It's still possible, but not likely that we will not be breaking them down this year into the detailed, DE, DT, ILB, OLB, S, CB -- there really is way too much ambiguity in deciphering DEs from DTs in certain systems, ILB and OLB in certain systems; S and CB is really the only non-vague thing you can branch out with almost 100% certainty.
It's something we will revisit around June though when minicamps open and there is more certainty with schemes that teams run. I definitely wouldn't rule it out. But if it does happen, our staff would like to sway away from the dual eligibilities; for instance Lawrence Timmons of the Steelers has played some OLB when Harrison or Woodley was hurt, how would we denote him? He did spend many games starting at OLB, but is definitely their starting ILB and an NFL ILB by nature. Our staff would probably give him eligibility at ILB (the IDP he's starting out the season at and not change it until the next year). It's quite difficult here and also difficult with DEs in 3-4 schemes that move to a 4-3 team and would play NT.
We're going to look at all our options here and revisit it in the summer. It's too early now with the uncertainty of player movement and certain schemes teams are running. We'll know more in June though and keep you updated.
I don't know that you need to break LB down into OLB and ILB. It would obviously be an asset to bring in more leagues and players. DE and DT shouldn't be too hard to break down, though. You may get a player or two wrong, but the reward certainly outweighs the risk in this regard. There are a large number of IDP players who will not play on Flea because of the limited nature of Flea's IDP setup. When in doubt, the rule should be to use the team's official depth chart.
scotto1959Fri 4/13/12 11:29 AM
Anything on adding pos.?
FleaMod AdminFri 4/13/12 1:42 PM
It's still possible, but not likely that we will not be breaking them down this year into the detailed, DE, DT, ILB, OLB, S, CB -- there really is way too much ambiguity in deciphering DEs from DTs in certain systems, ILB and OLB in certain systems; S and CB is really the only non-vague thing you can branch out with almost 100% certainty.
It's something we will revisit around June though when minicamps open and there is more certainty with schemes that teams run. I definitely wouldn't rule it out. But if it does happen, our staff would like to sway away from the dual eligibilities; for instance Lawrence Timmons of the Steelers has played some OLB when Harrison or Woodley was hurt, how would we denote him? He did spend many games starting at OLB, but is definitely their starting ILB and an NFL ILB by nature. Our staff would probably give him eligibility at ILB (the IDP he's starting out the season at and not change it until the next year). It's quite difficult here and also difficult with DEs in 3-4 schemes that move to a 4-3 team and would play NT.
We're going to look at all our options here and revisit it in the summer. It's too early now with the uncertainty of player movement and certain schemes teams are running. We'll know more in June though and keep you updated.
rangerdaveFri 4/13/12 5:25 PM
I don't know that you need to break LB down into OLB and ILB. It would obviously be an asset to bring in more leagues and players. DE and DT shouldn't be too hard to break down, though. You may get a player or two wrong, but the reward certainly outweighs the risk in this regard. There are a large number of IDP players who will not play on Flea because of the limited nature of Flea's IDP setup. When in doubt, the rule should be to use the team's official depth chart.