Proposal: Simplify ROSTER Positions, Keep Depth Chart Positions
Proposal: Simplify ROSTER positions, keep DEPTH CHART positions (for stability + better lineup logic)
I think EA would improve both roster clarity and engine stability if they separated two things that are currently tied together:
- Roster Position (plain / broad)
- Depth Chart Role (nuanced / scheme-specific)
The core idea
Make roster positions plain (RB, OT, OG, C, DT, EDGE, LB, CB, S, etc.), but keep the depth chart exactly how it is today (LT/LG/C/RG/RT, SAM/MIKE/WILL, FS/SS, etc.).
Right now, it feels like EA’s engine can get “locked” into rigid roster labels (LT vs RT, SAM vs WILL) in ways that cause weirdness with sorting, auto-fill logic, and role assignment.
If the roster positions were broad, EA could treat players as part of a position family first, then let the depth chart + attribute weighting decide where they actually fit best.
What this would fix (why it’s more stable)
• The engine wouldn’t be forced to assign roles/sides based on a rigid roster title.
• Users and CPU teams could naturally get the best 11 on the field because players aren’t “tied to a side” by a roster label.
• The depth chart remains the place where the nuance lives (LT vs RT, SAM vs WILL, etc.), but the roster stays clean.
Important guardrail (my biggest concern)
If EA did this with no restrictions, I could see the engine doing something stupid like:
• the same OT is “best” at both LT and RT and starts at both.
So this system must include duplicate restrictions for both user teams and CPU teams:
No player can be assigned as the starter at two parallel positions (or any two positions that appear on the field at the same time).
If a player is already slotted at one spot, he should be blocked/greyed out from being slotted into the parallel spot.
Ratings should drive “left vs right” once placed on the depth chart
Even if the roster says OT, the moment you highlight a player for LT vs RT, the game should evaluate him differently (attribute weights / archetype fit) and show a projected OVR for that depth-chart role, like it does now.
I also think overall shouldn’t show on the roster screen
On the roster list, I’d rather see attributes only (or at least hide the overall by default).
Overall should be contextual and role-based: the projection should show up when you’re placing a player into a depth chart role (LT, RT, SAM, etc.), because that’s where the weighting actually matters.
Proposed plain roster positions (with depth chart staying the same)
RB
• Covers HB + FB types. You place them at HB/FB on the depth chart based on skill set.
OT
• Can be placed at LT or RT. If he’s bad at both tackle roles, you might move him to OG during offseason position changes.
OG
• Can be placed at LG or RG.
C
• Same as now.
DT
• Can be a penetrator or NT type. Depth chart can still have DT/NT slots; attributes/body type decide where he fits best.
EDGE
• Can be 3–4 OLB type or 4–3 DE type. Coverage ratings should matter more for the 3–4 edge types.
LB
• Can play MIKE/SAM/WILL. Archetype + attributes determine who fits where (ex: Thumper = SAM, Signal Caller = MIKE, Lurker = WILL).
CB
• Outside CB or NB.
S
• Can play FS or SS
In hybrid defenses like 4–2–5 and 3–3–5, you effectively have two Strong Safeties on the field:
• SS1 = STAR (the nickel/overhang safety who plays over slots, fits the run, and is involved in coverage adjustments)
• SS2 = WS/Rover (the second “box safety” role on the opposite side, depending on the playbook/formation)
I actually like the current system, but EA should clarify this in the UI so casual players understand what they’re investing in when they recruit/develop safeties. A lot of people don’t realize that in these hybrid looks, you aren’t just building “one SS and one FS” — you’re often building two SS-type roles with different jobs, and your roster resources need to reflect that.
DB
• True utility secondary player (likely ATH types) that can play anywhere in the secondary.
(Other positions that aren’t “parallel” can stay basically the same.)
Optional: depth chart roles could be refined even more (only if feasible)
If EA can handle it cleanly:
• Make DE / DT / NT / EDGE real depth-chart roles with different weighting.
• Consider SAM as the hybrid edge type for base 3–4.
• Make DE the hybrid 5-tech that can play strongside in 4–3 and 5/4i in 3-4.
• Make EDGE the main pass rusher archetype (speed/power).
If that’s too complicated to implement reliably, then keep the current depth chart system—but the roster simplification + duplicate restrictions is still the main stability win.
