no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Add option to change a rule if average yards per attempt is less than x Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Cheesehead
|
posted: 2017-06-26 12:50:15 (ID: 100108727) Report Abuse |
|
So let's say I make a run heavy playbook but I am worried that the run D I'm up against might stifle my attack.
I can then put in a rule that says: if at half time average yards per attempt for rule 'Wishbone, rush, both flanks' is less than x (for example 2.5 yards) then change this rule for second half from rush to pass type so it becomes 'Wishbone, pass, both flanks'. Bonus points for making me set up a whole new rule instead of changing the rule (example: instead of Wishbone, change it to '4WR, pass, left flank only') |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2017-06-26 20:35:20 (ID: 100108743) Report Abuse |
|
I like this idea.
More realistic because that is what would happen if a team found they were having no success with a particular play - they would change to something else rather than just keep running it for the whole game. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-06-26 20:51:20 (ID: 100108746) Report Abuse |
|
Captain Jack wrote:
I like this idea.
More realistic because that is what would happen if a team found they were having no success with a particular play - they would change to something else rather than just keep running it for the whole game. Unless your Atlanta with a massive lead in the Super Bowl and decide to play chuck and duck to protect that lead..... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Hunter550
|
posted: 2017-06-26 23:16:42 (ID: 100108749) Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Unless your Atlanta with a massive lead in the Super Bowl and decide to play chuck and duck to protect that lead..... WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THAT HERE  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Cheesehead
|
posted: 2017-06-27 10:11:53 (ID: 100108758) Report Abuse |
|
Captain Jack wrote:
More realistic because that is what would happen if a team found they were having no success with a particular play - they would change to something else rather than just keep running it for the whole game. Exactly! It is frustrating to go for example for a run heavy PB only to realise after one Q you are f@#$ed because it's getting you nowhere. This will fix that. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2017-06-28 06:07:36 (ID: 100108817) Report Abuse |
|
Cheesehead wrote:
Captain Jack wrote:
More realistic because that is what would happen if a team found they were having no success with a particular play - they would change to something else rather than just keep running it for the whole game. Exactly! It is frustrating to go for example for a run heavy PB only to realise after one Q you are f@#$ed because it's getting you nowhere. This will fix that. I really like this idea so long as the defense has a corresponding option to adjust should they need. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
MonsterT95
|
posted: 2017-06-28 08:24:12 (ID: 100108825) Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Cheesehead wrote:
Captain Jack wrote:
More realistic because that is what would happen if a team found they were having no success with a particular play - they would change to something else rather than just keep running it for the whole game. Exactly! It is frustrating to go for example for a run heavy PB only to realise after one Q you are f@#$ed because it's getting you nowhere. This will fix that. I really like this idea so long as the defense has a corresponding option to adjust should they need. Seems fair, but PB's are getting much more complex !(they already are ) |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Cheesehead
|
posted: 2017-06-28 08:41:17 (ID: 100108830) Report Abuse |
|
Well it can be said that many people need a lot of rules to introduce randomness into their PBs so it cannot be easily scouted.
This would probably reduce the need for a lot of rules in a PB as you can be more specific because you can swithch if rule x is not working. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-06-28 08:56:46 (ID: 100108833) Report Abuse |
|
You don't really need that many PB rules to have randomness in your PB, just make sure you do opposite things in the same situation in 2 different PB and voila.
For example, in one PB I always run from Wishbone on 1st down in the 1st quarter. In my second PB I always pass from Wishbone on 1st down in the 1st quarter. My opponent has no way of guessing which PB I'll use so he'll know I'll play from Wishbone on 1st down in the 1st quarter but he has no way of knowing if I'll run or pass which is the important part to keep "secret". |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Add option to change a rule if average yards per attempt is less than x | |
