Pass Rush Str Vs Pass Rush Tech

[A-Husker-4-Life]

What is the difference between these two rating's? Let me give you an example;

SLB has PRS = 78 PRT = 34

Should I blitz him inside more because his PRS is so high compared to his PRT? Also does his low PRT mean he can't blitz to the outside effectively?

[QuikSand]

My initial reaction was going to be "PR Tech matters, PR strength doesn't," which is close to conventional wisdom.

However, your question is pretty intriguing... it would be interesting to see if things really worked that way, and that there was some correlation between inside/outside rushing and the two skills. Sadly, it sounds like it requires some tedious testing to try and learn much, and many of us are just plain tapped out on that front.

[tarcone]

I always thought stength = inside rush and tech = outside

[stevew]

I'd guess strength is compared vs the linemans blocking strength and technique vs the blockers pass protectiob and the QBs avoid rush.

Probably a dice roll to determine the "winner" on the strength match up . Then another on the skill technique.

I'm probably wrong tho.

[TheMeat]

I've previously just lumped the two into an overall effectiveness at rushing. But it would beg the question of why would Jim put in two ratings instead of just one "Pass Rush" rating. It's interesting to hear that most folks mostly disregard PR strength, maybe i'll pay a little more attention to PR tech now.

But as with various other ratings that I've thought about testing the thing is that most players have ratings that are pretty similar. Good players have generally good bars in important categories, so I've found in some areas it is tough to test for lack of good subjects to test with. I suppose the key may be to look for players under 50ovr that have one max bar or something similar but I've noticed most players with good PR str also have good PR tech, so even if you found perfect testing subjects the dilemma is does it even matter since most players you'd get in real situations would be good at both or poor at both.

I've spent more hours testing than I have playing the game in the last couple months and I still have an interest in it but the killer is doing enough samples to notice a small change in results. I run 5-10 seasons with one setting and compare it to the control, looking for things that really matter in the game. 10 seasons is obviously not enough to reliably conclude anything about anything other than major changes, like getting 5 more sacks in each season. With something like this we'd be dealing with minor changes in stats which would only come clear after many test seasons. And the downer of a lot of testing is doing all that only to realize the same thing that comes from most of my testing: It either doesn't matter, or it's too minor to worry about.

Summary of my post: We need a testing robot.

[chinaski]

I'd guess strength is compared vs the linemans blocking strength and technique vs the blockers pass protectiob and the QBs avoid rush.

Probably a dice roll to determine the "winner" on the strength match up . Then another on the skill technique.

I'm probably wrong tho.

I think its somewhere along this train of thought.

I pesonally dont care much about strength and mainly rely on technique.

[TheMeat]

I'd guess strength is compared vs the linemans blocking strength and technique vs the blockers pass protectiob and the QBs avoid rush.

Probably a dice roll to determine the "winner" on the strength match up . Then another on the skill technique.

I'm probably wrong tho.


I'd actually thought this may be the case. It makes sense that strength would trump technique and that may very well be true. Maybe it doesn't matter more, but it matters first. Interesting that maybe the technique matters more in deciding whether a qb is sacked, hurried, or knocked down. But my brain wants to think that the sack is part of a different roll, and hurries and knockdowns are just handed out at the end of an unsuccessful play.

[Shard77]

I don't have a body of statistical analysis to back this up, but I've always valued PR Technique for a DE and PR Strength for a DT.

[QuikSand]

With all this discussion about what might make sense, do keep in mind that a number of people have tried pretty hard (albeit with older versions of this game) to work out what ratings correspond to what outcomes. And I believe pretty much every such study has suggested that Pass Rush technique corresponds strongly to all the pass rushing stats that you want (sacks, hurries, etc) and that Pass rush strength has far, far less correlation to anything useful.

If it were anything near as simple as Tech=outside, Str=inside, or Tech=DE, Str=DT, then this sort of thing would have shown up in these efforts, I'm fairly sure.

I'm fairly inclined to go back where I started. The difference between the two is that one obviously matters a lot, and the other one doesn't seem to much at all.

[primelord]

I'm fairly inclined to go back where I started. The difference between the two is that one obviously matters a lot, and the other one doesn't seem to much at all.

This about sums it up for me as well. Whether you blitz inside or out, you just aren't going to get many sacks in general with a guy who has a crap pass rush tech bar. Pass rush strength certainly adds to a players productivity. Tests clearly show a guy with 100 pass rush tech and 50 pass rush strength, on average gets more sacks than a guy with 100 pass rush tech and 0 pass rush strength. However the difference is not huge and you can still put up monster sack seasons with 0 pass rush strength.

I think the pass rush strength is a balance to blocking strength, and there likely is benefit to having a higher pass rush strength when blitzing inside, but again I think the benefit is minimal.

[Daimyo]

Interestingly enough when I looked at rating correlation with stats, there were many ratings that didn't correlate much with anything measurable such as PrS and blocking strength (or their correlation was dwarfed by some other rating as with PrT vs PrS). In fact, if you compare the FOF 2k4 ratings set with the FOF 2k1 ratings set, pretty much none of the new ratings had an effect that I could measure. My rule of thumb was that if could map a rating back to a 2k1 rating it was probably useful... otherwise I mostly ignored it.

Of course, the analysis that got me to that conclusion was based on (many, many) simulations with AI-run teams with their AI-gameplans. Its entirely possible the AI gameplans in such a way that favors PrT over PrS and BT over BS, etc, etc, but I wouldn't bet on it.

[Firefly]

I'd guess strength is compared vs the linemans blocking strength and technique vs the blockers pass protectiob and the QBs avoid rush.

Probably a dice roll to determine the "winner" on the strength match up . Then another on the skill technique.

I'm probably wrong tho.

That's my take as well. I believe that, when that happens and the defensive player wins, you get a

"defender bowls over lineman,"

message or something along the same lines, as opposed to a

"defender made an incredible move on lineman and is chasing the QB,"

which I think correaltes to technique.

[A-Husker-4-Life]

That's my take as well. I believe that, when that happens and the defensive player wins, you get a

"defender bowls over lineman,"

message or something along the same lines, as opposed to a

"defender made an incredible move on lineman and is chasing the QB,"

which I think correaltes to technique.

I believe you are onto something.. I'll do some more testing and see if blitzing a OLB with great PRS will generate more Hurries/sacks/Qb knockdowns..