playn WR at TE - what your thoughts?

Our rules are very clear... U cant play WR at TE! (and 90% of all SIM leagues have the same rules...); nevertheless - I have been called out recently because i told a player (in a playoff game) - that he couldnt play WR at TE...

a lil background...

In our playoff game - my opponent runs a lot of DOUBLE TE SET - (and stats show he throws to TE a lot..) - in the 2nd quarter of the game- his NUMBER 1 TE (Finely) recieved a multi game injury... - He had another solid TE (who had similar stats and rtatings as FINLEY) - he was TE KELLER... He also had 2 weaker TEs (THOMAS and RODRIQUEZ)....

My opponent thought it would be SIM - and ok to break the "WR cant play at TE rule" because he got an injury!!!! I told him that an injury was no excuse to break rules - and only players he could play at TE were TE - FB and OT... but the skill level of his backup TE and FB were weak - he argued (and his friend) - that because the WR "wasnt that fast and had similar rating as Finley" - that he should be allowed to play WR at TE!

My response was that i was SORRY (and very lucky for his injury) but he had to suck it up - follow the rules and play players ONLY AT THE POSITION THAT RULES DICTATE REGARDLESS OF INJURY...

LIL HISTORY - We have this rule - because although OCCASSIONALLY a few WR play TE in the NFL ITS DEFINITELY THE EXCEPTION TO THE RULE - AND HAPPENS LESS THEN 1% OF THE TIME...

In addition we have this rule because U CANT SWITCH MAN TO MAN ASSIGNMENTS MID PLAY - Often a LB comes out of the huddle and is "manned up" with a TE - If u have WR playn TE thats a huge mismatch! (often there is another DB that could even be matched up man to man with a RB on the same play) - and even a peewee team would switch the DB to cover the Wr (who is playn TE) and then the LB covers the RB - BUT IN MADDEN U CANT MAKE THAT CHANGE - so the defense is put at a disadvantage...

Even if u dont throw to the WR playn TE - the defense is at a disadvantage because i had to USER PLAY the LB - (who was covering the WR who was illegally at TE because if i didnt HE WOULD GET EASY COMPLETION!) - BUT BECAUSE I WAS COVERING THIS PLAYER - i couldnt user cover another - and my opponent benefits from my non user matchup elsewhere (where i could have user defended elsewhere if i wasnt busy defending a WR playn TE - which i shouldnt have to do because its agaisnt the rules!...)

The player (and his buddy) seem to think that because he had an injury - and because the WR had closer ratings to FINLEY then the backup TE did - then it was ok to play the WR at TE (even though its clearly against the rules!!!!) - I CALL TOTAL BS ON THIS - and paused the game each of the 4 times he did this until he took the WR who was playn TE out of the game (ironically when he put in backups - they dropped 3 different passes...) BUT IMO THATS THE GAME - we all have to deal with injuries - and u cant break rules because injuries occurred!


In the end i ended up winning the game - but he thinks i am "abusing my commish power" - by telling him he couldnt play a WR at TE - and some how i am a tirant commish for this...

I wanna know what u think:

I agree with this rule. If he seriously didn't want to play his backup TEs... don't run formations that include them. I know that would put him at a disadvantage in terms of play-calling, but that's the unfortunate effect of injuries. The Patriots don't put Brandon Lloyd at TE just because Gronk is hurt; they keep ample depth with the likes of Shiancoe, Fells, and Hoomanawanui. If your opponent's TEs were that vital to his gameplan, he should have had better TE depth in case of injury.

EDIT: I just realized this is not listed in the rules -

Offense
HB to FB, HB cannot have a speed greater than 89
HB to WR, HB cannot be in the WR depth chart higher than 3
TE to FB, TE cant have a speed greater than 89
TE to SLOT, SPLIT-END or FLANKER, TE must be an "inside reciever"
OT to TE/G/C
G to OT/C
C to G/OT

So I'm not sure if my position stands if the rule isn't explicitly stated.

if the rule states u cant use a wr at te then at no reason can u ever put one in...
no gray just black or white
thats my understanding of the rules

McNoob wrote:I agree with this rule. If he seriously didn't want to play his backup TEs... don't run formations that include them. I know that would put him at a disadvantage in terms of play-calling, but that's the unfortunate effect of injuries. The Patriots don't put Brandon Lloyd at TE just because Gronk is hurt; they keep ample depth with the likes of Shiancoe, Fells, and Hoomanawanui. If your opponent's TEs were that vital to his gameplan, he should have had better TE depth in case of injury.

EDIT: I just realized this is not listed in the rules -

Offense
HB to FB, HB cannot have a speed greater than 89
HB to WR, HB cannot be in the WR depth chart higher than 3
TE to FB, TE cant have a speed greater than 89
TE to SLOT, SPLIT-END or FLANKER, TE must be an "inside reciever"
OT to TE/G/C
G to OT/C
C to G/OT

So I'm not sure if my position stands if the rule isn't explicitly stated.

bro it is explicitly stated - u failed to leave out a key part of the rules - THE RULES STATE WHAT CHANGES ARE ALLOWED - and in no part pof the post does it say u can play WR at TE - and even a 2 year old would know - if its not listed as a change you can do THEN ITS ILLEGAL!

PS3MG Rules wrote:The acceptable changes of positions are as follows:

Offense
HB to FB, HB cannot have a speed greater than 89
HB to WR, HB cannot be in the WR depth chart higher than 3
TE to FB, TE cant have a speed greater than 89
TE to SLOT, SPLIT-END or FLANKER, TE must be an "inside reciever"
OT to TE/G/C
G to OT/C
C to G/OT

Defense
DE to OLB/DT
DT to DE
OLB to DE/MLB
MLB to OLB
SS to FS/CB/OLB, SS cant be greater than 88 speed at OLB
FS to SS/CB
CB to FS/SS

i TRY TO BE A POSITIVE - TELL PEOPLE WHAT THEY can do - AS OPPOSE TO TELLING THEM what they cant! - Clearly we all have the intelligence to know that if its not listed - then u cant do it - claiming that its not "said" SO U CAN - is a point of convenience - it wreaks of lobby room trash tryn to allow garbage in a SIM league

- Every SIM league is the same U CANT PLAY WR at TE - thats the 1 rule virtually every SIM league has - and this is the same at PS3MG - If u were allowed to play WR at TE then it would be listed - but you are NOT so its not listed as an option u can do under the rules!

AJ Green would get blown off the ball by a DE or LB coming out of a 3 point stance trying to block or release from that position into a receiver route.

Def don't want to see that in the game.

My mistake. I read the rules incorrectly.

I'm not concerned with wht other leagues do and having a rule just because. I question things in all aspects of life and refuse to just swallow this is the rule pill.

My firsts question to you all is in the language of the rule it says all players playing out of possition must be reasonable and sim like

Was Tarvin playing TE really more unreasonable then you calling him on this rule? His stats are WORSE then Finleys.

I asked you why the issue was and you said you need to have a CB guard a WR but admited that you had LBs covering Finley the whole game. So now even though Tarvin is not as skilled as Finley just because he's listed as a WR you have to have a CB cover him? That makes no sense the substitution is totally reasonable

My next question to you all is how can it be ok for a TE to play WR but a WR can't play TE my to mention I think it's stupid that you also have to put the TE in the slot and can't line him up anywhere you want. These rules take away from the skill level of the game.

Analyze the aspects of the game that differentiate the great players from the good and the good players from the bad.

Being inventive as a coach is one aspect . Pre snap adjustments is another. I change anywhere between 3-6 guys assighnments pre snap ON DEFENSE and almost every pass play 2-3 hot routes. This is where the skill level of the game is at. This rule of keeping the TE in the slot and not bein able to play a WE at TE makes it easier to play defense. It's a handicap in my oppion and if you are not good enough to make the adjustments before the ball is snapped that's your problem not mine.

General Hon great point about an AJ green playing at TR he's going to have a tuff time getting of the line with his hand in the dirt. He's certainly not blocking anyone in the run game either.

Pre snap the game tells you exactly what type of personnel is coming into te field so ou can call your defense. There is no excuse for you to have the wrong personnel on the field. Even if I call a 2TE set but a WR is in at TE it will still say 3wr 1te 1rb. So big deal you have to maybe flip your play and change 1 or 2 Guys assighnments . OH NO GOD FORBID YOU HAVE TO ACTUALLY PLAY TE VIDEO GAME!!!!

You have minimum speed or rather maximum speed rules at ther possitions I think saying you can't have a WR play TR with a speed of over 89 is a reasonable compromise here. That TE spot you can motion into the slot by the way then at no longer a 2TE set now is it? So what's the differance if I have my WR that's in the slot move over closer to the ball? What's the differance wen your told exactly what players are on the field?

Are you guys getting my logic here?

TE to WR but no WR to TE?

Then why can you do DE to LB am LB to DE

The possitions are either interchangeable or they are not its that simple

Also.... Do you watch the NFL? Do you see how gronkowski is used ? Or Aaron Hernandez ? Finley in GB ? Graham in NO? These guys line up all over the field not just in the slot. Aaron Hernandez takes handoffs!!!!

So how is this not sim when THE BEAT TEAMS IN THE NFL CREAT MATCHUPS IN THEIR FAVOR WITH THESE HYBRID PROTOTYPE TE's

I'm sorry I don't buy the I have to user this guy here and can't there. To Fuxking bad step your game up practice on defense pre snap adjustment a it might just make you a better player. Peace

I am completely indifferent on this topic in regular play, however i do agree with injuries acceptions can be made. I personally only carry 2 tightends on my roster as i prefer to have more defensive players to rotate in and out. I was told that i can not have a wide reciever at tight end. So when i run any goalline or heavy sets, i have to put a offensive lineman in as my third tight end (instead of a wr). I agreed to this because this is the commish's league and i will follow and respect his rules. Also since im normally running in the heavy sets its not like having an extra lineman instead of a pass catching player doesn't really matter. That being said if my two tightends got hurt, what am i suppose to do?? if i do not have a healthy tightend and my playbook always has a tight end on the field do i have to put a lineman in a shotgun package? Luckily i haven't had a problem with multiple injuries so i haven't had to deal with this.

I personally think that any moment any player should be allowed to play any position. I see nothing unfair about that. If you want to put a wideout at tightend go ahead. But expect a blitz coming off the side he lines up on every play i hope your wide receiver can block lineman and linebackers.

As far as matching up i agree with Weasel. It states the formation and player personel coming out onto the field before you call your defense. If you get caught in a bad personel package i think that is your own fault.

I also agree with those who argue against it because i like to play a legit sim style game. I do not think a player should have a wr as his number 1 tightend at all times. so i think if from time to time someone wants to sub in and out a player to maybe catch someone off guard then its fine and actually good coaching (this is what people do in real life, find mis matches and personel mistakes and take advantage of them) pro QBS are constantly moving guys around formations to find the best matchups.

So again i do not care either way...... I think having a wr as ur third TE is no big deal.. I think if someone is putting in a wr at tightend all the time thats cheap but if they wanna do it go ahead i will just adjust my playcalling and keep an extra db out on field at all times.

So basically if its once in awhile or out of desperation i see nothing wrong with it. I would be against a wr at te all the time, but again if someone wants to do that its not hard to figure out how to play against it and use it to your advantage. I mean if he comes out with a wr at TE do you really think he is running the ball???

No he's not running the ball with desean Jackson playing TE. NOT ON ME AT LEAST. This Mickey Mouse crap has got to stop. My 6'5 230 WR should be able to line up as the 3rd TE on the goalie if I want him to I'm the coach. Ain't any cheese about it. It's not "lobby trash". It's me as a coach putting MY PLAYER in the best possition for him to succeed. Seriously .

With all do respect - you tried to let u run a FREESTYLE league at PS3MG last year - and it was a failure - OUR MEMBERSHIP ARE SIM PLAYERS!

playn WR at TE has no business in a SIM league - THESE LGS ARE A SUCCESS BECAUSE GUYS ARE TIRED OF LOBBY ROOM TACTICS IN RANKED GAMES! There is no way this rule would get changed - we wouldnt be a SIM league if we did...

and weasal your not gonna put desean jackson in at TE when u are runnin offtackle! so that point is mute - only time a WR would be at TE is if it was a PASS PLAY... And from a pass catching perspective - A MEDICORE WR would be considered 1 of the ELITE TEs! So doing this would dillute the integrety of that position - all of sudden FINLEY isnt a top pass catching TE because there is 200 other WRs that could do a better job recieving the ball! - This takes us even farther away from SIM and closer to FREESTYLE! - the though of this makes me wanna puke!

and fyi weasal - it doesnt matter that i think WR TARVIN is a close fit to FINLEY (in regards to pass catching) - TARVIN ISNT A TE! He has no business lining up in a TE spot and i shouldnt have to be forced to defend him! my opponent had an unfortunate injuruy AND THATS TOO BAD FOR HIM AND LUCKY FOR ME - but u cant make that injury INCONSEQUENTIAL by breaching rules and putting a WR at TE! If we want to make injuries inconsequential WHY DONT WE JUST TURN OFF INJURIES ALL TOGETHER - because allowing guys to play positions that are agaisnt the rules just because there is an injury MAKES INJURIES MEANINGLESS!

and with all due respect to albundy - its your call to only carry 2 TEs - and limited extra offensive tackles...

So if u get an injury to TE - THATS TOO BAD for you - u know the rule ahead of time - u will have to call plays without TE or run plays with a FB or OT at TE! (if you only have 2 TEs on your roster you are carrying extra players at other positions and have an advantage in depth at those spots - this advantage is a definite plus - BUT THE FLIP SIDE IS YOU COULD IN RUN INTO PROBLEM AT TE IF U HAVE INJURIES) - thats your gamble to make BUT U CANT EXPECT TO BREAK THE RULE AND PUT A WR IN AT TE BECAUSE U GOT AN INJURY! If that unfootunate situation happened - u have to suck it up and deal with it! (afterall if u were allowed to play WR at TE - it wouldnt make carrying only 2 TEs much of a gamble! - which it is if u rely on TEs in your offense)

Did you even read the post? No successful league last year? No we ran tree full seasons then I got burnt out myself running the league and quit. The league was a huge success and everyone asked me to do it again this year. We had a few players in the group that joined my guys who were able to compete. The cream of the crop were the only ones who stood a chance and stuck around. That's not te point. Get away from the language of "sim" and "lobby". I understand your point of diluting the possition but with all do respect you didn't answer any of my questions the only relevant point you are making is the diluting of the possition which is all relative. I'm today's NFL the TE is more valuable the a WE especially the hybrid ones because they can play both WR and TE. You are devaluing Tarvin as a player because he does have te ability to play TE and be very effective. Have you looked at his stats? He's a TE in my eyes not a WR take away the WR or TE as out a question mark an look at his stats and you would be playi g him at TE not WR. Actually what im proposing to let people use a WR at the TE spot with speeds under 89 is more sim and more true to life. Open your eyes greener be subjective here your being a stubborn simpleton

Greener we are not stupid we understand the rule were saying in reality and if this if we are truelly here trying to simulate the NFL this rule is ANYTHING BUT "sim". Your being dismissive. Rule change out of the question!?!! That's insulting take your head out of the ground and evolve its called being human. Your a smart guy I'm really shocked at this ignorance

TRVIN CAN PLAY TE FULL TIME HIS RUN BLOCKIN IS OVER 70 which is better then most of the TE in the league. In real life as a coach if I had a player with this skill set I'm throwing him in at TE and WR and even on occasion at FB . TO CREAT A MATCHUP THAT'S IN MY FAVOR!!!! In don't care if its a bad matchup for you that's our problem to deal with your o ln defense figure out a way I defend my style of play that's your job. Not envoking a bunk rule that has ZERO BASIS that makes the league worse. For real man you didn't answer any of my questions

To answer your question no it doesn't make injuries meaningless I would draft a player like Tarvin to add depth to y team because he can actually play TE and WR. This is hy I play a hybrid 3-4 front on defense and have interchangeable OLB and DE TO ADD DEPTH TO MY TEAM!!!! Same reason why I like pass catching RBs. BECAUSE TEY CAN PLAY WR IM ADDING DEPTH TO MY TEAM!!! Do you understand ?! Your nt even going credit to the genious of broadway blitz drafting Tarvin and using him like this. IT'S GENIOUS . And when I seem him pick this player up I was so pissed of because he fits my scheme perfectly. Ed the exact type of player everyone should want on ther roster. A special player with a very unique set of skills. It should be up for debate open your kind greener open your mind my points are valid and my logic is sound

It really doesn't matter guys your both right and make valid points. People do come into the NFL at one position and end up playing another all the times..... undersized lineman become tightends....quarterbacks become WR's and Running backs.... Tightends become wide recievers.... wide recievers become athletic pass catching tight ends..... some wide recievers become corners... some linebackers become full backs... defensive ends become pass rushing line backers... Corners become safteys..... safteys become linebackers.... i mean these things happen...

Weasel - its his league we follow his rules jsut how it is..

It does suck that your can not designate a guys position when you draft him because thats really all we are arguing about.... A player is a player and his skill set is his skill set... coaches in real life and scouting departments are constantly looking for guys who are pure athletes and then find positions they can play be it special teams... pass rushing situations.... special packages... etc. I mean you always hear about a former basketball player becoming a tight end.... or a former rugby player becoming a punter.. or a track star becoming a return or deep threat specialist.....

But Greenrr makes a good point about watering down the talent pool... I personally still think its a disadvantage to have a WR at TE if im playing defense against it... I feel it signals to me that its a pass play and that the players is probably his main target.....

and to say its a risk to carry only two tightends might be true... but bottom line is i have an elite full back on my roster. So running sets with two tightends and no full back on field doesnt make sense....

I would obviously continue to play with my 2nd tight end if my starter got hurt... if only one got hurt in a game i would make a personel move to add another tightend after the game... if they both got hurt in the same game your telling me i have to play my back up tackle at tightend over someone else does not seem "sim" to me.... no coach in the NFL would do that... When you get hit with injuries you put the best player on your roster in the spot to fill the void... thats what any coach at any level would do... When the patriots were thin in the secondary did they put a lineback at corner??? no they put in backup wide receivers....

Again i could care less about the rule.... This is your league and i will always follow your rules since you dedicate the time and effort to keep this thing together and deserve credit for that.... But i think in certain situations (i.E. an injury or multiple injuries) that exceptions could be made for that specific game.. Just a thought...
After the game the coach with the injured player has the option to sign another player to fill the void or move on following the established rules...

And that's the long and the short of it ell said albundy. Greener I give you a ton of respect for running this whole show. I love it man I do. All hail greener!!! I'm not going to be shy I will always voice my opinion that's what this forum is for after all aimt it?

I don't want to see WRs at TE. The average WR would be a top "TE", so we'd be making actual TEs irrelevant.

McNoob wrote:I don't want to see WRs at TE. The average WR would be a top "TE", so we'd be making actual TEs irrelevant.

I disagree... an average wide receiver is not a top TE. Most cannot block in pass protection or on running plays..... They can have a terrible release (most tight ends have better releases)..... Less Strength.....less size.... they will excel in the passing game more but in all other aspects of the position they are a worse player.....

But i do understand that most people only use their tightends to recieve essentially making them a wide receiver anyways... which is why the rule exists. As i have said before it really makes no difference... if you want ur wr to be a tightend instead of calling a play with 2 wrs and tightend just call a play with 3 wrs its really not that big of an issue

All valid points for the most part in my opinion.

* Patriots put WR at CB instead of LB, reasonable enough due to speed issue

* Patriots would NOT put a WR at TE lined up at the TE spot, in a TE stance (just an educated guess, I haven't combed through film on them of course). WR would get BLOWN OFF THE BALL lined up that close to a DE or OLB.

WR are not used to making pass protection reads to block, and they are not typically taking on a LB one on one, it's usually a crack block or they are simpy trying to get in the way.

In the game right now, Wes Welker could line up at TE and herass a DE or LB long enough to be an effective blocker. No he wouldn't pancake anyone, but it doesn't seem EA accounts for -who- WR are usually blocking in the NFL when they determine RB ratings.

Just my thoughts because it's a fun discussion. If anyone has done true testing on this to see how much size and strength play in at the TE position for run and pass blocking, I would love to be wrong. Looks as though it only accounts for their RBK/PBK ratings

General_Hon wrote:
* Patriots put WR at CB instead of LB, reasonable enough due to speed issue

And also consider Matthew Slater (who played Safety last year) was a former DB in college. In fact, he didn't catch a single pass at UCLA.

* Patriots would NOT put a WR at TE lined up at the TE spot, in a TE stance (just an educated guess, I haven't combed through film on them of course). WR would get BLOWN OFF THE BALL lined up that close to a DE or OLB.

This is true. When Hernandez was injured last year, Belichick opted to place Nate Solder at TE in double sets. But for the most part, he ran 3 WR 1 TE formations, just like what we should be doing if we're down to 1 healthy TE.

if u can put a ot at te or te at fb or te at wr....that is extra blocking on cbs , lbs ,etc...if u can do one u should be able to do another... i follow rules and i am just giving my opinion...it should not be a big deal to put a wr at te...

Hpee wrote:if u can put a ot at te or te at fb or te at wr....that is extra blocking on cbs , lbs ,etc...if u can do one u should be able to do another... i follow rules and i am just giving my opinion...it should not be a big deal to put a wr at te...

note: cant put a TE in a WR position unless 2 legitmate WRs are also on the field... - justw anted to make that clear...

and u can give a bunch of eexamples of WRs that occassionallyt line up at the traditional TE spot - but the bigest negetaive impact of allowing WR to play at TE is that it woukld completely make the ELITE TE meaningless - no longer would GRONK - GRAHAM and DAVIS be high draft picks because u could draft WRs with similar speed and catching abilitues to play those spots very late in the draft (may take a half season to improve catch ratings slightly but there literally would bve an influx of DOZENS of WRs that have no meaningful value at the traditional WR spot but at TE they would be elite as the big names previously mentioned - doing this is not a positive thing - it certainly screws the guys who spent high fantasy picks to get these elite TEs...

besides - the ELITE TE shouldnt be on every team - and playn WR at TE would allow this - eroding this position to be meaningless would be a huge negative....