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 / S28 Supercup Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 14 15 16 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2018-02-02 16:26:35 (ID: 100123032) Report Abuse | |
|
It is not about making SG4WR less effective, since the benefits of not playing "under center" are very clear to everyone who stood on the field himself. The issue in RZA is the "not good enough reaction" of defenses when offenses play SG4WR all game long without any diverse playcalling. And this is what I try to address in the rebalancing. If you call it a game or a simulation does not matter to me, really.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Gambler75
|
posted: 2018-02-03 09:22:51 (ID: 100123073) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
AP Sports wrote:
According to the 2016 data, though, teams actually put up better running numbers in the shotgun (4.95 yards per carry) than out of it (3.82). And passing was more efficient out of snaps under center, with a 63.6 completion percentage and 7.99 yards per pass attempt vs. 62.8 percent and 6.93 yards from the shotgun. The key, it turns out, might be moderation: With Tom -G.O.A.T- running the show for Belichick, the Patriots never started less than 43.4 percent, or more than 55.6 percent, of their plays from the shotgun in any season from 2011-15, reaching at least the AFC title game every time. James Develin at FB, played 30% of the Patriots snaps this season ... and made the Pro Bowl. So might be interesting to weigh the shotgun calls versus team success ... a lot of the constantly trailing struggling teams might be using a lot less "running formations" due to game situation as well. And it's not like the statistical advantage of shotgun runs means it's a better running formation ... it's about expectations / defense faced. All of those 3rd and shorts, where teams put out the "big" formations, drag down the average for non-shotgun formations - even if 2 yards IS a success in those cases. Statistics can be made to make all sorts of irrelevant points, or the NFL teams would fire their coaches and hire statisticians, and go for 4th down pretty much the entire length of the field, as a few statistical studies have suggested would actually give better odds of winning.  Last edited on 2018-02-03 09:34:03 by Gambler75 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Gambler75
|
posted: 2018-02-03 09:32:43 (ID: 100123075) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
Sharp Football Analysis wrote:
Effective Shotgun RBs: LeSean McCoy, Jordan Howard, Carlos Hyde, Ty Montgomery, Bilal Powell, Duke Johnson, James White, Rashad Jennings, and Jeremy Hill. Effective Under Center RBs: Ezekiel Elliott, DeMarco Murray, LeGarrette Blount, Tevin Coleman, Adrian Peterson, Mike Gillislee, Mark Ingram, Theo Riddick, Jerick McKinnon, and Latavius Murray. Based on 2016 stats, not a 100% trend from that list but at least looks somewhat like the smaller shiftier backs worked better out of the SG, and the traditional power backs did better from under center. Again, you can pull some arguments out - Hyde and Howard don't fit that trend, and look more like power RBs, but pretty much that whole list of UC RBs are 220 lb+ bruiser types. Last edited on 2018-02-03 09:43:20 by Gambler75 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2018-02-03 09:37:38 (ID: 100123076) Report Abuse | |
|
Since the success depends on the defense playcalling as well, all these "formulas" are only part of the picture. This is why of love this game...it is not black/white, and there is single adjustment causing success...
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Gambler75
|
posted: 2018-02-03 09:49:09 (ID: 100123077) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Since the success depends on the defense playcalling as well, all these "formulas" are only part of the picture. This is why of love this game...it is not black/white, and there is single adjustment causing success... Exactly my point ... it's not that the two back sets are particularly better for passing, it's the defense is forced to play "honest". The problem (IMO) is that here in RZA ... that doesn't happen. Playing over aggressively versus those formations doesn't have the same "risk" ... you won't give up a super long run, as they don't exist short of playing goal line D in the middle of the field, and often times shoving a 5-3 out versus a 2 back set will crush the run, and equally pressure the pass if they do go that way. The "play SG2/SG4" all game versus MSS, despite my team scraping out the W ... felt a bit absurd as I ran balanced formations and got sacked 11 times ... 10 from non-SG formations, and once from a 52.5 speed former player of mine in the SG. The protection issues of all of the non-SG forms still feels pretty "tilted". The risk vs reward just doesn't seem to be there ... and that creates incentive to just play SG all day. My 2 cents, YMMV.  Last edited on 2018-02-03 09:51:35 by Gambler75 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2018-02-03 14:06:42 (ID: 100123106) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse |
|
bwadders76 wrote:
Rock777 wrote:
Final 4: Admirals - 2 teams 0 intraleague games in second round Galaxy - 1 teams 0 intraleague games in second round Fire - 1 teams 0 intraleague games in second round Surprisingly the 2 Admiral teams are not facing off this week      While I want the Admirals teams to win we have two teams who rely heavily on match settings which I've been against from the start. It be much easy if playbooks where easy to make. And had run pass sliders That have been suggested many times. As ever time I tried making a playbook it either does not have the pass run ratio I am looking for game in and game out. And more importantly the playbook seemed to get hit pently anyway. So why try. On the other hand rebalanced the formations on defense is needed. On offense read mt next post Last edited on 2018-02-03 14:11:54 by andrew2scott2 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2018-02-03 14:18:27 (ID: 100123108) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
Offense
4wr and 2te/2wr sets have a big advantage 4 receivers Why other formation only have 3 or 2 depending. That why I think next u p d a t e the rb need to be legitimate receiving Option .So ever passign formation has 4 passing checks to do. And I do agree that fb blocking of shotgun or the other formation need adjusting. Last edited on 2018-02-03 14:19:06 by andrew2scott2 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Rock777
|
posted: 2018-02-03 14:25:02 (ID: 100123109) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Since the success depends on the defense playcalling as well, all these "formulas" are only part of the picture. This is why of love this game...it is not black/white, and there is single adjustment causing success... This is true in real life, but not so much in RZA. The single adjustment of "use SG formation", causes success. If there is not plans to balance the effectiveness of formations, why not just get rid of the other formations? New players won't automatically know they are supposed to just call SG every play, and will get distracted by all the useless formations in the game. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2018-02-03 14:34:05 (ID: 100123111) Report Abuse | |
|
Please stop discussing this such black/white. Balancing is part of my work for seasons and it still goes on...I feel offended somehow.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2018-02-03 14:41:03 (ID: 100123114) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Please stop discussing this such black/white. Balancing is part of my work for seasons and it still goes on...I feel offended somehow. Don't feel offend this game has came along way. And a game like this will likely never be done tunning. As long you look for ways to make it better. Thanks for the hard work pete. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 14 15 16 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / S28 Supercup | |
