|
|
Post by Jacksonville Jaguars (Jordan) on Apr 14, 2023 22:36:15 GMT -5
I propose that we update the DL position to DL/EDR (Edge Rushers) to include not only interior lineman and 4-3 DEs, but to also include pass rushers in a 3-4 scheme, aka 3-4 OLBs.
As of now, the eligibility of a pass rusher can change from DL to LB, depending on what the their team's scheme is. This means that each season, LMs have to go through every roster and ensure that each player is listed at the "correct" position. Since this was proposed in 2020 (and failed to pass), it has become even harder to designate whether players should be DL or LB. Most depth charts (including official team depth charts) call these players EDGE or RUSH as opposed to calling them DE or LB. Making these changes every offseason is time-consuming work, and there are more and more of these gray areas with every passing season. This leads to uncertainty during the offseason for managers whether their players will be listed as DL or LB when the season begins.
Making this change has become more of a necessity than a preference at this point, as we are struggling to find reputable depth charts to inform whether a player should be a DL or LB. We cannot leave it to Fantrax to decide, as they just give players dual eligibility at both positions when there isn't a consensus.
Under this proposal, we would continue to have 8 total defensive players in weekly lineups:
2 DL/EDR
2 LB
2 DB
2 FLEX
TLDR: the NFL has moved towards lumping pass rushers (whether DE or OLB) together as EDGE rushers, and most depth charts list them as such. CDFL should do the same to remove the DL/LB gray area that is getting harder and harder to set correctly.
If the majority votes yes on this proposal, we will then discuss how soon it should take effect.
|
|
|
|
Post by San Francisco 49ers (Nate) on Apr 15, 2023 14:17:26 GMT -5
I love this idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Bills (Salvatore) on Apr 15, 2023 17:48:46 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens (Goose) on Apr 15, 2023 20:00:04 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers. I agree that there will fewer options for the LB position and make it difficult to fill the position and have a abundance of DL/Edge players. |
|
|
|
Post by Jacksonville Jaguars (Jordan) on Apr 15, 2023 20:52:22 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers. I agree that there will fewer options for the LB position and make it difficult to fill the position and have an abundance of DL/Edge players. We're going to have to make some kind of change before all the reputable depth charts go away from the DE or OLB designation. It's already getting difficult to find, and the teams themselves are calling pass rushers "Edge" or "Rush." |
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens (Goose) on Apr 16, 2023 8:27:25 GMT -5
I agree that there will fewer options for the LB position and make it difficult to fill the position and have an abundance of DL/Edge players. We're going to have to make some kind of change before all the reputable depth charts go away from the DE or OLB designation. It's already getting difficult to find, and the teams themselves are calling pass rushers "Edge" or "Rush." OK then lump edge with LB not with DL. That would be my solution. |
|
|
|
Post by Baltimore Ravens (Goose) on Apr 16, 2023 10:35:40 GMT -5
We're going to have to make some kind of change before all the reputable depth charts go away from the DE or OLB designation. It's already getting difficult to find, and the teams themselves are calling pass rushers "Edge" or "Rush." OK then lump edge with LB not with DL. That would be my solution. I was just looking through Fantrax at the LB position based on last year's stats and see that not only is there a LB\Edge issue there is a LB\DB issue. There is only 3 with the LB\DB dual drsignation out of the top 100 LBs, but there is 19 out of 120 with the LB\DL designation. That is just what is on Fantrax it may differ if you look through wherever you go to get your information to change positions. Just my take on moving LB to Edge. |
|
|
|
Post by Cincinnati Bengals (Chris) on Apr 16, 2023 13:13:23 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers. This is my only concern as well. I think that any of those EDGE players should also be available to start in our DL spot, OR in our LB spot. Otherwise, we would turn LB into a kind of those who have and those who have not a la RB, as the only players eligible to start at LB would effectively be off the ball LBs. While there would be some out and out DEs who would end up starting at LB spots though, it would very infrequently provide any sort of advantage to start a DL in an LB spot (Mike's worry was always the other way when he came up with the no multi-position players rule back in the early 20teens). If we could add that in there, I think this could work very well, and it would have my vote. P.S. To Jordan's point, it's takes a long time to update this list, and doing it at the last minute is a necessity, as cuts and positional changes are all confirmed right at the end of the off-season/start of Week 1, so mistakes are made on my end (Also, we only do this for players who are signed to real NFL teams, AND are on a team's roster in our league). However, just for clarity, someone would still have to do this same process every year. It would just be about the differentiation between LB and EDGE, vs. DL and LB. |
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Bills (Salvatore) on Apr 16, 2023 13:25:02 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers. This is my only concern as well. I think that any of those EDGE players should also be available to start in our DL spot, OR in our LB spot. Otherwise, we would turn LB into a kind of those who have and those who have not a la RB, as the only players eligible to start at LB would effectively be off the ball LBs. While there would be some out and out DEs who would end up starting at LB spots though, it would very infrequently provide any sort of advantage to start a DL in an LB spot (Mike's worry was always the other way when he came up with the no multi-position players rule back in the early 20teens). If we could add that in there, I think this could work very well, and it would have my vote. P.S. To Jordan's point, it's takes a long time to update this list, and doing it at the last minute is a necessity, as cuts and positional changes are all confirmed right at the end of the off-season/start of Week 1, so mistakes are made on my end (Also, we only do this for players who are signed to real NFL teams, AND are on a team's roster in our league). However, just for clarity, someone would still have to do this same process every year. It would just be about the differentiation between LB and EDGE, vs. DL and LB. Yeah I think just having all 3-4 backers be Edge/LB would fix the issue. We could Possibly do another vote if this is passed and see where the league stands on this. |
|
|
|
Post by Jacksonville Jaguars (Jordan) on Apr 16, 2023 14:56:28 GMT -5
I think my only issue with this is that it's going to drastically cut down on linebacker options which could be an issue. I wouldn't mind using some kind of duel eligiblity for 3-4 outside linebackers. This is my only concern as well. I think that any of those EDGE players should also be available to start in our DL spot, OR in our LB spot. Otherwise, we would turn LB into a kind of those who have and those who have not a la RB, as the only players eligible to start at LB would effectively be off the ball LBs. While there would be some out and out DEs who would end up starting at LB spots though, it would very infrequently provide any sort of advantage to start a DL in an LB spot (Mike's worry was always the other way when he came up with the no multi-position players rule back in the early 20teens). If we could add that in there, I think this could work very well, and it would have my vote. P.S. To Jordan's point, it's takes a long time to update this list, and doing it at the last minute is a necessity, as cuts and positional changes are all confirmed right at the end of the off-season/start of Week 1, so mistakes are made on my end (Also, we only do this for players who are signed to real NFL teams, AND are on a team's roster in our league). However, just for clarity, someone would still have to do this same process every year. It would just be about the differentiation between LB and EDGE, vs. DL and LB. Once we make the change, the outside LBs should automatically switch to EDGE once we make that position active. |
|
|
|
Post by Jacksonville Jaguars (Jordan) on Apr 16, 2023 15:06:21 GMT -5
We're going to have to make some kind of change before all the reputable depth charts go away from the DE or OLB designation. It's already getting difficult to find, and the teams themselves are calling pass rushers "Edge" or "Rush." OK then lump edge with LB not with DL. That would be my solution. That would make the only eligible DLs interior linemen. |
|
|
|
Post by Washington Commanders (Dave) on Apr 16, 2023 16:21:51 GMT -5
When it comes to the LB position I see it two ways:
1. We make a max limit (3 players) to prevent the pool being shortened
2. We add 3 Edge Positions and 1 LB. That way any additional LB's wanted to be used could go to the IDP spot.
|
|
|
|
Post by New York Giants (Malachi) on Apr 16, 2023 16:59:27 GMT -5
OK then lump edge with LB not with DL. That would be my solution. I was just looking through Fantrax at the LB position based on last year's stats and see that not only is there a LB\Edge issue there is a LB\DB issue. There is only 3 with the LB\DB dual drsignation out of the top 100 LBs, but there is 19 out of 120 with the LB\DL designation. That is just what is on Fantrax it may differ if you look through wherever you go to get your information to change positions. Just my take on moving LB to Edge. With there only being about 1 out of every 6 being DL/LB eligible would it not make sense to just let those players keep both positions of eligibility? I get doing it for LB/DB and RB/WR (or WR/TE) because those don't happen enough to be an issue and are pretty easily distinguished. I know the precedent here in this league is to only allow 1 position of eligibility and I get wanting to stay with the traditional way of running things, but based on how things are going I think it helps both positions keep depth while also adding value to the DL position that seems to be lacking of late. |
|
|
|
Post by Buffalo Bills (Salvatore) on Apr 17, 2023 8:23:43 GMT -5
I was just looking through Fantrax at the LB position based on last year's stats and see that not only is there a LB\Edge issue there is a LB\DB issue. There is only 3 with the LB\DB dual drsignation out of the top 100 LBs, but there is 19 out of 120 with the LB\DL designation. That is just what is on Fantrax it may differ if you look through wherever you go to get your information to change positions. Just my take on moving LB to Edge. With there only being about 1 out of every 6 being DL/LB eligible would it not make sense to just let those players keep both positions of eligibility? I get doing it for LB/DB and RB/WR (or WR/TE) because those don't happen enough to be an issue and are pretty easily distinguished. I know the precedent here in this league is to only allow 1 position of eligibility and I get wanting to stay with the traditional way of running things, but based on how things are going I think it helps both positions keep depth while also adding value to the DL position that seems to be lacking of late. Yeah I think it's the only logical next step. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2023 21:43:18 GMT -5
So will the edge players be eligible to play both DL and LB positions, or are we creating a position on the roster just for edge players?
|
|
