Warrior General Games

pls and thanks

Nobody knows the exact number except bort. I'd imagine it be more than the minimal difference so probably 10 to 20 percent.

Originally posted by Robbnva
Nobody knows the exact number except bort. I'd imagine it be more than the minimal difference so probably 10 to 20 percent.

Just wanted an estimate. 10-20% is manageable.

Originally posted by Robbnva
Nobody knows the exact number except bort. I'd imagine it be more than the minimal difference so probably 10 to 20 percent.

my guess is 10% max. could be 5% or 10%. 20% seems high-both based on logic and past performance of TEs as 4th and 5th WRs. Played a couple seasons with a scat FB as 5th WR and even then didn't seem like 20%.

Originally posted by fogie55
my guess is 10% max. could be 5% or 10%. 20% seems high-both based on logic and past performance of TEs as 4th and 5th WRs. Played a couple seasons with a scat FB as 5th WR and even then didn't seem like 20%.

Agree completely!

Originally posted by fogie55
my guess is 10% max. could be 5% or 10%. 20% seems high-both based on logic and past performance of TEs as 4th and 5th WRs. Played a couple seasons with a scat FB as 5th WR and even then didn't seem like 20%.

ok cool thanks.

I thought the agree upon number was 5%, since the difference between a WR and TE shouldn't be a big deal. NFL does it all the time. How many times did the Colts line up Dallas Clark at WR?

Originally posted by ReMeDy
I thought the agree upon number was 5%, since the difference between a WR and TE shouldn't be a big deal. NFL does it all the time. How many times did the Colts line up Dallas Clark at WR?

No one knows 100% what the number is so there can't be an "agreed upon number" per say but based on performance it is assumed it is around 5% to 10% being max.

If it helps I agree mostly with the "more than 5% and less than 10%" mantra. FB's are the closest interchangeable position to TE's... with WR's being second on that list... probably tied with O-linemen. If that's true then a FB would be around the 5% and the WR would be closer to 6-7%.

Its unnoticable to the naked eye thats for sure.
we have used WRs at TE since they invented the TE custom slot.
3% penalty, at the very most, would be my guess. probably closer to 0.

wait, WR playing TE, or TE playing WR?
if its the former, the OOPP must be basically zero.

as for the former, have mainly tried it at the WR4, WR5 slots
never noticed any affect either. can't possibly be more than 5% for that...

I remember someone posting results from the speed script showing a noticeable difference in speed. More than 5%

I remember a GLB radio show that had Catch22 and Bort on. Was like maybe 9 seasons ago?

Anyways, they said on that show that the TE at WR OOPP was pretty low (no they did not give exact numbers). All the rage in chat for rest of the show was how no one was ever gonna build WR's anymore because TE's are much cheaper and just about as good.

WR in TE slot is teh suck.

Originally posted by Baustin
WR in TE slot is teh suck.

Not for my team it hasn't. Most of our 3rd down completions for first downs have gone to a WR in the TE slot.