hosh13 wrote: The other thing I noticed is that we have a lot of Aussie players in the top 100 earners that aren't on the NT - I assume they all have poor physicals/INT/CON/secondaries?

Your assumption is correct.

Brazil didn't beat us, the Poles did!



That game was a bit odd. A landslide on the scoreboard, but if you look at passing/receiving yardage and completions and so on, it was actually much closer than you'd think. However, I think it speaks volumes of our field positions on kickoffs and that's the difference between finishing a drive off and punting.

Forgot to add:

hosh13 wrote: The other thing I noticed is that we have a lot of Aussie players in the top 100 earners that aren't on the NT - I assume they all have poor physicals/INT/CON/secondaries?

Besides the one skill wonders from certain number of teams (now-defunct...) and otherwise poor builds, you have to consider their positions. QBs in particular (maybe kickers too) will dominate most top 100 salary lists, and we can't make an entire team out of that

Also our team has a lot of relatively fresh blood injected in recent cycles, some of whomcan almost certainly increase significantly in skill (and salary) depending on their parent club finances and build plans.

Top 100 salary is a good starting point for scouting, but usually they've already been scoured to death by NT coaches before you.

Just going though the groups and noticed something. Australia has allowed the least amount of points against per game from all the teams.

I think unfortunately that was one of those games. We had a good completion %, but our offence just didn't finish drives and our defence coughed up some repeated broken tackles where Brazil's ridiculously skilled receivers pulled out their finger. To sum up how our group has turned out, the two teams with the best Points Differential are 2nd and 3rd, both 1 whole win behind the leaders.

Far out, I'm disappointed. We have to beat Poland, simple as that. We didn't get taken to the cleaners against them with a (in hindsight) stupid gameplan, so hopefully we can turn it around.

The DEs we have are the best choices we have on the team. Perhaps swapping sides or something might do it, but I doubt it, given I try pay attention to who they line up against anyway. Pat is the fastest (best overall physicals too), most skilled, and most consistent. Ted is 5*, same physicals as Bailey (who is a DE I'd take on my club team in his own right), and better tackling, agility, double the footwork, slightly better vision, and slightly more consistent. Nothing that really says he's significantly better, but on that evidence it's why he gets the spot on DE ahead of Bailey. No evidence or announcement that BMI matters yet, as that's the only real difference (17/18 for Ted, 15/20 for Bailey)





P.S. Unrelated to results of this cycle, and regardless of how far or not we go, I won't be NT coaching next cycle as I'll be away for some time, and probably only logging on to not go bot and chuck in some last minute orders. Start practicing your campaign speeches now!