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 / Random thread Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2024-10-31 17:19:08 (ID: 100187249) Report Abuse | |
|
StuartW wrote:
I'm reading with interest, though I don't know the answers (looking forward to Chrill's further comments). Oh, the pressure 
Olband wrote:
I am so perplexed by the TE position in RZA. [...] They seem less effective than WRs in the passing game, there's no way to tell how effective they really are in the running game, they don't ever block in the passing game [... ]and they take more training than other positions, so the question [...] is Are they Worth it? About the effectiveness: Last season our second best pass catcher in terms of catching TDs was our #1 TE, and this season seems to go the same direction. So at least for us they put points on the board, even if not nearly as much as a first string WR. Not being able to tell their effect on the run game is a valid point, as they never seem to miss a block. Maybe there's a series of scrimmages hidden here to examine this further. About the training aspect, though: They do need a lot of training, yes, but 10 seasons in I'd say that all positions on or around the O-Line seem to. E. g. FB is similar to that. The only position on the defensive side of the ball that needs as much training and has a similar hazy effect on the play is that of the Safety. At least for the latter you can tell if their contribution is worth it, though... as you realize pretty fast that your personell is less than when you get long TD passes left and right
Olband wrote:
Is there any benefit to passing to the left flank in a BigI formation? Seems like that would put your TE against their CB1 and an LB? Doesn't seem like a good recipe for success. That's why the SEA LIONS avoid this madness 
Olband wrote:
Do you ever put your best player in a given offensive position 2nd so that they'll get a better matchup instead of going head-on against what would presumably be your opps' best defender at that position? I have, at the TE-position, to try and exploit defenses in the second quarter of a game. I never went back and looked if it worked, though... Right now our best RB is placed 2nd on the DC, but only to make sure he's alligned on the right in Wish- or Flexbone, so he's usually ticked first-string. Sometimes he's not, though, so he comes in fresh later in the game... but that, too, I have not examined any further if there's success to that. Olband wrote:
I doubt it, but is there any benefit to running your QB occasionally in wishbone, since that would be an option play and it would give one more player the defense would have to account for? This one, though, I have examined and tested just recently when we acquired a speedy QB with good CAR-skills. I did not run many scrimmages, and I did not use all the defenses that are available. I used the most common ones, though, and sadly Wish- and Flexbone seem to be the least effective QB Rush formations of them all.... which is kind of crazy as they were, as you said, initially developed to take advantage of a QB that's "a running back who can throw". Then again the SEA LIONS do not have all the other parts of an effective attack from the bone-formations, so maybe our tests did not show the truth about that... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-10-31 17:21:03 (ID: 100187250) Report Abuse | |
|
StuartW wrote:
2 years, and with the great help of our Knights ...I have been wondering how much planning and play testing you did, before day 1 of RZA, to come up with such a brilliantly balanced game? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-10-31 20:48:08 (ID: 100187251) Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
Is anyone even still reading this? Is the only of your question that I can answer |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-10-31 21:27:46 (ID: 100187252) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
How do you like 533 as a viable pass defense formation? Sure, there's not much backfield, but it (allegedly) puts more pressure on the QB, especially with a LB blitz, so that should mean less passes get well thrown, right? Risky, I'll grant you, but with talent in the backfield, it seems viable. Interestingly the SEA LIONS are right now playing a team that seems to rely on 5–3–3 a lot, against the pass or the rush... and we cannot make much happen. So it does seem to work. But I'd guess it's the same as with 4–4–3: if you choose to defend with only one Safety back there the chosen one should be very good. Or you have an awesome offense and can live with your opponent scoring "easy" TDs at any time and you just try to outscore your opponents in every game 
Just now the SEA LIONS had a 2nd&2 SG2WR pass incomplete and a 3rd&2 SG4WR pass incomplete on our own 39, both against 5–3–3. Maybe it's because of sub-par talent on the field, because I have set up the DC according to the opponent who's also not very good personnell-wise... but it's maddening nonetheless. EDITH: In the end we were able to win this one by a pretty wide margin (see here), but it took a 2nd half kick-off return for a touchdown to get comfortable. And even after that we did not get much going really, but that may be because of rushing the ball mostly with the lead... Last edited on 2024-10-31 21:58:07 by Chrill |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-10-31 21:34:45 (ID: 100187253) Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
This is just because there haven't been any discussion posts in a week... don't like the quiet. I am so perplexed by the TE position in RZA. I like tight ends. I like using them in play. But they seem less effective than WRs in the passing game, there's no way to tell how effective they really are in the running game, they don't ever block in the passing game (still don't like that one,) and they take more training than other positions, so the question (not for the first time) is Are they Worth it? I'm still playing with them because I do like them, but I hate this feeling of not knowing if it's a less-effective, and therefore wasteful, resource. Any thoughts? I think they are worth it, since if you avoid the TE position, the selection on formations without a penalty gets quite slim. But that's the managers decision. Problem could be, that in the middle often the best LB, including very smart, is sitting and might INT more often, if you throw the ball to the TE. Olband wrote:
Is there any benefit to passing to the left flank in a BigI formation? Seems like that would put your TE against their CB1 and an LB? Doesn't seem like a good recipe for success. That seems to depend on your TEs skill set and the skill set of the defenders. Remember that this is NOT real life, so no weight, the TE is not autoamtically slower, less agile or bigger than the defender. But nobody knows what the engine does, so maybe the catch calculation is equal with a WR or not. Olband wrote:
Do you ever put your best player in a given offensive position 2nd so that they'll get a better matchup instead of going head-on against what would presumably be your opps' best defender at that position? I did that in the past sometimes, but with substitution and skill sets almost at the same level it does not matter much, whether #1 vs #2, #1 vs #1 or other stuff. Olband wrote:
I doubt it, but is there any benefit to running your QB occasionally in wishbone, since that would be an option play and it would give one more player the defense would have to account for? I never run by intention the QB, so no exp on that topic. In general did the QB run not looked much better or worse than the regular one. Olband wrote:
How do you like 533 as a viable pass defense formation? Sure, there's not much backfield, but it (allegedly) puts more pressure on the QB, especially with a LB blitz, so that should mean less passes get well thrown, right? Risky, I'll grant you, but with talent in the backfield, it seems viable. In my competion called 'Leatherheads'm, where only running is allowed, but sometimes passes happen, the 5-3-3 defense was the one most of the time played (since run was expected) and got burned with many big play pass plays then. So, very risky defense. You MIGHT stop the pass play, or you get burried on a 80 yard pass TD.... Olband wrote:
Does a pass medium/deep playcall still have increased interception chance against a 533? or against anytime the defense is defending against a run? I did not test specific defenses, but the increased INT-chance is for sure there. Olband wrote:
Does anyone ever use the pass medium call? Yes, if the game is more or less lost, if not fast a TD comes in, the medium call, if successfull, gives many yards, so with 3-4 plays you could get 50+ yards easily. But of course the INT chance is also big. Sometimes it feels like the chance to force a fumble or INT as defense has the same chance than getting such desperate drive done. Olband wrote:
Is anyone even still reading this? Obviously is reading not the problem. Answering is on the forum. I'm sure any post is likely read by 10 to 50 people, but often not one is answering. Depends of course on the topic and how the post is written. Olband wrote:
It's more satisfying to build your team by developing players, but might it be more cost-effective to just buy ready to start vets? If your developing not-yet-1st-stringers cost $50-150K/week for 4 seasons while you patiently get them up to snuff, but you can buy an enough-snuff player mid-season and pay $200K+ for half a season while you get his TW up, haven't you saved moolah? (not to mention YA/facility costs) You have a point, but buying means either constant scanning the market and then being lucky to get the player cheap or willing to pay the highest price, or to take a player available and then train them with less effort to the setup you want. I think the best way is using all 3 pools, YA, Draft and Market, to get the team done. Money is not THAT issue, if you BUILD a team. A mature team is different, but it seems most managers do not have a reload-plan, more often a rebuild-plan. Olband wrote:
Does anyone else find that stats which don't support opinions you want to believe can just be ignored? Not sure what you mean, but the stats I hate the most are W on my opponents records, while I'm SURE their teams are not build in a smart way.  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-10-31 22:07:39 (ID: 100187256) Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
I am so perplexed by the TE position in RZA. I like tight ends. I like using them in play. But they seem less effective than WRs in the passing game, there's no way to tell how effective they really are in the running game, they don't ever block in the passing game (still don't like that one,) and they take more training than other positions, so the question (not for the first time) is Are they Worth it? I'm still playing with them because I do like them, but I hate this feeling of not knowing if it's a less-effective, and therefore wasteful, resource. Any thoughts? Also a big fan of TEs in real life. Gronk is someone that is really special and that made Patriots such a great team. In RZA TEs drop a lot of passes (like 1 on every 3-4 catches, while WRs drop 1 on every 5,6,7), they don't block on pass plays (I also don't like that one) and they are key to 11 yards inner pass that produce most of interceptions in RZA. So it seems that you can live and play very good football with pass outside and ignore TEs all the time, so there is no need for a great player on that position, let me say one or two with 35 skills can do the job. Olband wrote:Is there any benefit to passing to the left flank in a BigI formation? Seems like that would put your TE against their CB1 and an LB? Doesn't seem like a good recipe for success.
I believe result will be as good as passing to both flanks no matter of match up created TE vs CB or TE vs LB Olband wrote:Do you ever put your best player in a given offensive position 2nd so that they'll get a better matchup instead of going head-on against what would presumably be your opps' best defender at that position?
All good teams have at least 2 or 3 similar players on WR, OL, DL, LB or CB positions, so making best one a 2nd string is not a benefit at all since the match up is almost the same. Olband wrote:I doubt it, but is there any benefit to running your QB occasionally in wishbone, since that would be an option play and it would give one more player the defense would have to account for?
Only if he decide to run by himself, never put a QB to run on his own since hard to get carrying on elite level by the time he retires. Olband wrote:How do you like 533 as a viable pass defense formation? Sure, there's not much backfield, but it (allegedly) puts more pressure on the QB, especially with a LB blitz, so that should mean less passes get well thrown, right? Risky, I'll grant you, but with talent in the backfield, it seems viable.
For my team, no matter how good my defense is, passing is something I can't stop. Once I was in PO with 32nd defense in passing (WORST). And really don't know what to do. When you run scrimmage almost every pass is ALMOST INTERCEPTED, but QB still get like 70-75% completions and no interceptions
So 5-3-3, 3-4-4, 4-3-4, 3-3-5, dime, it is all the same, pure random from match up to match up what happens for that catch/incomplete/interception pass Olband wrote:Does a pass medium/deep playcall still have increased interception chance against a 533? or against anytime the defense is defending against a run?
I believe it does, it has increased chance no matter what defense plays. Olband wrote:Does anyone ever use the pass medium call?
Is anyone even still reading this? I only use it in 4th quarter when behind and like 3-4 minutes left with me long way from scoring. Both medium and deep. And still reading and answering 
Olband wrote:It's more satisfying to build your team by developing players, but might it be more cost-effective to just buy ready to start vets? If your developing not-yet-1st-stringers cost $50-150K/week for 4 seasons while you patiently get them up to snuff, but you can buy an enough-snuff player mid-season and pay $200K+ for half a season while you get his TW up, haven't you saved moolah? (not to mention YA/facility costs)
Like seeing my players grow, but also support instant result from buying older players. It is sad that transfer market is so weak with not so many players. So my answer is yes, result will come faster if you manage to buy lot of players in short time from transfer market that are already built way you like Olband wrote:Does anyone else find that stats which don't support opinions you want to believe can just be ignored?
I ignore almost everything
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-11-03 10:10:10 (ID: 100187298) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
For my team, no matter how good my defense is, passing is something I can't stop. Once I was in PO with 32nd defense in passing (WORST). And really don't know what to do. When you run scrimmage almost every pass is ALMOST INTERCEPTED, but QB still get like 70-75% completions and no interceptions
edit : this was a quote from Dumbarajko but I am as bad as quoting as defending against passing game... There's a lot of things I cannot answer in this thread. But I have the same problem you have, I can't do anything against a pass offense. Yesterday I lost against Falcons who chose to make a lot of passing in shotgun 4, and I was unable to get a single pick. I don't know how to change this. I have to search but I Think 32nd pass defense was mine last season! Last edited on 2024-11-03 10:11:04 by Uaschitschun |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-11-03 10:20:56 (ID: 100187299) Report Abuse | |
|
Uaschitschun wrote:
I have to search but I Think 32nd pass defense was mine last season! According to RZA, seems you were 31st in passing yards allowed |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-11-03 10:23:25 (ID: 100187300) Report Abuse | |
|
Auers wrote:
Uaschitschun wrote:
I have to search but I Think 32nd pass defense was mine last season! According to RZA, seems you were 31st in passing yards allowed That's much better |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2024-11-03 10:24:45 (ID: 100187301) Report Abuse | |
|
Personnaly, I tend to think that I'm not too bad against the pass.
It's as simple as this : be awful against the run, so your opponents will prefer to run the damn ball |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Random thread | |
