Trying to figure out blocking to strength ratio.

Is strength or blocking skill more important?

I think it's strength, but they're sort of co-dependant, so it's hard to say one is strictly better.

A 95 strength, 50 blocker is by all means worse than a 85 strength 80 blocker - is my experience.

Blocking (OL) is in a weird spot though, so it's not where I'd focus too much if I were you. QB, RBs, WRs, TE(s) are all more important on offense.

I lean toward blocking skill more than strength, at least to some extent. I’ve had some guys with 90+ blocking skills and only 50 strength be quite serviceable.

Check Setherick's last set of player weights.

On my rosters I’ve noticed you can get decent play out of an OL with above 50 Strength. That’s the bare minimum for me when deciding on the OL then I focus more on the blocking attributes then speed the acc. . FWIW

Blocking skill relates to how long a player can hold a block, strength relates to how the players push each other during the block (with weight factored in as well).

would one rather draft an OL with 60 str and 80 rblk/pblk? OR 90 strebth and 60 r/p blk?
....and now you have your answer :) As above, I too hav found lower str, higher blk ol to be very serviceable. Also, the OL, well... if one wants an O that can move - have time to pass, open up the gaps, I encourage to have a decent one;) It was actually the first place I addressed when I started MFN, DBs being second. That was 4.3 though.... These days, its o/d lines, TE's RBs and LBs, as everything tends to happen between the line of scrimmage - 5-10yds.
MFN really, really needs to fix the catch rating.... The most important fix for the off for 4.6, in my very humble opinion.

Great info guys!! All of this makes sense. I'm just trying to re-assess my o-line. Just like in RL, some guys have success with brute strength and some make it in the NFL with perfect technique.