can you send me a list to scout after training update?

Haha we have a solid amount of Safeties I think!

Anyway, I'd say a WR or TE. Maybe a CB

It's hard to say where we need depth really, not without having additional information (yeah, real life coaching mode again, please pardon the foray into reality).

How many we need at each position depends on the schemes you intend to run. Running a Big-I form you would need extra RB's and fewer WR's along with some extra TE's. Running a traditional I, you'd need the WR's (split ends) but fewer TE's. So on and so forth.

Defensively speaking, at least one spare player for each position I would say. So for a 30 front 4 DL's, for a 40 front you want 5, and on a 50 front you'd want 6. Linebackers are a key element in the real world, you'd need at least one spare MLB and one spare OLB...so depending on the look you use you will want 4 to 6 LB's. You get the idea.

Based on the numbers I am looking at, if I had to guess, I would say the numbers support the following schemes:
DEFENSE:
3-3 (including stack alignments on safeties), 4-3, 3-4, and any nickle, dime, or quarter package. With the depth at Safety and Corner you could also run a maximum coverage scheme (half dollar/prevent with 8 DB's...) but you'd be very vulnerable to the rush (but if we are outmatched by a pass happy team it could be viable depending on the players available).
OFFENSE:
Wing T (using WR's instead of a wingback), Single Back (twins, doubles, trips, etc.), Split Backs (Veer: using two TE's and a WR, using a single TE and two WR's, or going 3 wide), or potentially the I in any of its' permutations (provided you don't suffer injuries). With only three TE's I'd tend to shy away from 2 TE sets normally in the real world, but it is a wrinkle you could use if needed.

Ultimately, I'd say an extra TE would be the best call.

Some possibilities:
I've found a REALLY good WR, except he has a very low CON. With skills as good as his, a low CON will hurt more than help.
I've also found a STCB. While there are better def CBs that aren't making the team, he also has very high blocking making him by far the best STCB I've seen. Just not sure if the position is worth a roster spot.
Debord will be/is a beast. I am concerned about his blocking though. I know with our offenses that TEs don't block, I'm just not sure if the game engine takes that into consideration. I will put him on the short list though.

One of the safeties I added turned out to have lower speed (17) than reported. While he's still good, with the addition of several safeties now, I could replace him with another position as well.

Belau23 wrote: PHI 21 wrote: Some possibilities: I've found a REALLY good WR, except he has a very low CON. With skills as good as his, a low CON will hurt more than help. I've also found a STCB. While there are better def CBs that aren't making the team, he also has very high blocking making him by far the best STCB I've seen. Just not sure if the position is worth a roster spot. Debord will be/is a beast. I am concerned about his blocking though. I know with our offenses that TEs don't block, I'm just not sure if the game engine takes that into consideration. I will put him on the short list though. One of the safeties I added turned out to have lower speed (17) than reported. While he's still good, with the addition of several safeties now, I could replace him with another position as well. I don't think blocking matters for a TE, unless there is a run play. But I understand the hesitation. I think the STCB would help, but only if we are 100% everywhere else

I know blocking is suppose to be one of the primary skills for TE, but since most teams pass, I'm not sure how it affects it, if it does in that situation. Anyway, I've dropped the Safety with lower speed and added the STCB. When I get the other roster spot opened up, hopefully tomorrow, I'll add Debord since I don't see anybody else that really stands out to me and I feel pretty good about the roster everywhere.