All in on CBs for DBs because weight is still tied to acceleration and I don't want my safeties to technically be at a disadvantage. I 100% think that an all CB defense is the best defensive setup because speed is king on defense. I generally don't like playing any LB with less than 80 speed and honestly the closer they are to max they less their skills matter. I think intelligence is low key strong but not so much that I would play a slower player unless they had +85-ish in the skills that I want and even then I would still want high acceleration to try and compensate for less speed

I am partial to "true" LBs and usually do draft/sign/trade for solid ones, so I'm hesitant to jump into that part of the pool yet, but I get your point. I'm a big proponent of acceleration on defense too - I don't immediately leap for the 90 speed DB if he only has 39 acceleration if there's an 82 speed/79 acceleration guy with similar ratings for everything else.

Last question (I promise) about CBs as CBs - how do you set up that depth chart? I've been plugging my best overall speed/coverage CB in as CB2 since I was assuming WR2 was the opponent's top receiving target. If you're saying that WR3/TE actually gets most of the targets in 4.6 where should my best CB be slotted? Do you only need three stud CBs total to account for for nickel coverage and everyone else is just overkill? (unless you're going for an 11 Deion Sanders defense) Would you ever put your best overall CB as CB3 if an opponent ran lots of 113 and 203 plays even though he wouldn't play against 212? Again, I'm just looking to save time by optimizing my depth chart so I can leave it set for 16 weeks unless there's an injury.

As someone who's only won one Super Bowl ever playing for nearly three calendar years, I really appreciate you sharing your knowledge as one of the top tier players in MFN - thanks.

Generally all my defenses are set up so that the FS covers the WR3. I believe you can't have enough good dbs but CB3/CB1 can be slower provided they are loaded with 100s in coverage, punish, and intangibles. You get more mileage out of them being faster but prime DBs don't grow on trees.

My general DB priority is CB2/FS -> SS -> CB1 -> CB3 but I always try to have 5 solid options so CB3 is not a weak link. The tiebreaker between FS and CB2 is the faster guy plays CB2

Awesome info. I'd read somewhere that CB1 could be a bit slower if he had great coverage skills, so I've tried to keep that in mind. I struggled for a long time to get the hang of what to look for at FS, but feel like I've finally got it figured out. Your list prioritizing DB importance was very helpful - thanks again.

Just to note I updated the QB values in the original post to value several skills more to help identify actually good QBs vs QBs with 100 pass accuracy. Obviously pass accuracy is still the most important skill but a guy with 100 pass accuracy and 40s for everything else should not rate higher than a guy with 80 pass accuracy and 80s everywhere else. Also the changes I made were Intelligence -> 21, Arm Strength -> 12, Passing Release -> 18, Look Off Def -> 27, Scrambling Skill -> 15, and Field of Vision -> 24. I value Intelligence highly, but some owners have had great success with lower INT QBs so you can lower that if you disagree with my rating

Hey everyone, I have another update to the weights. Currently some positions were overrating players because other skills didn't have enough weight and caused the positions to have inflated ratings because of it. I don't want these ratings to have that issue as I want people to be more comfortable when the AI makes a draft pick for them. At some point I'm going to post a small drafting tips guide to help you prepare for a draft and during the draft. It will contain a list of things I do that I'm not sure if it is common knowledge but it will be a separate post.

The main two problems were RB and C which I believe to be mostly fixed. RB's with high speed and avoid fumble were rating much higher than slightly slower but vastly more skilled players. C was a position where high short snapping and pass blocking would sky rocket their rating to the point there would still be mid 80 rated players in a draft in the later rounds.

All the changes I'm about to list are already changed in the main post.
RB: Pass Catching 5 -> 10, Route-Running 2 -> 6, Ball Carrying 3 -> 10
FB: Max Speed 80 -> 86, Route-Running 1 -> 4, Run Blocking 6 -> 8, Pass Blocking 8 -> 10
TE: Max Speed 85 -> 90
WR: Max Speed 94 -> 92
LT, LG, RG, RT: Run Blocking 15 -> 20
C: Max Speed 8 -> 15, Acceleration 8 -> 21, Strength 8 -> 15, Run Blocking 10 -> 15, Pass Blocking 80 -> 85, Short Snapping 30 -> 55

The speed changes are mostly to compensate for the very skilled players who are also slow at TE/FB who were slightly overrated with the previous weights while the WR change is to help lower the ratings of WRs who are 90+ speed but who's skill ratings are in the 60s stop being rated above WRs with low 80s speed but 80+ in the technical skills.

This post turned lengthier than I anticipated, but I want to explain my rationale for these changes. If you have any questions, please DM me or ask on here and I will answer ASAP. Thanks for reading

I've restructured some of my weights, especially regarding the OL, since our conversation. I'm interested in giving it a whirl. I appreciate the work you put into this.

I'm curious about break tackle for RB and if it's really that useless? I think you have it set to 1.

Skills that have a weight of 1 are explained in the main post.

Speed, avoid fumble, ball carry, pass catching, and route running all help a RB be better explicitly from what I've seen/read on the forums. There doesn't seem to be much consistency when breaking tackles other than it's a weighted coin flip and I don't think 100 break tackle helps that much. Considering that it's affected by the defenders tackle ability, which you have no control over, I gave it a weight of 1.

interesting stuff