If you have any call ups left. You could drop Taylor Thurstons and call up one of my startying TEs. Both are better that him physically.

Also maybe my starting MLB might be better than the current 32yo low physical MLB.

Matthew Anthony is probably a better bet for TE than Taylor Thurstans too (hence the reason I sold one and kept the other)

At linebacker I'd put forward Roger Dempster. Highly intelligent, reasonably consistent, and decent physicals along with good basic skills.

Win vs NZ. Now on to the WC!!!

Cash_Box wrote: BuiltForSpeed wrote: Nice going! Love the %'s with 2 TE's... Awsome shit! ... and BFS that is exactly the reason for the no WR set. my theory is that the more we give the GI match engine to consider, the less chance we have of completing. the only drawback I have found in TD with the no WR set is that yards per pass is lower (short game as expected with TE's) HOWEVER the NT have still managed some long bombs into the end zone to a TE !! I will be changing up the lineup and strategy for the last 2 games in preparation for the next phase.

Question is...Did you pass through centre or both flanks..etc.League matches are good to try this..I did notice QB preference was i think the best option..Just a thought coach.

Watching the UK game live and we're winning 38 - 7 in the 48th minute. Obviously can't view their lineup while it's live, and it's a dead rubber (as there's no seeding) so it's likely we're both trying different things. But a score of only 7 for the UK this late is pretty amazing (assuming it's not bot).

EDIT: Noticing the guy throwing the rock is an actual QB, and the receiver he's most targetting is a WR. So they're probably not running a bot formation! Strangely enough, the entire offence seems to be the QB passing to the very same person over and over and over. Probably a 2 reciever set but biased towards whichever side the WR is on