My 2 Cents On Recruiting O-Lineman

[chrisbzn832]

A few guys have asked how to recruit lineman specific to their schemes; run blockers, pass blockers, etc..Heres what I have found; if you want good lineman of any kind, you need to go by their star rating, period. It is really the only position in the game where I have found that a mediocre player can't be used effectively in some way. The first thing I did in my first recruiting session was go through and get quality O Lineman that not only had high ratings, but also had good potential.

[Razorbacker]

You are on to something.

I haven't studied this, but I am willing to bet that OLinemen who are 5-star and an A+ for awareness will be rated higher in awareness than a 3-star with an A+ for awareness.

That doesn't make sense. A+ for awareness should be the same, right?

I think I will check this out later today...

[chrisbzn832]

I think the lineman rating are a compilation of every stat-5 star lineman w/ A+ awareness have all around better ratings; strength, speed, run blocking, and pass blocking than 3 star guys ith the same awareness. I have found that 4 and 5 star lineman end up with 90+ overall ratings by their junior and senior years. Guys under 4-5 stars probably won't end up any higher than 85 overall rating. I have even found that some 5 star guys end up with really high 90+ overall ratings by their sophmore years.

[Razorbacker]

Basically, after one recruiting season (all off-season), here's what I found:

It's pretty much a crap-shoot.

I recruited about a dozen linemen and tracked them. All had A+ field awareness. I tracked six tackles (1 *****, 3 ****, 2 ***), six guards (1 *****, 3 ****, 1 ***, 1 **) and one *** center.

At the position switch screen, I checked their ratings.

Three players (all 4 or 5 star) had awareness ratings of 68. Everyone else, except one, had 65 awareness. The one exception was a 4-star with a 72, yes 72, awareness! He was 80 overall.

I did notice one 3-star was nearly as good as a 5-star and BETTER than a 4-star:

5-star Guard 78 overall, 65 aware, 82 PBK, 87 RBK, 6-5 280, 5th ranked G
3-starTackle 76 overall, 65 aware, 90 pbk, 82 rbk, 6-8 269, 29th ranked T
4-starTackle 76 overall, 65 aware, 85 pbk, 88 rbk, 6-10 347, 20th ranked T

I thought I'd find that 4 and 5 star guys had significantly better awareness ratings than 2 and 3 star linemen... I was wrong.

[chrisbzn832]

Damn, thats friggin weird, I've never seen that. Most of the 4-5 star guys I pick up end up being between 80-85 overall as freshman. I'm playing on AA, are you on Heisman?-

[Hypocrite]

The other thing I've wondered about is how much size and weight fits into the equation. Typically I just go by strength numbers and awareness, but it only seems to make sense to me that a bigger guy (height and weight) SHOULD perform better on the field.

But does height and weight really make a difference? Maybe measureable in pancakes? I have no clue.

[chrisbzn832]

The other thing I've wondered about is how much size and weight fits into the equation. Typically I just go by strength numbers and awareness, but it only seems to make sense to me that a bigger guy (height and weight) SHOULD perform better on the field.

But does height and weight really make a difference? Maybe measureable in pancakes? I have no clue.
The big, taller guys are better at tackle, while the smaller guys are better at guard and center, at least in my experience. When you change a tackle to a guard, or vice versa, they usually lose 2-4 overall rating points. Overall, I have had big, tall, heavy lineman (6'7'' 320) with 99 overall ratings, and I have had smaller guys (6'0'', 280) guys with the same. It also depends on what you run, if you use running plays with guys pulling, speed is important.

[Razorbacker]

Damn, thats friggin weird, I've never seen that. Most of the 4-5 star guys I pick up end up being between 80-85 overall as freshman. I'm playing on AA, are you on Heisman?-

I've never seen a freshman above 84 overall and that was an athlete who was moved to safety.

I did this test on a sim dynasty I use, so I don't think difficulty matters in recruiting.

[Hypocrite]

The big, taller guys are better at tackle, while the smaller guys are better at guard and center, at least in my experience. When you change a tackle to a guard, or vice versa, they usually lose 2-4 overall rating points. Overall, I have had big, tall, heavy lineman (6'7'' 320) with 99 overall ratings, and I have had smaller guys (6'0'', 280) guys with the same. It also depends on what you run, if you use running plays with guys pulling, speed is important.

I understand what you are saying, but let me pose this scenario then and get your thoughts.

I have 2 WR's in my dynasty with nearly identical ratings. One guy is 6'7" and the other is 5'11". On screen passes, the 6'7" guy seems to break the first tackle much more frequently than the 5'11" guy even though they have identical BTK and strength numbers. So...in this case, it seems to me that the taller guy is breaking more tackles due to his size even though his BTK is not too high.

If the above is true, can't the same be said for big OL resulting in more pancakes? I don't play dynasty enough to really be able to tell this.

[chrisbzn832]

I do think that size matters on the game overall, but I don't think it relates as much to overall rating. The taller guys are better at tackle because it is assumed they have longer arms and are thus more effective against DEs and LBs in the pass rush. I just finished up a season yesterday and recruited this morning. I picked up five solid (4-5 star) offenseive lineman and they're all between 79-84 overall as freshman. However, since I ditched Boise State, signed with Florida and won a national title, I seem to get the cream of the crop in recuiting year in and year out. I get recruits that are in the top 10 at their position consistently and everybody I picked up this year (w/ the exception of walkons) were in the top 25. I have noticed that if you're playing dynasty with the schools from Florida or Texas, the talent level you pick up is incredible. The Interested Prospects seem to be of higher caliber when you're recuiting for schools in these states. I played 2003 and 2004 as Nebraska (still a five star school at the time) and the Interested Prospect talent level was noticeably lower.

[mstaple]

I've never seen a freshman above 84 overall and that was an athlete who was moved to safety.

I did this test on a sim dynasty I use, so I don't think difficulty matters in recruiting.

I actually had an athlete who was in the 80's as a freshman on the o-line but I switched him the FB and he was a whopping 91. I about crapped myself. I was like damn I'm gonna use the I and strong formations for sure with this guy.

[chrisbzn832]

I've had a few 5 star recruits end up in the 80s overall, but I have never had much success with athletes. Here's an example-
I recruited a 4 star 6'3, 190lb athlete with like 4.5 speed, a B+ arm accuracy and a B throwing power. I recruited him ( and spent a ton of points in the process) figuring he'd be a decent option QB. Nope- they stuck him at FS where he was like a 65 overall. I move him to QB and his stats jumped up to like 69 overall. So I figured, what the h*ll, he's got average potential, he'll get better with training. Didn't happen, he could never get his awareness up, so his senior year, he was only like a 74 overall.

With a B overall arm as a frosh, you'd figure he'd be a great QB.....Another EA Landmine.