Anyone create some kind of defensive library?

[ZootMurph]

I saw SkyDog's offensive library, and was curious if anyone had done something similar for defense. I'm interested in specifically running a Buddy Ryan styled 46 Bear/Eagle defense that he was so successful with.

Any advice or information would be awesome!

[MacroGuru]

I am looking at doing something of the sort with this, but it's a little harder than the offensive side...

[apollo_tsg]

In some undocumented testing I have done - the double coverage setting has a significant effect on the outcome of a game - and the same setting used against a diff teams is a not so wise move.

I have found that if all else stays the same, just using Rex to decide that greatly increases positive results.

So...some settings should change depending on your opp. I am not smart enough to figure out what other settings should change week to week. Perhaps blitzing based on the opp lineman...

[MacroGuru]

In some undocumented testing I have done - the double coverage setting has a significant effect on the outcome of a game - and the same setting used against a diff teams is a not so wise move.

I have found that if all else stays the same, just using Rex to decide that greatly increases positive results.

So...some settings should change depending on your opp. I am not smart enough to figure out what other settings should change week to week. Perhaps blitzing based on the opp lineman...

Of course, there will definitely have to be more tweaking on the defensive side of the ball more than the offensive, but I feel having some set standards out there, with instructions on how to make the changes, or what has to be looked at, could be benificial...

For example, Quicksands MinWage defense is a close 4-2-5 style, however, it was being used with the 3-4 instead of the 4-3.

[ZootMurph]

Basically, I don't feel there is enough customizability on the aggressiveness of your defense. I've tried to find a way to get more blitzes out of my defense, but I have yet to find it.

Obviously, I'm a defense first type of guy, so I'm more interested in the defensive settings. I would love to be able to turn up the blitzes against a QB with a low Read Defense or a rookie QB, etc. etc.

I was hoping AgRun and AgPass would mean I'd run more Run Blitzes and Pass Blitzes, but that didn't change the setting. It basically seems all settings run the same % of blitzes, which in turn really really decreases the possible defensive schemes.

[Ben E Lou]

You can definitely blitz more or less if you use the "defensive personnel choices" screen to do it.

[MacroGuru]

Well, I have done about 5 hours of research within the game on Plans and such...and it is time to start my testing, I will be using Quicks excel spreadsheet for it, and I will be posting my results here.

[Lintyfresh85]

With ****EDIT**** Albion's Cover 2, originally said QuikSand's min. wage defense ****Edit**** defense and a few adjustments I got a very good pass defense... rush defense was another story...

But as for passing after a 7 year trial this is what I came up with.

<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 258pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="343"><col style="width: 52pt;" width="69"> <col style="width: 103pt;" span="2" width="137"> <tbody><tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 11.25pt; width: 52pt;" height="15" width="69">RPG</td> <td class="xl25" style="width: 103pt;" x:num="" width="137">
</td> <td class="xl25" style="width: 103pt;" x:num="" width="137">30.1

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">Rush Yds

</td> <td class="xl25" x:num="103.74285714285713">
</td> <td class="xl25" x:num="120.16666666666667">120.1666667

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl24" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">YPC</td> <td class="xl25" x:num="3.6442857142857146">
</td> <td class="xl25" x:num="4.003333333333333">4.003333333</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
<table x:str="" style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 258pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="343"><col style="width: 52pt;" width="69"> <col style="width: 103pt;" span="2" width="137"> <tbody><tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt; width: 52pt;" height="15" width="69">Pass Att.</td> <td class="xl24" style="width: 103pt;" x:num="35.414285714285711" width="137">
</td> <td class="xl24" style="width: 103pt;" x:num="33.783333333333331" width="137">
33.78333333

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">Complete</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="">

</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="18.516666666666666">
18.51666667

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">%

</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="59.01428571428572">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="">54.85

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">Yards

</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="185.66666666666666">185.6666667

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">YPA

</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="5.7842857142857138">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="5.5149999999999997">5.515

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">YPC</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="9.7957142857142845">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="10.033333333333333">10.03333333</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">
</td> <td class="xl22">
</td> <td class="xl22">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">Tot
Yards

</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="294.14285714285717">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="291.66666666666669">291.6666667

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">3rd Down</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="36.385714285714286">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="33.566666666666663">33.56666667</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">PPG</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="16.385714285714283">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="">
15.4

</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 11.25pt;" height="15">Pass Rush</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="23.61428571428571">


</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="23.166666666666668">23.16666667</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl23" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pass Def</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="64.428571428571431">
</td> <td class="xl24" x:num="67.766666666666666">67.76666667</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[MrDNA]

Linty, is that 7 trials of the same season, or 7 consecutive seasons?

Also, I'd be interested to see how those stats stacked up against straight Rex.

For my part, I've been fooling with Aggressive/"Un"-Aggressive Ds. I did ten trial seasons of straight Rex and then ten trials of a "safe" defense (all Aggressive Runs when to Run and all Aggressive pass went to Pass). Looks like there was almost NO statistical difference across the board. Right now I'm trying out an ALL Aggressive D. I'll post up the results when I get them and can make them look nice :D

[Lintyfresh85]

Linty, is that 7 trials of the same season, or 7 consecutive seasons?

Also, I'd be interested to see how those stats stacked up against straight Rex.

For my part, I've been fooling with Aggressive/"Un"-Aggressive Ds. I did ten trial seasons of straight Rex and then ten trials of a "safe" defense (all Aggressive Runs when to Run and all Aggressive pass went to Pass). Looks like there was almost NO statistical difference across the board. Right now I'm trying out an ALL Aggressive D. I'll post up the results when I get them and can make them look nice :D

7 trials of the same season...

I also did 7 trials of that exact season, but this time I didn't touch the gameplan at all.

In the first trial I posted... Each week I let the coach dictate the "gameplan".... in this trial, whatever the gameplan was for the Week 1 team, we went with for the entire season...

Interestingly enough, the rushing yards are down.... but not so surprisingly the passing defense suffers when you don't change the gameplan week to week to meet the other teams strengths and weaknesses.

So here's the results of the 7 test with no gameplan changes...

http://www.sendspace.com/file/ow2ams

On the left is the original test with no recommended gameplan changes... Test 2 is with Rex recommended gameplan changes.

Unfortunately I can no longer use the season for test as I accidentally let the Season end on my 14th trial. :(

[Lintyfresh85]

So I decided to start up a new trial...

I did a complete draft (with defense clearly in mind) and this is my team.

This test is done with no injuries....

Here's the roster.



http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/3651/teamrosterso5.png

So here are the results. This is thirty years of testing... The first 10 are complete Rex defense... no changes for percentages or coverages.

The second 10 years are my defense, but with no weekly gameplan changes.

The third 10 years (and a pain in the butt to sim through) was my gameplan with CPU suggestions for each weekly gameplan. Coverages are not touched at all... just gameplan.

As you can see, my gameplan with CPU recommended changes seems to work the best...

Thoughts?



http://img232.imageshack.us/img232/8374/chartbl8.png

[MacroGuru]

See now we are talking, this is the kind of numbers we need to see on defense to help determine what areas and which ways are the best.

[MacroGuru]

Alright, here we go..my first set of results

10 Seasons - same season with the following roster



Front Office Football 2007
Detroit Lions Roster, Scout Overview

Player # Pos Start Exp Current Estimate Future Estimate Cntrct
Bridges, Will 7 QB QB 4 43 44 1 yr.
Alonso, Curtis 27 RB RB 2 47 47 2 yrs
Robertson, Preston 26 FB FB 1 30 38 1 yr.
Reid, Steven 81 TE TE 10 61 61 2 yrs
Bensen, Ed 84 FL FL 6 43 43 3 yrs
Barker, Bo 82 SE SE 10 46 46 1 yr.
Henderson, Ian 71 LT LT 1 30 54 1 yr.
Van Horn, Harvey 60 LG LG 6 48 53 2 yrs
Howard, Britt 59 C C 8 67 67 2 yrs
Shivers, Brant 64 RG RG 5 50 50 3 yrs
Dotson, Isaac 62 RT RT 10 40 40 1 yr.
Oakley, Bert 77 LDE LDE 9 72 72 3 yrs
Murphy, Rusty 91 LDT LDT 2 61 64 3 yrs
Singleton, Bo 90 RDT RDT 9 54 54 3 yrs
Garza, Cole 79 RDE RDE 8 65 65 2 yrs
Peterson, Vinny 55 SLB SLB 8 80 80 2 yrs
Blanchard, Barry 96 MLB MLB 5 76 76 5 yrs
Brandon, Scottie 95 WLB WLB 8 54 58 2 yrs
Bentley, Seth 43 LCB LCB 7 59 59 3 yrs
Shea, Rod 31 RCB RCB 5 57 57 1 yr.
Green, Lee 24 SS SS 11 76 76 1 yr.
Shepard, Dave 42 FS FS 7 71 71 4 yrs
Bookas, Ron 74 LDT 17 30 36 2 yrs
Rossi, Bennie 67 LT 11 34 34 1 yr.
Mercado, David 40 LCB 10 36 36 3 yrs
Assanie, Harvey 15 QB 9 36 36 1 yr.
Collins, Shawn 11 QB 9 31 31 1 yr.
Cassidy, Kennedy 45 RB 9 40 40 2 yrs
Shepherd, Andre 86 SE 8 29 30 1 yr.
Alexander, Nolan 50 SLB 8 42 51 3 yrs
Nanamaker, Artie 48 LCB 8 27 30 1 yr.
Rex, Nolan 29 RB 7 27 28 2 yrs
Jourden, Luke 89 FL 7 30 30 2 yrs
Davis, Bryant 97 WLB 7 35 35 2 yrs
Baxter, Lance 88 TE 6 35 35 2 yrs
Liakos, Nicky 85 TE 6 27 31 2 yrs
Cayea, Jorge 66 RG 6 31 33 2 yrs
Nowlin, Henry 93 LDE 6 38 38 2 yrs
Claybrooks, Joseph 54 SILB 6 39 41 1 yr.
Bradford, Daniel 44 SS 6 41 41 1 yr.
Shupp, Everett 41 LCB 5 48 48 1 yr.
Bitkowski, Ian 4 P 4 37 37 1 yr.
McCormick, Casey 14 K 4 90 90 3 yrs
Floyd, Jeremy 76 RDE 4 38 40 3 yrs
Mills, Lamar 56 C 3 29 38 1 yr.
Dole, Darrin 80 SE 1 23 46 3 yrs
##Rayburn, Roman 65 LG 5 20 27 2 yrs
##Stanek, Morris 52 MLB 3 27 38 1 yr.
##Carpenter, Randy 47 FS 2 27 41 1 yr.
##Cohan, Erik 98 LDT 1 22 29 2 yrs
##Buckley, Walter 53 MLB 1 17 39 1 yr.
##Borders, Vinny 78 LDT 1 16 30 1 yr.
##Jurgensen, Arnie 70 RDT 1 16 26 1 yr.


I am running a 4-2-5 test based upon personal knowledge on how most 4-2-5's have been ran in the High School and College level.

the 4-2-5 is primarily a 3 deep defense, with multiple blitzers coming off the outside edges, freeing up the DE as the OL slide to pick up the blitzers, if the DE is picked up, those blitzing get in.

Settings: 4-3 defense, with the focus on the nickle, settings cover both sides of the field.

Goaline
Agressive Run: 20

Nickle
Agressive Run: 80
Run: 100
Pass: 100
Aggressive Pass: 80

Dime
Aggressive Pass: 20

Defensive Game Plan Adjustments - Reset All

Blits 1st or 2nd Down:
90/50/50/90

Blitz 3rd or 4th Down
90/50/50/90

Bitz 2+ Players:
100

Blitz Settings (I think the SS Blitz could be notched up more)
SLB Outside: 20
MLB: 10
WLB Outside: 20
LCB: 5
SS: 20
SLB Inside: 5
WLB Inside: 10
RCB: 5
FS: 5

Coverage Settings:
1 Deep Loose Man: 2
1 Deep B&R: 3
2 Deep Loose Man: 15
2 Deep B&R: 15
3 Deep Zone: 45
4 Deep Zone: 10
Strong Side Man: 5
Weak Side Man: 5

Orient CB by Side of Formation
Double Team Strong: 10
Double Team Weak: 10

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 459pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="611"><col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="3" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 48pt;" height="17" width="64">
</td> <td class="xl63" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="2" class="xl65" style="width: 96pt;" width="128">Rushing Offense</td> <td class="xl63" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="2" class="xl65" style="width: 96pt;" width="128">Passing Offense</td> <td class="xl63" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="3" class="xl65" style="width: 144pt;" width="192">Defensive Results</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl63" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Wins</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl63">Rushes</td> <td class="xl63">YPC</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl63">Passes</td> <td class="xl63">YPA</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl63">Points</td> <td class="xl63">YPC</td> <td class="xl63">YPA</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl64" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">7.10</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl63">24.1</td> <td class="xl64">3.89</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl63">33.74</td> <td class="xl64">5.53</td> <td class="xl63">
</td> <td class="xl64">20.80</td> <td class="xl64">4.13</td> <td class="xl64">6.93</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Now here are some interesting numbers defensively from this Gameplan:

Over the 10 seasons:

Avg Sacks 40.5
Avg TO Margin: -.5

You can download the gameplan and the Team Summary Print Outs Here:
http://www.flfl-fof.com/425test.zip

[MacroGuru]

I will run some more tests after I wake up(3-3-5, 5-2, and attempt the 4-6)

[Leonidas]

I've discovered a few things like the dynamics of the different patches have made vast differences in what you can or cannot get away with in defensive gameplanning. When the new game first came out I built a stuff the run first defense that was brilliant, really improved the defense. I did the testing to prove it as well.

However that defense is plain merde on the current version of the game. I have yet to come up with a run stopping defense that contributes to an improved overall defense with the newest version. That said I have come up with a nice pass defense geared to stopping the short passing game, do just enough to not stop big runs, but occasionally gives up big pass plays. It keeps completion percentage and pass yards per attempt way down and ints up.

I do think not enough thought is given to overall game dynamics. I've run hundreds of tests on all the patches with various offenses and defenses and some trends really stand out on me. There's a chicken and egg thing you really need to watch out for when testing gameplans. Strangely successful teams tend to give up rushing yardage at a higher rate per carry while usually having a better rating against the pass. My theory is when you are winning most of the time you have a pass defense on the field more often. Thus your run defense will tend to look worse than it really is while your pass defense may look better than it really is. Beware on teams being successful while seeming to have a poor run defense.

Along those lines for offenses, you may think passing is the way to go as frequently losing teams have higher run averages. I found this in testing of single teams over many seasons. In the less successful season on average teams run better and pass worse, while conversely they run worse and throw better when winning. At first I thought this meant the game required you to throw well and disregard the run to win. In fact I have become convinced this is just a consequence of the game dynamics winning and losing teams face and has nothing to do with the team's success. You get more yards per carry on a losing team because the opponent is in a pass defense more often, not because passing is more important to winning games.

I've always believed football should be coached with a holistic approach. Stacking up on one facet of the game is a mistake. You can go run and shoot and put a lot of points on the board, but you are hurting your defense with that approach. I believe the same holds true in FoF. The best approach is balanced, on both sides of the ball. Ultimately getting the best talent coherently fit with an appropriate gameplan is the way to success. Jim has done an excellent job discouraging the gimicks.

[Chubby]

I've discovered a few things like the dynamics of the different patches have made vast differences in what you can or cannot get away with in defensive gameplanning. When the new game first came out I built a stuff the run first defense that was brilliant, really improved the defense. I did the testing to prove it as well.

However that defense is plain merde on the current version of the game. I have yet to come up with a run stopping defense that contributes to an improved overall defense with the newest version. That said I have come up with a nice pass defense geared to stopping the short passing game, do just enough to not stop big runs, but occasionally gives up big pass plays. It keeps completion percentage and pass yards per attempt way down and ints up.

I do think not enough thought is given to overall game dynamics. I've run hundreds of tests on all the patches with various offenses and defenses and some trends really stand out on me. There's a chicken and egg thing you really need to watch out for when testing gameplans. Strangely successful teams tend to give up rushing yardage at a higher rate per carry while usually having a better rating against the pass. My theory is when you are winning most of the time you have a pass defense on the field more often. Thus your run defense will tend to look worse than it really is while your pass defense may look better than it really is. Beware on teams being successful while seeming to have a poor run defense.

Along those lines for offenses, you may think passing is the way to go as frequently losing teams have higher run averages. I found this in testing of single teams over many seasons. In the less successful season on average teams run better and pass worse, while conversely they run worse and throw better when winning. At first I thought this meant the game required you to throw well and disregard the run to win. In fact I have become convinced this is just a consequence of the game dynamics winning and losing teams face and has nothing to do with the team's success. You get more yards per carry on a losing team because the opponent is in a pass defense more often, not because passing is more important to winning games.

I've always believed football should be coached with a holistic approach. Stacking up on one facet of the game is a mistake. You can go run and shoot and put a lot of points on the board, but you are hurting your defense with that approach. I believe the same holds true in FoF. The best approach is balanced, on both sides of the ball. Ultimately getting the best talent coherently fit with an appropriate gameplan is the way to success. Jim has done an excellent job discouraging the gimicks.

Joe Teeters asks what's wrong with gimmicks?

[ZootMurph]

You can definitely blitz more or less if you use the "defensive personnel choices" screen to do it.

Thank you! That's made a big difference in my defense.

I do sorta feel silly I missed that screen completely...

[MacroGuru]

Alright, moving on to the 5-2 defense, I will be running 2 tests through with this defense, reason being is, I want to test the default settings vs a true 5-2 setting.

Here are my testing variables.

Roster: Same as the 4-2-5

Lineup: With the 5-2, the default is the goaline defense, this is the defense you will use a lot more than anything else. I left the WLB as WLB and the SS as SS for the default test. With a 5-2 you tend to blitz with the MLB more than the others, and the SLB/WLB (SS) position blitz from the edges, or twist to the inside, it is a high man coverage defense as well.

Gameplan
SLB Outside: 15
MLB: 35
WLB Outside: 15
LCB: 1
SS: 2
SLB Inside: 15
WLB Inside: 15
RCB: 1
FS: 1


Defensive Personell Choices:
Goaline
Agg Run: 100
Run: 100
Pass: 80
Agg Pass: 80

I think I need to run the 5-2 all the way across here, but even as a DC I would rotate a nickle or dime in as I needed it.

Blitz on 1/2: 20
Blitz on 3/4: 20
Blitz 2+ players: 10

Testing Results from 10 Seasons:
<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 137pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="182"><col style="width: 89pt;" width="118"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl65" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 89pt;" height="17" width="118">52 Defense</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Wins</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">7.25</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Rush/Gm</td> <td class="xl67" align="right">25.0</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">3.94</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pass/Gm</td> <td align="right">36.88</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">5.38</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">2.53</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">7.85</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pts/Gm</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">20.18</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
You can download the Gamefile and Print to File Team Summaries:

http://www.flfl-fof.com/52test.zip

[MacroGuru]

Ok, I ran the 5-2 again this time, I call it a true 5-2.

I substituted a SS for the WLB and a FS for the SS, setting it up.

I left everything the same as the prior 5-2 profile.

Here are some of the results...

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 180pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="240"><col style="width: 132pt;" width="176"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl65" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 132pt;" height="17" width="176">52 WLB/SS/FS</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Wins</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">8.30</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Rush/Gm</td> <td class="xl67" align="right">26.1</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">3.96</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pass/Gm</td> <td align="right">35.01</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">5.48</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">2.41</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">7.56</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pts/Gm</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">18.96</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Now, what I find unique here is that nothing really changed by placing two players out of position except that the SS that was replacing the WLB had an increase of INT's over the WLB that was in that position.

You can pull down the Print To Text Team Summaries Here:

http://www.flfl-fof.com/52testSS.zip

[MacroGuru]

Next test is running a true 3-3-5

[MacroGuru]

Ok, the 3-3-5 test sim...

For me, the 3-3-5 is pretty personal, Bronco at BYU ran it, and I have played in the scheme before. It's a blitz heavy scheme from the LB and SS side, even bringing them from the corner, but you are blitzing on every down. Coverage is a heavy man coverage, but the occassional zone is added in.

I am just going to post the gameplan and text files for you to look at...

But the results of 10 seasons are:

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 182pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="243"><col style="width: 134pt;" width="179"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl65" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 134pt;" height="17" width="179">335 Default</td> <td style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Wins</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">9.30</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Rush/Gm</td> <td class="xl67" align="right">26.3</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">3.90</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pass/Gm</td> <td align="right">34.36</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">YPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">5.84</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPC</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">5.26</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">DYPA</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">5.50</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">Pts/Gm</td> <td class="xl66" align="right">19.12</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
You can download the gameplan and text files here:

http://www.flfl-fof.com/335test.zip

[MacroGuru]

Ok, the results of my testing so far is the following:

<table style="border-collapse: collapse; width: 885pt;" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="1179"><col style="width: 270pt;" width="360"> <col style="width: 83pt;" width="111"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="2" width="64"> <col style="width: 25pt;" width="33"> <col style="width: 48pt;" span="3" width="64"> <tbody><tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl65" style="height: 12.75pt; width: 270pt;" height="17" width="360">Testing Summary</td> <td class="xl66" style="width: 48pt;" width="64">
</td> <td class="xl66" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="2" class="xl68" style="width: 96pt;" width="128">Rushing Offense</td> <td class="xl66" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="2" class="xl68" style="width: 96pt;" width="128">Passing Offense</td> <td class="xl66" style="width: 25pt;" width="33">
</td> <td colspan="3" class="xl68" style="width: 144pt;" width="192">Defensive Results</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">
</td> <td class="xl66">Wins</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">Rushes</td> <td class="xl66">YPC</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">Passes</td> <td class="xl66">YPA</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">Points</td> <td class="xl66">YPC</td> <td class="xl66">YPA</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td class="xl69" style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">425</td> <td class="xl67">7.10</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">24.1</td> <td class="xl67">3.89</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">33.74</td> <td class="xl67">5.53</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl67">20.80</td> <td class="xl67">4.13</td> <td class="xl67">6.93</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">52 Defense Default</td> <td class="xl67">7.25</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">24.98</td> <td class="xl67">3.94</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">36.88</td> <td class="xl67">5.38</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl67">20.18</td> <td class="xl67">2.53</td> <td class="xl67">7.85</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">52 WLB/SS/FS</td> <td class="xl67">8.30</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">26.06</td> <td class="xl67">3.96</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">35.01</td> <td class="xl67">5.48</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl67">18.96</td> <td class="xl67">2.41</td> <td class="xl67">7.56</td> </tr> <tr style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17"> <td style="height: 12.75pt;" height="17">335 Default</td> <td class="xl67">9.30</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">26.32</td> <td class="xl67">4.00</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl66">34.36</td> <td class="xl67">5.84</td> <td class="xl66">
</td> <td class="xl67">19.12</td> <td class="xl67">5.26</td> <td class="xl67">5.50</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[MacroGuru]

The tests provided an interesting look into the way the game handles defense for me.

The disparity between the 3-3-5/4-2-5 and the 5-2 were pretty drastic.

The 3-3-5/4-2-5 combos were great at stopping the Pass, but dead last in the rush, I find this the fault of the way you have to build the plan, as you are using the Nickle and Dime to create these formations, you could probably use the bases, if you were willing to substitute SS for LB in the positions needed.

For the 5-2, it was amazing at stopping the run, but dead last in the passing. Again, another plan that is based off of something meant to stop the other.

I will continue tweaking and I will set up a repository for gameplan downloads.

[ZootMurph]

I basically set up a 46 style defense... bumping up blitzing a great deal. It's basically a 43 defense with a preference of 1 deep coverage and, of course, more blitzing. I try to use a lot of man and bump and run coverage, even though the 46 will generally have a lot of zone coverages.

In my testing, my starters have an average 49.7 rating. My top players are an 82 RCB and 77 FS. After that, I have a 60 LCB and 58 SS. My OLBs are both in the low 30s with over 50 in Man coverage, and my MLB is a 41. My DTs are 38 and 40 and my DEs are 35 and 52. My DTs, MLB, and SS are strong in run defense. My DEs are strong pass rushers, and everyone else is a good man to man player. I find that I am very effective with weaker players who excel in just one specific area with this defense.

With just these average players, I'm a top 10 defense 7 out of 10 times I simmed. Made top 10 vs. rush 9/10 and top 10 vs. pass 6/10.

Admittedly, I have a weak schedule and a run happy offense... which helps.

I'd really love to see one of you fellas who has a lot of experience run some tests with a lot more blitzing. I also think that, much like Jimmie Johnson's Eagles defense, that you don't have to have great players with the right system (just the RIGHT players). Being able to apply lots of pressure with guys who can handle being put out on an 'island' is my main focus. But, again, my testing must be taken with a grain of salt given my lack of experience with the game. Anyway, I'm sure it can be tweaked a LOT by someone with some knowledge, since I only played around with it a little bit.

I'm happy to email the fdp file if you want to take a look at the settings, and hopefully to get your 2 cents (or $5) worth of input... it COULD be really weak and I'm just lucky to be in the right situation. I'm trying it out now in an alternate league using computer draft to see how things go. In any case, I'm really interested to know if blitzing can make that much of a difference, and the more input I get (even in negative), the happier I'll be.

[MacroGuru]

Alright,

I have played these defenses a variety of times through 3 MP leagues...what I have found is the following.

1) Picking one of these three give up a ton of yardage the other way. So if I am set to stop the pass more, than I will give up more yards on the ground and vice versa.

2) Familiarity. I know Jim has said that offenses get familiar with defense and nothing is read about it. It is apparent as the defense stops the offense all game long until the 2nd half of the 3rd qtr, where they start killing me. The results are a lot of close games.

To me, I will run these defenses if I have the offense to protect myself. I think of the old school BYU football games where we knew that the opponent would rack 40 on us, and we had to score 45.

I just know I have to have a potent offense to run one of these sets now.

[MacroGuru]

Just a bump here...I am making some changes to the gameplans...

I just went through my playbooks I have from when I was in the 3-3-5, I have also watched a lot of game film on the 3-3-5 (BYU, UNM)

I have set some things up wrong...but there are also some positional requirements that will make this a lot better.

Once I have the changes tweaked, and it tested out, I will post the information for you.

[MacroGuru]

Just a bump here...I am making some changes to the gameplans...

I just went through my playbooks I have from when I was in the 3-3-5, I have also watched a lot of game film on the 3-3-5 (BYU, UNM)

I have set some things up wrong...but there are also some positional requirements that will make this a lot better.

Once I have the changes tweaked, and it tested out, I will post the information for you.

Still tweaking the 3-3-5...this is pretty tough...

[MacroGuru]

Alright,

One of the main problems with the 3-3-5 was giving up a ton of points in the 4th quarter. Well threw a lot of my tests I finally realized. The players are wearing out. The game is not subbing them at all, and so they are getting tired and giving up the big plays.

I am thinking I am going to have to figure out, how to run the 3-3-5 out of a base 3-4 defense to make it effective or have players with an amazingly high endurance.

[QuikSand]

Alright,

One of the main problems with the 3-3-5 was giving up a ton of points in the 4th quarter. Well threw a lot of my tests I finally realized. The players are wearing out. The game is not subbing them at all, and so they are getting tired and giving up the big plays.

I am thinking I am going to have to figure out, how to run the 3-3-5 out of a base 3-4 defense to make it effective or have players with an amazingly high endurance.

Another component may just be that the offenses are getting too familiar with the same defensive formation over and over. We don't get notes to that effect in the game logs or Solevision, but Mr Gindin has made it clear that it happens.

In short, I think the safest presumption is that any sort of gimmick in this game is going to have dramatically diminished returns. No blitz? All blitz? All nickel? All nickel and dime? Doesn't matter. Like it or not, the game clearly has reactions to every variation from the norm, and you end up becoming increasingly less effective at the thing(s) you are doing all the time.

[MacroGuru]

Another component may just be that the offenses are getting too familiar with the same defensive formation over and over. We don't get notes to that effect in the game logs or Solevision, but Mr Gindin has made it clear that it happens.

In short, I think the safest presumption is that any sort of gimmick in this game is going to have dramatically diminished returns. No blitz? All blitz? All nickel? All nickel and dime? Doesn't matter. Like it or not, the game clearly has reactions to every variation from the norm, and you end up becoming increasingly less effective at the thing(s) you are doing all the time.

I have thought that through as well, it's why I am going to test a 3-4 base defense with different blitz philosophies to see if I can recreate it that way.

I do notice one thing. QB's with a high read defense and sense rush destroy the 3-3-5 as I have it. The others, not as good.

[MacroGuru]

I almost gave up on this, but I have been making some minor tweaks and changes in my MP leagues and I am starting to see some of the fruition of this happening.

I am going to test out several things today and this weekend on a SP league for the 4-2-5 and 3-3-5 and see what kind of results I can get.

[QuikSand]

Another general thing with defenses... I don't have any idea what it would take to have reasonable confidence with defensive testing, but I think it's pretty well beyond the runs that I used to do with offenses. I think that defensive success is so much tied to team success (as in, teams with a lead tend to get better on defense since they can narrow their expectations more effectively) as to render defensive testing a very, very tricky business. A run of 10 perfectly controlled seasons might not tell you a damned thing. I fear doing any sort of meaningful test might be way, way beyond the fair juice/squeeze ratio. I've definitely given up the effort (on both sides of the ball).

[MacroGuru]

My defenses were working until the end of the game and towards the end of the season as my players were getting tired.

Looking into the requirements of the positions and such on a team. If you were going to run a pure 3-3-5 or 4-2-5 defense you would need to stack your defense pretty heavily with talent in the 2 deep spots and set PT at 50%. This is my thinking behind it.

If you can get enough pressure with your front 3/4 DL and a 1 or 2 LBs I think you can wreck havoc with the passing game in this league, and if you can find a way to effectively run blitz as well it makes defensive game planning that much more fun.

It's why I am working on this, if I can provide just a glimmer of insight into this for others and it helps, I will be happy.

[QuikSand]

My defenses were working until the end of the game and towards the end of the season as my players were getting tired.

How on earth can you be this specific with your conclusions? I put in some fairly substantial effort trying to understand when my defenses were "working" and basically walked away without feeling like I had any handle on it. Are you running tons and tons of trials and parsing files with some kind of utility?

[MacroGuru]

How on earth can you be this specific with your conclusions? I put in some fairly substantial effort trying to understand when my defenses were "working" and basically walked away without feeling like I had any handle on it. Are you running tons and tons of trials and parsing files with some kind of utility?

Sadly, I am not using a utility and I sim a game at a time and examine each and every aspect of my defense per game.

I drew the conclusion based upon the following factors.

When I was running the 3-3-5 purely out of the Nickle (Set to 100) the game WILL NOT sub for you. So towards the end of the game you can see where you have been tough and not allowing a lot in, that it does. Then enter this factor throughout the season.

If I am playing the same 2 ends, 1 DT, 4 LBs, 3 CBs and 2 Ss game in and game out, they are pound to be wore out. Well, I have noticed that it hits about week 6.

I switched it up even more, dropping 20 into Goalline on the AGG Run and Run and 20 into dime for Pass and Agg Pass forgetting that the same players are in the same spots except for maybe a different saftey or corner. Again, they are still tired at the end of the game where I start allowing a lot of points, regardless if we are down or up on the opposition.

So the next step is to have about a 5 to 10% gap called from the base defense to allow the players some rest to see if that affects the endurance aspect as much as I am thinking it is taking place through the game and the way I am calling my defenses.

Right now with that test, I have simmed my 1st season, our defense was ranked 6th against the rush and 12th against the pass. Lead in sacks, 3 players in the top 15 in Hurries with one of them leading, 2nd in QB Knockdowns, 2 players in the top 10 for INTs. We finished the season 12-4 and are a wild card team. As you can see, my defenses are all about disruption.

[MacroGuru]

Well, I am still testing what I have set for the 3-3-5 and so far, every sim I have I am getting an 11+ win season, leading the league in Sacks most of the time. Leading the league in Hurries and Knockdowns all of the time and when I am not leading in sacks our Passing Defense is up in the top 10 in INTs.

However, this is what is needed to run this type of defense 2 DE's with great pass rush technique and run defense (right now, pass rush strength doesn't look to be to important). A DT with great Run D.

EVERYONE should have at least a 30 or higher in Endurance or they will get tired and their performance will drop drastically. I always suggest you go deep on defense with as much matching talent as you can.

SLB is a coverage type LB, as in the setup, I only have him blitzing 5 to the in and 5 to the out

SILB is key as he is blitzing roughly 30 percent of the time and is always in on the nickle.

WLB is another key aspect of this defense, he is always rushing so he has to have a high PRT and PRS and Play Diagnosis helps. This is the player that generally leads the team in sacks getting between 15 and 20 a season.

CB's have to be all around Pass Defenders in Man to Man and Zone and I like them to have a high interception as well, but as long as they knock the ball down it's ok. (Remember, there are three of these that you will need)

SS is only blitzing 5 percent of the time, so I like them to be punishing hitters, with diagnosis and interception. They will be playing more of a zone so I like them to have a higher zone as well.

FS is only blitzing 2.5 percent (like the CBs) and they need a High Play Diagnosis, Zone Defense, and I like them to be the ones with a high interception as well.

I have some minor tweaks to test on this defense. Once complete, I will post it.

[MacroGuru]

Anyone notice that when you save a 3-4 gameplan it doesn't save it as a 3-4?

I just realized that with this, I was going to post it, but it takes a lot away from it.

[tarcone]

I raqn a 4-1-6 in GEFL for a season. I played a lot of nickel and put my backup SS in the OLB slot. I liked the defense a lot. not sure how effective it was, as it was seasons ago.
I would like to see you test this defense.
It relies on a strong presence at SS as you have 2 in the lineup at all times.
The bad thing as you mentioned the defense is in pass defense mode as you are in the nickel a lot.

[Tormaz]

Mine save as 3-4 when I save them

[MrDNA]

Very interesting D, MacroGuru. Any pointers on experimenting with defenses for a defensive noobie (so far Rex Rexinstein has been my D-coach! :D )

[QuikSand]

I am glad that you are making effort into understanding this stuff, MG. I don't really want to throw a blanket on your efforts. However, I think you may be dramatically underestimating what it takes to have *any* sense of what is happening with a iven defensive setup.

Back a few patches ago, I put some time into trying to figure out defenses. I would run ten seasons, with injuries off, using the exact same lineup, and different (often minor) variations in setup. Eventually, I concluded that even that much effort wasn't really telling me anything meaningful -- there were just too many variables to attribute much of the success to the defensive schemes. And that's running ten controlled seasons with each scheme.

If you are making a tweak here or a tweak there, and then seeing how things play out over the course of a few games or one season -- I suspect that it's absolutely impossible to attribute any changes you get from one trial to the next to the defensive changes. Just way too small a sample size.

I wish you well, and I hope that you are able to improve your results with your efforts... but I fear that your ability to draw a real conclusion here is really suspect. I have seen the exact same team with the exact same defensive scheme rate among the league leaders in one full season trial, and then rate in the bottom third of the league in the next. With that kind of massive variability completely expected, it's really tough to run one season and say much of anything, in my judgment.

[Ben E Lou]

GUIDE TO DEFENSIVE SUCCESS IN FOF2007

1. Acquire players with lots of big, red bars.
2. Don't do anything extreme with your game plan.

[QuikSand]

I second the motion from the HNIC

[Dutch]

I wouldn't suggest a Rex Defensive gameplan, but definately keep it balanced.

[Subby]

3. DO NOT REX

[MacroGuru]

LOL...I hate to say it, I don't buy the fact it is futility to figure out a proper defensive formula and gameplan. I feel it truly helps you.

Sorry some of you feel that way.

[damelloman888]

I am glad that you are making effort into understanding this stuff, MG. I don't really want to throw a blanket on your efforts. However, I think you may be dramatically underestimating what it takes to have *any* sense of what is happening with a iven defensive setup.

Back a few patches ago, I put some time into trying to figure out defenses. I would run ten seasons, with injuries off, using the exact same lineup, and different (often minor) variations in setup. Eventually, I concluded that even that much effort wasn't really telling me anything meaningful -- there were just too many variables to attribute much of the success to the defensive schemes. And that's running ten controlled seasons with each scheme.

If you are making a tweak here or a tweak there, and then seeing how things play out over the course of a few games or one season -- I suspect that it's absolutely impossible to attribute any changes you get from one trial to the next to the defensive changes. Just way too small a sample size.

I wish you well, and I hope that you are able to improve your results with your efforts... but I fear that your ability to draw a real conclusion here is really suspect. I have seen the exact same team with the exact same defensive scheme rate among the league leaders in one full season trial, and then rate in the bottom third of the league in the next. With that kind of massive variability completely expected, it's really tough to run one season and say much of anything, in my judgment.

QuikSand is probably correct on this, but maybe we are asking the wrong statistical question. Even in 10 even seasons one drastic variable is that the computer offence is different each time. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
We may have more success asking if our defensive choices can make a difference against one team?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Has anyone tried playing the same game 100 times? Against the computer, the offense will be the same each time (something that would have considerable variance in a season long test).<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
What I did was got myself to the conference final and tested the red zone bug. So far, after 20 games, there has been a 5 point decrease in average points and an over 100% increase in my opponent being held to under 20 points. Yes, I know we need 100 samples and that one should override that but, but who is to say there is not a gem out there?

[tarcone]

QuikSand is probably correct on this, but maybe we are asking the wrong statistical question. Even in 10 even seasons one drastic variable is that the computer offence is different each time. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
We may have more success asking if our defensive choices can make a difference against one team?<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
Has anyone tried playing the same game 100 times? Against the computer, the offense will be the same each time (something that would have considerable variance in a season long test).<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
What I did was got myself to the conference final and tested the red zone bug. So far, after 20 games, there has been a 5 point decrease in average points and an over 100% increase in my opponent being held to under 20 points. Yes, I know we need 100 samples and that one should override that but, but who is to say there is not a gem out there?

The offense will not be the same. Unless you run the same play on every down. If it is 4th and one in the 1st quarter, im punting. If its 4th and 1 in the 4th quarter, late and im down by 2, im going for it.
The offense is dynamic and cant possibly be the same, ever.

[damelloman888]

The offense will not be the same. Unless you run the same play on every down. If it is 4th and one in the 1st quarter, im punting. If its 4th and 1 in the 4th quarter, late and im down by 2, im going for it.
The offense is dynamic and cant possibly be the same, ever.

Tarcone what I mean is that it may be better to simmulate the same game 160 times, make your one change, then simmulate the same game again 160 times. The offence that the computer will play against you will run the same percentages and have the same ratings.

Contrast that will running a season 10 times, changing your defence then running the season 10 times again. The computer adjusts the offence for every game you play. Your 160 game sample is greatly tarnished by that.

[JMO]

4: Be good on offense.

[QuikSand]

4: Be good on offense.

Isaac Asmiov says make this Rule Zero.

[Subby]

Just as a possible datapoint for the JMO RULE and to shamelessly brag about how fucking awesome I am at fake football.

The Washington Piledrivers (http://www.thefofl.com/league/standings.php?p=0&y=2020) just set the FOFL record for most points scored in a season (623) and just missed the record for least points allowed (179 - 177 was the record.)

Sure we have a lot of big red bars on defense, but on paper we aren't even close to the best defensive unit of the last 10 seasons. I am pretty much convinced that our high scoring offense immediately pushed opponents into passing mode, which of course our defensive adjustments were set to take into account. That translated into only seeing 22.5 rushes per game (1) and 37.2 passes (29). Since we could sit on the pass we led the league in yards per pass attempt allowed (5.71).

Anyway, probably all 4 points listed have applied to us this season but the first three we have every season for the last five or so. Number 4 really just happened this year when we went nuts on offense.