IrishBearcat's Roster Breakdowns

Discussion in 'Legendary Veterans' started by IrishBearcat, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. IrishBearcat

    IrishBearcat tFC OD Commissioner

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,353
    One of my favorite parts of the game is recruiting, but IMO there is a huge component that goes with this: ROSTER BUILDING

    Perhaps you could even consider it a "recruiting style", if you will. Everyone has their own strategy. Some offer the best prospects, some offer needs, some don't believe it's really important. You're only as good as your players, and that isn't always simply landing the best talent. The best recruiters are roster-builders: they bring in the best combination of quality talent that fills their needs.

    It's sounds simple, but after looking at all the rosters I believe I've done the best job so far of creating a roster that has the least amount of holes. I will rank the best roster-builders based on all user's current team. Commits from this season won't be considered. The most important factor is the talent that is supposed to step in for the senior class who is going to graduate. If there is a huge overall drop from your current SR starter and his backup, it will hurt your ranking.

    The biggest thing you can take away from your ranking is that the higher you are, the better shape you will be in for SEASON FOUR. The lower you are, the more you will need immediate impact players from this season's recruiting class in order to preserve the quality of talent you have on your roster in S3 for S4.


    1. California (IrishBearcat): Loses 7 seniors (5 impact players), other then C, tough to find a hole on my roster

    2. Washington (Fuzzyl0gic): Loses 12 seniors (All impact players), Elite WR depth, OLB + CB + SS = Weaknesses

    3. Utah (Oshiomogho): Loses 15 seniors (14 impact players), Elite DT depth, T + C + OLB = weaknesses

    4. Arizona State (CoachRedd): Loses 15 seniors (14 impact players), Solid QB depth, HB + T + C + DT = weaknesses

    5. Arizona (BakerWildcat7): Loses 12 seniors (10 impact players), Elite T depth, G + C + OLB + CB + FS = weaknesses

    6. Oregon State (MNoffke): Loses 15 seniors (15 impact players), Elite C & DT depth, QB + T + MLB + CB + SS = Weaknesses

    7. UCLA (-Cougars-): Loses 19 seniors (18 impact players), Moderate C + CB depth, FB + WR + T + G + DE + DT + OLB + MLB + SS


    * I left PhilStyle3005 and MurkYa21 out because they haven't even had a full season to make an impact on their roster.
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2012
    • Like Like x 2
  2. BakerWildcat7

    BakerWildcat7 Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    973
    Pretty cool post bro! Very informative, how would u rank each teams position groups?
     
  3. fuzzyl0gic

    fuzzyl0gic No new friends

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    8,935
    I like this idea, and I too believe it's important to go beyond just your listed team needs each year. Holes at any position can suck and expose a big weakness...
     
  4. IrishBearcat

    IrishBearcat tFC OD Commissioner

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,353
    That would take an incredible amount of time, which I don't have. Are you offering to step up the plate?! :)

    I may rank which team has the best/1st place depth at each position. IrishBearcat's Unit Rankings or something I suppose.

    Yup, the "team needs" really only considers the # of bodies and only the QUALITY of talent slightly.
     
  5. Oshiomogho

    Oshiomogho Donnie Darko

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,310
    I have only a few min right now but how can you call WR NOT a weakness of yours? Allen Graduates and you have Clay and then who knows what. It's not that you need to recruit the position, but its a weakness. Kind of the same situation at QB. you dont need to recruit a QB, you just dont have any good ones. C is a huge weakness if you dont position change. thats one of the most important positions in this game.

    as for me in my 3-4, I only need one beast of a DT and Banks is going to be that guy for the next three years. and my Oline is young but filled with doubt and questions. LBs are my biggest Weakness tho considering there is a good chance I lose all 4 starters and the best of the backups are 70 and 67 OVR

    In my "weakness" at DT compared to your roster...
    My DTs next year sit at 82 JR and 81 FR
    your DTs sit at 82 JR and 79 SO and you run a 2 DT front

    Your team is filled with weaknesses, you just are too young right now to care I think. In a season or 2 from now, you should have a great roster but so should almost everyone

    /and thats my 2 cents for the time. maybe ill look deeper into more teams later/
     
  6. IrishBearcat

    IrishBearcat tFC OD Commissioner

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,353
    EAAAAASY.

    Read what I wrote above, your ranking is hurt if you have a unit that will drop sharply in overall quality from year to year. It's not a side by side comparison of who has the best talent. Perhaps you lack understanding of what I wrote above or perhaps I didn't explain it well enough.

    I have one Senior WR, Allen, who is 87 overall. My current returning WRs are 83, 77, 76, & 73 overall respectively.

    When doing these, I assume all positions will progress an average of 4 overall points. With Allen gone, my receivers in S4 would be projected as 87, 81, 80, & 77 overall respectively.

    S3: 87, 77, 76, 73
    S4: 87, 81, 80, 77

    S4 my WRs will be improved. It's not a depth weakness because the group overall improves, and has solid ratings.

    As for DT's, once again, you're cross comparing rosters and not considering progression. Remember, as I noted above, the rankings are given assuming no other recruits are going to be signed. They only include the current players on the roster.

    Cal's DTs: 82, 79, 72, 69
    Utah's DTs: 90 (SR), 84 (SR), 82, 81, 71

    Now, S4 progression...

    Cal's DTs: 86, 83, 75, 73
    Utah's DTs: 86, 85, 76

    You DT's were tabbed as a slight weakness since your depth goes from 4 quality bodies to 2 quality and 1 solid body on the roster, and there is a slight dropoff in talent. As I stated, a "weakness" is considered a drop in talent from S3 to S4. I return all my DT's and the unit improves as a whole.

    Hopefully that helps you understand a little better. It's not perfect, and my opinion. I'm glad it's sparking some discussion! :)
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2012
  7. -Cougars-

    -Cougars- Walk On

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2010
    Messages:
    4,129
    I'm excited about the corners I picked up on the trail this week. Especially Kennard Jack. His man coverage is outstanding. UCLA will have a shutdown defense in the future. In my opinion.
     
  8. Oshiomogho

    Oshiomogho Donnie Darko

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,310
    I was in a hurry. I only skimmed the reading. Im still saying you have weaknesses :p
     
  9. IrishBearcat

    IrishBearcat tFC OD Commissioner

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,353
    Weaknesses above are defined as drop in talent and/or depth. I think C is the only position where that occurs on my roster. My team doesn't have the most talent, but it will definitely have the best depth, lose the least amount of players, and improve the most in overall talent from S3-S4.
     
  10. Oshiomogho

    Oshiomogho Donnie Darko

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2011
    Messages:
    1,310
    Improving from a 70 to an 80 is still not better then going from 89 to 90
    (not saying your team is that bad, just saying its still not the best team in the conference)

    but still, my defense will be horrific next season. Im looking forward to 70-60 games all year
     
  11. IrishBearcat

    IrishBearcat tFC OD Commissioner

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,353
    Again, I'm not saying my team is the best in the conference. I'm saying it has the best quality depth & will experience the lowest dropoff in terms of talent CHANGE.
     

Share This Page