Football Frontier Blog: Hint at Upcoming FOF Engine Change?

[RedKingGold]

Sometimes, a random investigation of statistics can lead to important changes in Front Office Football. Going back to the first edition of the game, fumble recoveries have been a bit off. While the total fumble numbers mirror the NFL very closely, as well as who recovers the ball, what happens after the recovery isn’t as well studied.

I had that in the back of my mind a couple of times over the years, but never did the legwork. A couple of weeks ago, as I was watching the bizarre overtime finish between Arizona and Green Bay, I decided it was time to take a good luck at the numbers.

I happen to have the 2007 season boxscores in an easily searchable format, so I started my investigation with that year. What I saw was enough to warrant some changes. There were 27 fumble return touchdowns in the NFL in 2007 - all by the defense. One was on a fumbled punt snap, one on a kickoff return. Only three were on designed run plays, and six were on completed passes.

The surprise? Other than the lack of returns on run plays was the fact that 16 of the 27 touchdowns came on sacks or plays where the quarterback bobbled the snap. So it’s time to reflect this in the game.

Link: http://www.solecismic.com/frontierblog/?p=328

Thoughts?

[RedKingGold]

FWIW, based on the reference to the Arizona-Green Bay game (which was in January), I don't think any contemplated changes in the blog post would be in Version 6.3 (released in late December).

My guess is that this might be a hinted tweak for 6.3a.

[Ben E Lou]

Innnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnteresting.

[RedKingGold]

My two cents:

Good to see the stats bear out what I've thought for awhile: Overall fumble numbers are in-line with real NFL, but the events that trigger them are not.

Too often in Solevision, I've seen game changing fumbles happen on completed passes or special teams. Those should be a lot rarer, and it seems like the engine will bear that out (eventually).

Rather, we should be forced to pay attention to a QB with tiny hands who can't hold onto the ball when sacked, or just takes too many sacks period.

Of course, it would be nice to have a better idea of the "Avoid Fumbles" rating which FOF has now hidden in more recent versions.

[Ben E Lou]

Any time FOF is changed to better reflect real-life details like this, it's a good thing.

And I'd agree with RKG that the verbiage there makes it sound like a 6.3a hint.

[gstelmack]

Folks have been complaining about the number of offensive fumble return TDs for a long time. Good to see it getting looked at finally.

[Solecismic]

Folks have been complaining about the number of offensive fumble return TDs for a long time. Good to see it getting looked at finally.

And yet, more than a decade after the first FOF was released, I don't think there's ever been a single support email on the topic. It's something I decided to investigate on my own.