by the way, the other part, saying LI is hard because SB is not high enough is like saying nothing, because its impossible having a good team and have a high SB ... for that i want to see a practice match without seeing skills, but seeing how a good SB team win a good team ...
how much is high SB ??? 18? 15? 10? have we go up SB to 20??? then we dont attack ... we only defend or we have a 2M roster
If you intend to build a team like everyone else, yes, it's going to be impossible for it to be functionally different from everyone else.
The overwhelming "wisdom" is that SB is too expensive, never mind that a pop in SB costs half a pop in IS, ID or RB.
But, you might say, we can't give up IS, ID, or RB, because LI is the only way to play and 2-3 doesn't work.
One might then counter that you could give up IS, and maybe play outside.
But, you might say, we can't do that because JR is too expensive and outside game does not work.
One could then suggest you could use some of the savings from giving up IS and apply that wage room to JR on the 1, 2 and 3, and instead of having guards with huge passing and bigs with low passing, balance it out.
But, you might then say, nobody does that, so obviously it can't work.
And so on. At some point, the crux of the matter is that it always comes back to the "proof" that nobody does it, so it's impossible. And then because it's "impossible" nobody does it.
I, for one, don't know that it is impossible, nor do I know that it is possible. I do know that as long as nobody ever tries, and instead just complains about the option not being possible, we'll never know. And as I'm not good enough of a manager or trainer yet (or possibly ever) to do this one way or another, I'm not sure I'll be part of the answer either. But intellectual curiosity makes me feel like dismissing 2-3 / outside / shotblocking / JR as impossibilities with the absence of an actual documented attempt at making it work is poor logic, whether or not it turns out to eventually be proven or disproven.