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 / Discussions / OL blocking Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 9 10 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2016-09-07 20:54:48 (ID: 100085382) Report Abuse | |
|
Jonny Utah wrote:
but does the engine take into account how long it takes the WR's to get into a desired position and/or free from coverage Of course |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2016-09-07 20:57:19 (ID: 100085383) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
Jonny Utah wrote:
but does the engine take into account how long it takes the WR's to get into a desired position and/or free from coverage Of course Excellent, thanks Pete! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2016-09-07 21:27:51 (ID: 100085385) Report Abuse |
|
I don't see any real problem with a higher level of Sacks from the I formation, the backs are lined up for a rushing play with one behind the other, and with them being directly behind the QB they are hardly in prime position to either pass block or flare out to take a dump off.
The problems are elsewhere: FBs are too effective at pass blocking in the Shotgun formations. HBs don't even try to block. Passing should typically be better from the Pro set than the I - the split RBs are in good positions to assist with pass protection, and are better placed to move for a screen or swing pass play. At least, this was the case in the UK college football I played in the early 90s! Another problem seems to be with the way QBs deal with pressure. I'd like to see the game engine offer more options if the QB gets hurried (to more intelligent/experienced/high vision QBs) - scrambling out of the pocket, looking for a quick dump off pass to a secondary receiver/TE/RB, or just throwing the ball away. This improved sack evasion should probably be balanced with a return to the old levels of DE effectiveness in terms of sacking, along with DT/NT sacks being introduced. But I'm rambling as usual  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2016-09-07 21:34:07 (ID: 100085387) Report Abuse | |
|
JonnyP wrote:
The problems are elsewhere: FBs are too effective at pass blocking in the Shotgun formations. HBs don't even try to block. My 2 cents worth: FB blocking on SG are properly effective IMO. Sacks do happen but with the "6th" lineman (blocker) it really is harder to get at the QB. HB 's are normally and generally pathetic blockers and mostly just a decoy and/or 1/2 second slow down of the rusher. Of course there are a very few HB's that actually block somewhat effectively but they are really uncommon. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2016-09-07 21:42:58 (ID: 100085388) Report Abuse |
|
Figures of roughly 1% sacks on SG formations are way too low. 3-6% depending on relative skillsets of the teams would be much more realistic.
And regarding HB blocking (I think you run then down a little harshly there, even a bad attempt at a block can buy a QB a crucial second or 2) - something is better than nothing - if they simply cannot block, then at least they ought to act as a worthwhile spare receiver a bit more often. Last edited on 2016-09-07 21:45:10 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2016-09-07 21:49:52 (ID: 100085390) Report Abuse | |
|
Yesterdays wildcard game my opponent attempted to pass 32 times out of SG and I sacked him 3 times.
Looks like near 10% I attempted 36 SG passes and was sacked 3 times. Thats not far from 10% either. These numbers include SG2 - The sacks only happened vs SG4. I do agree there should be more dump off / outlet passes to HB's - mostly very short gains. Last edited on 2016-09-07 22:37:46 by punch drunk |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
thomastem
|
posted: 2016-09-08 03:11:43 (ID: 100085401) Report Abuse |
|
punch drunk wrote:
FB blocking on SG are properly effective IMO. Sacks do happen but with the "6th" lineman (blocker) it really is harder to get at the QB. You meant to say 3 right? 2 tackles and a FB. The kicker at center and punter at guard really aren't too worried about that DT pass rush now are they? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Doc
|
posted: 2016-09-08 12:09:29 (ID: 100085413) Report Abuse |
|
Solana_Steve wrote:
Doc wrote:
Interesting to see Lions has the lowest % sacked on SG4 considering the QB speed discussion. Is there anything from the I-Form stats, correlating with OL Blocking %, FB blocking and QB speed that you can take from the 3 teams, anyone? QB is a lot closer to the line in I formation than shotgun....maybe that has an affect? Steve SD Blitz Indeed, but I had a QB for over 12 seasons who was slower than Buffalo's guys, who played equally as close to the line of scrimmage and never got anywhere near sacked 60 odd times in 16 league games. I imagine it does have an effect, but there must be other factors contributing to the large difference in sacks between the teams. What about lop sided tactics coming into play, could this be causing anything? Edit. eh, probably not that, unless there's a 60% threshold or something. Last edited on 2016-09-08 12:59:05 by Doc |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hollyhh2000
|
posted: 2016-09-08 13:11:24 (ID: 100085425) Report Abuse |
|
Doc wrote:
Indeed, but I had a QB for over 12 seasons who was slower than Buffalo's guys, who played equally as close to the line of scrimmage and never got anywhere near sacked 60 odd times in 16 league games. I imagine it does have an effect, but there must be other factors contributing to the large difference in sacks between the teams. What about lop sided tactics coming into play, could this be causing anything? Edit. eh, probably not that, Holly's SG4 is in the 57% range to Buffalo's 61% for I-Form. I think, a couple of factors contribute: 1. Buffaloes passing a lot out of no FB Formation 20 Sacks were from SBS, SBB or Pro Set 2. Heavy passing % out of the same Formation Mombasa passed 82% of the times he ran an I-Formation and 69% he ran a Singleback Spread. So every Defense was in its passing defense and thinking pass and nearly every Defensive Coordinator who scouted his teams, were dialing up blitzes against this formations 58 of 67 sacks came from those 2 formations. I would bet, that the low Blocking stats are mainly driven by 1) high percentage of pass blocking ( my guess: scoring a good Passblock is harder than scoring a good Runblock) 2) the defense was expecting the Pass and thus ready for the passblocking, making it harder to succeed |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Doc
|
posted: 2016-09-08 13:14:46 (ID: 100085426) Report Abuse |
|
Good stuff Holly, definitely makes sense.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 9 10 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / OL blocking | |
