Just so I understand, you guys aren't talking about changing a players position right? You are talking about playing players out of position. Cause so far there hasn't been much distinction between the two.

So I know, drafting an LB and changing his position to CB, permanently playing him at CB is still allowed right?

Correct.

Just let me know when a clear direction is laid out & a vote is being considered.

This subject has been going on for quite some time in other leagues. I'm tired of beating a dead horse.

You guys figure it out. I'll do what the majority decides.

Guys, i just win win the league title, why changing something :)) : )) :))

The reason why I don't see a big benefit from using an WR at the RB position are two fold:

1) It's more psychological than it is game breaking. Everyone wants to see their players get above 90 SP because that's become the new psychological marker after the 100 SP rating was revised and the cards show the appropriate SP for the player's weight class (best change in the game). It's also a psychological game with your opponent to have a bunch of 90 SP players that are working out of the backfield.

In some ways, 197# WRs playing RB are at a disadvantage. Weight modifies a player's strength, and strength is what is used to "push the pile". That's why a 95 SP WR may avoid a tackle, but he's going down in a head on collision. But a 243# FB running the FB dive is going to push ahead for that yard you need on 4th down most of the time.

I have considered running a team with "big backs", so finding 88 SP (I think that's max) FBs and building a team around that. But I haven't been that willing to do it. (I'm not immune to the psychological bonus of having fast players in the backfield. Also, there is a significant acceleration difference between 217 and 243 that isn't there between 217 and 197.)

2) The max speed you gain from swapping the RB to WR is 2-3 points. Unless a RB is already going to be maxed out or the WR is already maxed out, you're not going to get an actual benefit from doing this ... IF ... your opponent is running appropriately fast defenders (see this thread: https://usflwfl.myfootballnow.com/community/1/6761?page=1#41440) and game planning appropriately for fast RBs.

It's not difficult to run set defensive plays against opponents that use the 95 SP RB. It's also not difficult to play a single high or Cover 2 defense with 95+ SP defenders since all they need to do in such systems is run and "tackle".

People always used to complain about how IoT would win a lot of games with fast, but bad, defenders, but so much of it is figuring out who to play where and then figure out how to put pressure on certain plays to speed them up (HB Flare, 221 Deep Passes) or how to run blitz effectively.

Addendum: The other reason to play a WR at RB is when the player is going to be in the 85-88 SP range.

There is a big, big, big difference between these two. (See the linked thread above if you want to see the math behind this.) Since speed is parabolic, an 85 SP RB is ~5 linear points slower than an 88 SP RB. But an 88 SP RB is only ~2 linear points slower than a 90 speed RB since 88 is the inflection point in which the gap in displayed speed begins to narrow.

If you have an 85 SP RB that is a decent receiver, it's better to get the 3 point bump and make him as fast as the fastest LBs. The bonus is he can flex back and forth between positions.