|
|
Post by Pat Hoglund on Aug 19, 2020 12:35:12 GMT
All teams must have a valid roster before the league can start. In order to field a valid roster for the computer game you must have the personnel to field players in every formation.
This includes the defensive formations:
5-6 (2 DE's 3 DT's)
3-4 (2 ILB's)
3-3-5/4-2-5 (5 DB's)
3-2-6/4-1-6 (6 DB's)
And the Offensive formations:
BB with a FB(2 FB's/BB's)
2TE 2WR(2 TE's)
3 WR(3 WR's)
4 WR (4WR's)
Special Teams
1 Kicker
1 Punter
1/2 Kick Returner (2 if your player isn't a #1 returner)
1/2 Punt Returner (2 if your player isn't a #1 returner)
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Aug 19, 2020 14:35:25 GMT
I mentioned this to Pat before and am in favor of the idea. I know it's not the perfect scenario, but it will help so all the proper available formations can be used without issue or depth chart error. NC players are nothing more than roster fillers. They are not available to be used by the PC game. OFM allows them to be used kind of like the generic. Other than FB's I don't believe any other position has a shortage of players. If a team only had one FB and they became injured, the game would still allow for the formation to be used but the injured FB could not run or catch a pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 19, 2020 16:29:07 GMT
Thank you for explaining where the numbers come from.
I believe the PC game already compensates for returners. Peterson was always the Giants #2 returner despite only being listed as a HB.
In regards to FBs, you are correct, there are only 18 in the set. I assume the BB with a FB set requires a true FB? How did that work this past season?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 28, 2020 2:06:21 GMT
Tony, Check out the 2019 Chicago Bears. Adam Shaheen is not rated as a Fullback, but is able to play Fullback in the Blocking Back 1 FB Formation. Not sure why it works, but it works.
|
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 28, 2020 19:10:21 GMT
Tony, Check out the 2019 Chicago Bears. Adam Shaheen is not rated as a Fullback, but is able to play Fullback in the Blocking Back 1 FB Formation. Not sure why it works, but it works. Thank you. Your post led me to test some things out. The computer game will let any "back" play fullback. Halfback, blocking back, and fullback are all eligible to play fullback even if they do not have a run card. This is important because it means a rule we have debated over the last few years is actually instituted in the computer game. If you want to run an offense with 2 halfbacks in the backfield, you can. Select San Francisco and change the 3 WR 2 RB formation to Raheem Mostert and Matt Brieda (both are rated solely as HBs) and the game will not only allow you to call one the FB, it also continues to utilize that player's HB card in the FB position. The roster minimum for the computer is not 2 FB/BB and 2 HB, it is 2 HB/FB plus 1 HB/FB/BB. A blocking back only may play FB in a full house, but may not play HB or RB. |
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 28, 2020 19:16:11 GMT
This is apparently the loose substitution rule. We have to play with loose substitutions due to our linemen, linebackers, and safeties. Loose substitutions also allows you to play lineups we (OFM) have not allowed (but are seen in the NFL).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Aug 28, 2020 23:43:22 GMT
Tony -- please be aware that our rules and the Strat rules allow for any back rated as a 4 run block to play the position of blocking back. There are a number of players in this set that are HBs that have a run block rating of 4. These players will be allowed to play the Blocking Back position (at a reduced run block rating per Strat rules). "Blocking Backs" cannot run the football--but they can catch it utilizing the players card.
You can review the rules on your hard drive when you downloaded the game. There is a pdf named "Football Rules."
|
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 29, 2020 0:44:28 GMT
Yes, I am aware of that, but I am not sure how that would make the computer minimum be 4 for those two "groups" of positions. It should still be 3.
And my post where I said Adrian Peterson was my #2 KOR for the Giants last year was deleted [edit: nevermind a different post was deleted]. You do not need 2 KORs if your player is not a #1. The game allows for someone not rated to play KOR for some reason as well. My only goal here with minimums is to ensure no one drafts a player that they *think* they have to in order to meet a minimum when really they do not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jets and Chargers on Aug 30, 2020 14:42:45 GMT
Yes, I am aware of that, but I am not sure how that would make the computer minimum be 4 for those two "groups" of positions. It should still be 3. And my post where I said Adrian Peterson was my #2 KOR for the Giants last year was deleted [edit: nevermind a different post was deleted]. You do not need 2 KORs if your player is not a #1. The game allows for someone not rated to play KOR for some reason as well. My only goal here with minimums is to ensure no one drafts a player that they *think* they have to in order to meet a minimum when really they do not. We have a rule that mandates that a #2 KO/PR cannot be your only returner. These players tend to have big returns in just a few NFL opportunities (Nyheim Hines this year). If the computer will allow a non-rated player to be a returner -- fine -- but what does the return card look like? From where are the results obtained? Just something we need to work through. |
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Aug 30, 2020 16:25:50 GMT
I'm not sure that's completely accurate. It may allow you to place a player there, but I'm pretty sure it won't allow for an actual return unless they have a return card.
|
|
|
|
Post by huntleybrian8 on Aug 30, 2020 17:22:56 GMT
I have no issue with roster minimums, but I think you will have to allow any RB to play FB to allow for all formations to be used. I know this will broach the two HB in the backfield at the same time discussion which I'm OK with. It makes it a bit harder on the D because they may have to account for two runners (eye roll here) on the field at the same time. If we do this, we may also have to make adjustments or roster maximums (IE, 4 QB's)
Let the debate begin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan D (Ravens & Redskins) on Aug 30, 2020 18:55:30 GMT
I am good with whatever is easiest for Pat to manage the rosters.
|
|
|
|
Post by allday28 on Aug 31, 2020 16:48:40 GMT
f*** it, no one else cares about figuring out what the game's minimums are. Sure, I vote yes to approve whatever we are *assuming* they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 31, 2020 18:45:25 GMT
I appreciate the spirit, but until Brian, Ryan, John, Rich and especially Pat get behind this vocally and vote yes, the rest of the league will not respond to this issue. It is a problem that no one wants to address, which confuses me because it will confuse the rest of the league when their teams don't have the personnel to meet all the offensive and defensive formations required by the computer game. It can be done without changing the current OFM rules (ie: we should not be able to use two halfbacks in the same backfield unless the league votes for this change--in my opinion we can vote on this issue after the minimum roster rule is passed). There are plenty of BB/TE's to fill out the BB/FB offensive formation.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 31, 2020 20:47:02 GMT
I am in favor of the minimums that Pat recommends.
|
|
