this situation it would be that their OLB has now moved to DE.

As for Nickel package being the new designation, go watch Chandler Jones in ARI and try to tell me he plays DE in nickel with a straight face. He doesn't. He is a clear OLB. He's way off the end of the line and sometimes head up on slot WRs. Using Nickel sounds good but also is blurry and it's not capable of implementing this into existing Dyno leagues.

Big play scoring is clearly the answer. My leagues are big play. Starting rush LB have risk because they can give you a donut but also have huge weeks. The top scoring LBs the past half decade each year in my league have been Von Miller, Kuechly, Bowman and Justin Houston. It's no different than starting a WR like DJax (that has a huge weekly ceiling but low floor) compared to a target hog with less big play potential like Crabtree.

Making more position categories will only cause more problems. Everyone wants a simple fix all solution but their isn't one, especially in already established dynasty leagues.
Twitter: @BreezeIDP

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Mon May 15, 2017 5:05 am

breeze wrote:
Mon May 15, 2017 4:34 am
So say EDGE Linebacker is made as a separate position "to value OLB accordingly" (which I don't agree with but will for the sake of hypothetical situations) and is a separate lineup requirement. Now your league starts two DE and two EDGE Linebacker.

What's gunna happen when a team switches from a 3-4 to a 4-3 and your prized Edge Linebacker turns into a DE?

More whining! And people will argue exactly the opposite of they are now. Currently it's "not fair"" that OLB can't be used as DE and in this situation it would be that their OLB has now moved to DE.
Well, in this case the prized edge linebacker would turn into a prized DE, which would be a lot better than a prized DE turning into a much less valuable inside linebacker as is the case in most leagues today.

Another potential way of handling that would be to start 3 or 4 FLEX DE/ELB with tiered scoring so that DEs have a slight premium over ELBs. That way the player would still be used in the same spot even if he changed from DE to ELB, but his scoring would be dropped slightly since he as an ELB would (supposedly) play wider and drop down in coverage more. I think this would be a hell of a lot better than the damage we see today when players like Robert Quinn or Jerry Hughes change positions.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)

hoffballs
Combine Attendee
Combine Attendee
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:12 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby hoffballs » Mon May 15, 2017 5:16 am

Big Play is a helpful solution agree.

Aesthetically this is going to be a better modern day setup: DL, EDGE, LB

DT, DE, LB is an unbalanced way to divide these players. There are WAY too many LBs in the MFL database and not enough DTs and DEs.

Why not take a more modern approach that other sites are adopting? DL, EDGE LB balances the positions better and also groups the most important position, the pass rushers, together.

There are already sites adopting this as the norm. Check out how 3sigmaathlete.com groups players. This is highly rational.

breeze
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4380
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby breeze » Mon May 15, 2017 5:35 am

I don't know how else I can say this is not a good idea. I've said it, many have agreed but the few that want it ignore and just keep beating their same drum. None of these solutions are realstic to be the norm, all of them create more blurriness and none can be implemented into existing leagues.

There will ALWAYS be a debate between IDP positions regardless what positions you use because there are so many versatile players in this league. Some guys play both inside and outside, will they be EDGE or DL in your suggested solution? Nothing is perfect.

If you want to make a highly custom league with many position variants go ahead and do so, but to expect a site to do it is unrealistic.

Do you really think ESPN added EDGE position with the mindset of "let's make IDP better" or just "let's stop whining of casual fans because we don't care if people actually enjoy IDP that much, we just want as many people playing as possible"? It's the Call of Duty mindset once that series took off 6-7 years ago, numbers of sold copies is way more important to them than quality of product
Twitter: @BreezeIDP

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Mon May 15, 2017 5:36 am

hoffballs wrote:
Mon May 15, 2017 5:16 am
Big Play is a helpful solution agree.

Aesthetically this is going to be a better modern day setup: DL, EDGE, LB

DT, DE, LB is an unbalanced way to divide these players. There are WAY too many LBs in the MFL database and not enough DTs and DEs.

Why not take a more modern approach that other sites are adopting? DL, EDGE LB balances the positions better and also groups the most important position, the pass rushers, together.

There are already sites adopting this as the norm. Check out how 3sigmaathlete.com groups players. This is highly rational.
I totally agree with the rationality part; grouping ELB and DE together makes much more sense.

The challenge with doing that is that you devalue DEs by increasing the player pool quite massively which is a problem unless you expand the starting position requirements. I'm in a league that manually re-designate ELBs to DE, but this league only starts 3 DL which means that DTs have absolutely no value except for the top 3 players or so who are low end starters. DEs lose a lot of value, and ELBs become preferred starters. It also creates more value for regular LBs since the LB3-6 range become much thinner.

However, if you counter the larger EDGE/DE pool by increasing the starting position requirements you would counter that effect somewhat; e.g. if you start 1 DT and 4 EDGE or something. But then the losing part would be 3-4 DEs which is why I'm leaning more towards separating ELB out in it's own category - so the DEs maintain their current value.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Mon May 15, 2017 5:43 am

breeze wrote:
Mon May 15, 2017 5:35 am
I don't know how else I can say this is not a good idea. I've said it, many have agreed but the few that want it ignore and just keep beating their same drum. None of these solutions are realstic to be the norm, all of them create more blurriness and none can be implemented into existing leagues.

There will ALWAYS be a debate between IDP positions regardless what positions you use because there are so many versatile players in this league. Some guys play both inside and outside, will they be EDGE or DL in your suggested solution? Nothing is perfect.

If you want to make a highly custom league with many position variants go ahead and do so, but to expect a site to do it is unrealistic.

Do you really think ESPN added EDGE position with the mindset of "let's make IDP better" or just "let's stop whining of casual fans because we don't care if people actually enjoy IDP that much, we just want as many people playing as possible"? It's the Call of Duty mindset once that series took off 6-7 years ago, numbers of sold copies is way more important to them than quality of product
DL-DT
DL-DE
LB-ELB
LB-LB
DB-CB
DB-S

This isn't unrealistic or blurry. It's quite basic and there is ZERO downside in implementing such a change. Leagues that would want to keep bunching ELBs together with LB could do so, leagues that wants to bunch them together with DE could do so, and leagues that wanted to separate them out in its own starting position could do so.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)

breeze
Hall of Fame
Hall of Fame
Posts: 4380
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby breeze » Mon May 15, 2017 5:52 am

Is Jamie Collins an Edge Linebacker or regular Linebacker? What about Dont'a Hightower. What about Beasley, he technically plays in a 4-3 not a 3-4 so is ELB just all 3-4 OLB? There will always be tweener players that people fight over.

If it's so simple then it can be done league by league by the commish. Make people set correct lineups with rush backers and regular backers. Simple things when implementing site wide aren't so simple. The complexity that goes into getting things done as is as accurate as possible is immense. A lot of hard work goes into MFL. If you want something custom, doing a little work yourself isn't too much to ask for.
Twitter: @BreezeIDP

User avatar
Oslo Oildrillers
Practice Squad
Practice Squad
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun May 18, 2014 3:16 am

Re: Petition Rotoworld/MFL For an EDGE Position IDP

Postby Oslo Oildrillers » Mon May 15, 2017 6:19 am

breeze wrote:
Mon May 15, 2017 5:52 am
Is Jamie Collins an Edge Linebacker or regular Linebacker? What about Dont'a Hightower. What about Beasley, he technically plays in a 4-3 not a 3-4 so is ELB just all 3-4 OLB? There will always be tweener players that people fight over.

If it's so simple then it can be done league by league by the commish. Make people set correct lineups with rush backers and regular backers. Simple things when implementing site wide aren't so simple. The complexity that goes into getting things done as is as accurate as possible is immense. A lot of hard work goes into MFL. If you want something custom, doing a little work yourself isn't too much to ask for.
How they are being utilized is way more important than the position designation and formation. Jamie Collins plays more than half his snaps dropping down in coverage and only rushes on 13% of his snaps, and Hightower rushes about the same percentage of snaps as Benardrick McKinney, they are both pretty easy LBs to me. Vic Beasley rushes on 71% of his snaps so he is a clear ELB.

But sure, there's always going to be a couple tweener types that would have a case for both ELB and LB, but we're talking about a pretty marginal problem.
Zealots 2 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots 43 (10-3)
Zealots DEV-1 (8-5, 2016 champion)
Zealots REL-1 (13-1)
Paragon Pigskin (10-4)
Paragon Doppelgänger (2-11)
Paragon Blue Chip (6-7)
Paragon Divide et Impera
Paragon Go Deep
Backyard Brawl IDP (11-2, 2016 champion)
Black (10-3, 2016 champion)
The Dark Arts Dynasty League
The Singularity
Blue Label (5-8)
The Bull Horn Super Flex
Gangland (7-5)


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: killer_of_giants and 1 guest