I wonder what the purpose of having a player "skill" rating is when we already have individual skill ratings. Does this mean that if my Safety has good tackling skills and I decide to sub him in for linebacker on some formations, that he will not play as well simply because he has a very low position rating for LB? I'm honestly not sure what the position rating is or why it's in there, seems superfluous.
And the game is limited in the substitutions we can make. I can sub a LB in for CB in the nickel position. But in the depth chart, I literally can't line a FB at TE (H-back position), or RB at WR. Or another common one, sub OL for TE (tackle-eligible situation that teams often use).

If there is a purpose I'm curious to what it is? Is it just a generic rating to cover skills not addressed in the other ratings? For example I see nothing to differentiate man vs. zone coverage ability for a DB. What I would like to suggest is that if we have to have those ratings, can't take them out for 2024 at this point, can we at least make them more flexible? The argument I get back is that it's to disallow a really bizarre sub like an OT at DB. But my thought is that would not happen because an OL doesn't have the needed speed or agility, we don't need a separate position rating.

But maybe make it more flexible or gradiated so that WR for TE is not "punished" at the same rate that DL for WR is. For example, let's take a 76 overall FS on one of my teams. His position ratings are: FS 81, CB 26, SS 7, and everything else 1. If you want to avoid bizarre substitutions, maybe make for example
FS 81, SS 70, CB 65, LB 55. So that I COULD put him in at linebacker in a "big nickel" for example. Or why should a 98 skill Guard go all the way down to 24 for T and 22 for Center? It's quite common for an offensive lineman to play several positions. And there have been great multi-position players in NFL history: Kordell "Slash" Stewart, The Refrigerator Perry came in as goal line FB occasionally. Sometimes in an end of game hail mary situation I've seen CB line up at WR. I think we can avoid really dumb substitutions but not punish other movements like CB/S, LB/S, WR/TE so severely.

The skills are to replicate how good they are at the intangibles of a position. You may be able to generate a WR with a decent Arm, but that doesn't mean they have any clue how to play QB. You may be able to generate a QB with a lot of speed and hands, but that doesn't mean he could instantly be a good WR. You can almost think of skill as being "positional experience". The more they play at a particular position the more it will go up so if you move a RB to WR over time they will develop that skill (potentially they could lose some RB skill along the way as well)

There is an option to fully unlock the depth chart positions if you want. Swapping around FB/WR/RB/TE all should work relatively well, but things like OL at TE may cause some odd results depending on the formation and plays called.

Okay I didn't know about that last part about gaining experience. So I suppose the position rating is to prevent people cheesing by creating a WR with good throw ratings and playing at QB to exploit the AI? Otherwise of course I wouldn't play a QB at WR because his catching skills are probably going to be in the teens. I thought the individual skill ratings should preclude doing anything too odd, like putting a 300 pound rookie DT in at fullback in a Super Bowl. From what you're saying then, despite the bar graph showing the 80-to-5 dropoff of WR to TE, it shouldn't be too big a dropoff? Because I understand the concept to a point, but I just wish it was more graduated, so that WR-TE is not penalized at the same level of WR-DL. Because there are legitimate reasons to play people (slightly) out of position. Otherwise to me it's like saying, "Mr. Safety, I know you have great intelligence and tackling, speed, and the skills to play nickel back. In fact if I looked at your ratings I could barely tell you apart from a CB. And I'd love to put you in my three-safety nickel package. But even though you have CB-like skills, as soon as I move you to Safety you're going to play no better than if I'd put you in at kicker." See what I mean? Shades of gray.

The attributes still matter a lot more than skill. The lower skill players will just make more mistakes.

Okay that makes a difference. I was given the impression by more experienced users that if you play a Safety at LB, they'll effectively tank in ratings.