Originally posted by Cybertron
That’s pretty good. Can’t go to high because you need the SPs for other skills too. Although I would go about 10 or 15 higher in quickness than in sprinting, as accelerating is more important than sprinting.
This was my concern. That sprinting gets really, really expensive when you start looking at all the bases you have to cover. And with how many potentially awesome other SAs exist (ie Wide Load would neuter unblocked LBs on blitzes), it kinda makes me want to find a team that schemes around mostly inside or off-tackle runs and uses chip-blocking WRs and a S* FB dot instead when going outside.
Originally posted by atlbruce
With 40, this guy is 20 yards downfield on outside runs making plays in the secondary.
1. Would the need for that (or benefit) be reduced if you didn't have a +90 sprinting back?
2. For your dots, would the need for 40 sprint go for both guards and OTs? I'd assume, if anything, you'd need or want more sprinting on guards since the near-side guard is obviously further away than the nearside OT, who would probably engage a block earlier anyway--right?
For near-side OTs (I'm assuming the far-side OT is probably irrelevant in most plays because of distance), would 30 Sprinting, 45 Quickness, and maybe 70 Balance work? If I can reduce the need for such high Sprinting (by keeping balance/reducing need to slow when turning upfield) and still get the benefit of Balance on non-pulling plays, I think I'd prefer that. Is that a stupid question?
I know these are obnoxiously-detailed questions. Appreciate that there are other people who've thought through these things a bit, and if anyone's interested in collaborating and experimenting a bit, I've got some "prototype" builds I'd love to see on teams this next season, or I'd be just as glad to share them with others who might have S* dots to burn. I have a ton of dots I want to build for next season but no human teams to put them on.
