Washington Bombers- 2035

[Delandis]

I think that 2nd round RB pick could be a pretty solid one! The guard, Patton, and the LB Olds were also names I recognize for being on my radar. I ended up waiting and had to pick another guard (there were a lot this draft I liked!) and never really got around to the LBs.

As garion mentioned, moving T->G in their rookie years should be fine. But G->T usually comes with a big % loss of ratings. Depends on weight, though. You can guess what % that is by signing a 327-lb OG in a SP game to test it out, it'll probably be the same. After rookie seasons, any position switches start to get much more costly. At least I think that's how it works.

One thing you could do is play Mikkor at RG for the rest of his career. OTs will ask for more money than they would as OGs (since it's usually regarded as a more important position), so that's something to maybe consider too. I guess you could wait til after Ex2 in the preseason and take a look at the situation then.

In general, if a guy can get to 9 EXP at another position, I'd be fine with just playing him there without officially moving his position.

With Mikkor being a better tackle than the rookie at this point, what would be the advantage to play him at guard?

[Delandis]

So basically I want as many tackles as possible and just play them at guard without changing their positions? That's kind of lame.

[Aston]

No advantage, just throwing it out as a possibility. I mean, I guess the assumption was a guy drafted that high was meant to be a stud pass-blocking tackle and these would be ways to fit him in as one of your two Ts. But if he was meant to be a guard all the way, then he should be moved right away.

[Delandis]

No advantage, just throwing it out as a possibility. I mean, I guess the assumption was a guy drafted that high was meant to be a stud pass-blocking tackle and these would be ways to fit him in as one of your two Ts. But if he was meant to be a guard all the way, then he should be moved right away.

I drafted best available with the thought that "you can't have too many stud tackles." I think with injuries or some need for trade coming around it would be good to have a guy like this. In the meantime i was going to play him at guard but from what Garion333 is saying I should keep him at tackle but just play him at guard?

[Aston]

Oh, no, it's entirely up to you. I think it was just assumed you really wanted him to be your next tackle based on his draft position. But, because tackles are valuable, you might wait until after Ex2 for the position switch, *just in case* something disastrous happens to one of your current tackles in camp. At least, once you move the guy to G, just know that there's probably no moving back.

[Delandis]

But if I keep him at tackle but play him at guard? That keeps his tackle ratings?

[Aston]

Well, put it this way: if a T has full experience at G, or vice versa, I think you can play him out of position with no big issues. Don't quote me, though! And he keeps his original ratings.

If you want to develop a guy at G, move him to G. He will develop much faster that way.

If you want to actually change his nominal position, be aware that penalties will kick in, much more severely after rookie seasons, and especially from G to T. Sorry this is a little brief, I'm headed out atm. Does that make sense, though? He won't lose ratings except for penalties while moving positions.

[Delandis]

Well, put it this way: if a T has full experience at G, or vice versa, I think you can play him out of position with no big issues. Don't quote me, though! And he keeps his original ratings.

If you want to develop a guy at G, move him to G. He will develop much faster that way.

If you want to actually change his nominal position, be aware that penalties will kick in, much more severely after rookie seasons, and especially from G to T. Sorry this is a little brief, I'm headed out atm. Does that make sense, though? He won't lose ratings except for penalties while moving positions.

I see. So its best to keep him at his primary position and play him out of position rather than out and out move him.

[Guest]

Not exactly.

Tackle is the toughest OL position, so players at T are rated tougher. What that means is when you move a player from Tackle to a 'lesser' position you will see a player gain points.

A stud tackle playing Guard is gonna be a killer Guard. But once you move him to Guard in-game he no longer is a Tackle. Outside of experience level, once a person changes positions their bars and ratings forget they were ever at the other position.

For example, I have a SUPER fast QB I want to try at WR. Lets say he's an okay 40 rated QB. I move him to WR and the game tells me his ratings are likely to increase. Great! I move him over and his ratings end up being 45 future, but it turns out his RR and BPR are kinda chappy so he makes for a terrible receiver despite hit potential. So, I decide to move him back to QB and the game warns he'll lose ratings. I move him and suddenly he's rated 12 overall as a QB. What? He was 40 before! Well, the game doesn't 'remember' that, all it sees is you moving a kinda weak WR to QB.

The same is true of OL and any other position, though QB to WR to QB is an extreme example I don't recommend anyone doing ever. Moving a CB to S or OLB to ILB (and vice versa) is more normal.

So, once you move that T to a G, if you decide to make him a T again, the game sees you moving a player to a tougher position and says that his ratings won't change or will go down. It all depends on his height and weight, though really it's all about weight. Nuts' suggestion of moving a similarly sized T in a sp game is a good suggestion. I'm not sure what the weight requirements are for Tackles, but the info is out there somewhere.

It's entirely possible he's fine to switch between being a guard and tackle, but if he's a stud tackle I do think it's a bit of a waste to move him inside. Permanently, at least.

Hope that helps some.

[Aston]

@del, yes, but it's fine to move if the game tells you it'll be okay. It'll tell you the percentage of rating retained. Just be aware that guards don't often move to tackle at 100%, but it's up to you how mucj that matters.

I dunno about tackles rated tougher. Just tackles move to guards no problem as rookies.

edit--position switching is pretty much intuitive. The only thing that isn't is, it might make sense that you can move guys around and back at any time in their careers without issue. But actually, clicking the "Switch Position" button is a big decision that can have a significant irreversible effect on a player, whether positive or negative.

[Sharkn20]

So... Speak English Garion, don't make my life miserable...!!! What is the meanning of Kindaa Chappy??

[Guest]

Ha! New phone, that was supposed to be 'kinda crappy'.

dunno about tackles rated tougher. Just tackles move to guards no problem as rookies.

I couldn't think of a better way to put it. I'm trying to say Tackles are better athletes and players than Guards, according to the game, so when they move to Guard they get a ratings boost. Just like a Corner to Safety or Outside Backer to Inside Backer.

[Nemesis]

On the flip side of what garion said where you can essentially ruin a player, there used to be a sorta bug where you could move a LB inside and outside and turn him into a superstar because he'd "gain" ratings on both moves. Do it each week and by the end of the year, you'd have a LB gone from 16/16 to 65/65. Used to have alot of rules in place to prevent this sort of thing from happening.