4th Quarter Defense

[Warhammer]

OK, I'm stumped. After my latest 4th quarter collapse, I am at a complete loss.

I've had several games across several teams where I hold a guy to 3, 7, 10 points hardly any yards, but then in the 4th quarter the wheels come off. I've tried adjusting my coverage schemes and go with more 4 Deep and 3 Deep zones to account for the deep passing game, but I still get screwed.

The funny thing, if I don't get out to a huge lead, my defense is fine in the 4th quarter. Yet, everytime we get there with a 14+ point lead we collapse. Any ideas on what to do?

[WebEwbank]

Draft a hard-hitting safety and a ball-magnet shutdown corner.

Darned if I know...

[Warhammer]

That's one of the problems, I have two pretty good developing CBs. Both are 80+ in zone coverage, and 60+ in M2M. My safeties are young, but again are good at zone coverage.

The thing is, I have seen this in FOF2k4 as well where my entire secondary is 85+ in zone coverage (I run 3 Deep and 4 Deep coverages exclusively when up big).

[beargrowlz]

From the Help Files
4-Deep Zone - This coverage places both safeties and two extra defensive backs in deep zones. This is a prevent defense and should never be used when expecting a run. Even short passes are more likely completed against this defense, but it is very effective against deep passes.

Perhaps that is part of the problem. You say you're dropping back into exclusively 3 and 4 deep - according to the help files this leaves the short stuff underneath open.

I think you also need to take into account the pass coverage abilities of your linebackers, and whether you're in nickel or dime. If you're in a dime dropping 4 deep, your regular corners are still playing - well, that's the question. The game doesn't say what defense your regular corners play when you're in a dime, 4 deep zone.

Does 4 deep zone mean it's a full zone defense, with 4 dropping deep?

Or does it mean its a zone played by 4 players who drop deep, and the rest of the pass coverage is man or bump?

This section of the help file would seem to indicate that only 4 players are playing zone in a 4 deep.

The zone defenses indicate that pass defenders are responsible for certain areas of the field rather than covering a specific receiver. A 2-deep zone means there are only two zones far downfield (generally covered by the safeties), with the rest of the zones starting at the line of scrimmage. A 4-deep zone means there are four zones downfield.



My first inclination (and how I have been playing for months) was to think that the safeties and nickel/dime backs were in zones, and that everyone else was in man to man.

But as I review the help files, I don't see that specifically enumerated anywhere, and to infer that is fine, except that one could equally infer that the other pass defenders are in short zones.

Bleh, in trying to answer your question, now I've raised more.


Cheers.


Edit: After I read my post, I noticed the help file did in fact say this.
2-deep zone means there are only two zones far downfield (generally covered by the safeties), with the rest of the zones starting at the line of scrimmage.

So it means its a full zone, with 4 dropping deep. So what are the zone pass defenses of your linebackers, your regular corners, and your nickel and dime backs, and your safeties?

Also, the game should tell you who is getting beat - passes caught vs. passes defensed. That might help you figure out whats going on as well.

[Warhammer]

LBs are mediocre, and I've been getting beat 15 yards + downfield, for the most part.

[Warhammer]

The other question is, why when a 3 Deep zone has been working all game, does it fall apart in the 4th quarter, where the LBs are still playing in the same fashion?

[beargrowlz]

The other question is, why when a 3 Deep zone has been working all game, does it fall apart in the 4th quarter, where the LBs are still playing in the same fashion?

Mnnn, maybe it hasn't been, but just seems like it has?

What I mean is, for three quarters we can assume the opposing team is running its normal offense. So with you playing a 3 deep zone, and the opposing offense mixing its runs and passes normally, the weaknesses of your zone (your linebackers in pass coverage it seems) might not have been as noticable.

But when the opposing offense starts to throw every down because it's down a lot in the 4th quarter, all of a sudden every single play involves their zone defense readings.

For example, compare it to me having a LDE with a run defense of 0. If the opposing offense runs to its left - my right - 10 times and towards my LDE 0 times, and I hold them to 1.5 ypc, it seems like my DLE is playing adequate run defense. But if they run at him in the 4th quarter 10 times and I give up 6.0 ypc, all of a sudden what seemed like good defense is having its weakness exposed over and over again.

Just a thought.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Why don't you try NOT doing the 3 and 4 deep zone and see what happens?

Hell, I stopped playing zone at least 2 years ago in 2K4 because it is a crappy defense; unless you have absolutely no one who can play M2M or BnR.

[RedKingGold]

It's that damn catch-up bug!

[Warhammer]

Why don't you try NOT doing the 3 and 4 deep zone and see what happens?

Hell, I stopped playing zone at least 2 years ago in 2K4 because it is a crappy defense; unless you have absolutely no one who can play M2M or BnR.

First, it works if you have the guys to run it. The problem is that many LBs do not play a good zone defense. But, I was able to get my secondary relatively cheap, which meant I could spend money on other parts of the team.

Second, my defenses are frequently in the top 10 of the leagues I am in. However, I will admit that I do tend to have a blow out loss or two each year. Just don't look at my IHOF defense right now, its in complete rebuilding mode.

[Sgran]

Are you calling plays? What are your defensive adjustments set at? If you're calling plays, why not try a nickel, blitz 1 and double the hot receiver?

[MrBigglesworth]

So when you are running a bump and run with a two deep zone, do your safeties need to be good at bump and run or zone? And if zone, do they have to be good at bump and run if they double cover someone?

[beargrowlz]

So when you are running a bump and run with a two deep zone, do your safeties need to be good at bump and run or zone? And if zone, do they have to be good at bump and run if they double cover someone?

The help file says the safeties are playing zone, so it's their zone rating that would be used.

As for when they double team, that's a really good question. Realistically, two guys won't be bnr'ing the same receiver. So it might even be man to man that gets used.

[cuervo72]

The help file says the safeties are playing zone, so it's their zone rating that would be used.

There's been some wonderment on this point too, actually.

[MIJB#19]

Why don't you try NOT doing the 3 and 4 deep zone and see what happens?

Hell, I stopped playing zone at least 2 years ago in 2K4 because it is a crappy defense; unless you have absolutely no one who can play M2M or BnR.The exclusive 2-deep zone, served me well in two different (2K4) MP leagues, even having the #1 defense in both leagues at the same time (boosted by the top pass defense in both). I did stop using the 4-deep and shortly after the 3-deep (roughly the same 2 years ago), because my defense was getting run over (figure of speech) when we moved into either of those two. It still was vulnerable to the run at times (even with excellent run stopping personel and being geared heavily to stop the run, hoping the secondary would do their trick and shut the pass down on 3rd and long), but it worked for me.

Looking around, I'm not the only one struggling with 2K7 to get my defense to run a good pass defense (realizing that 2 crappy games of just BnR and 6 mixed games of zone+M2M mixes may be too small of a sample size). And as I write that, I noticed that in IHOF (basically my only link between 2K4 and 2K7) overall passing and rushing yardage are down, both in both gross yardage and per attempt categories. (512 vs 76 games = small sample size alert!). Since it's driving me nuts so far, I'm even feeling like doing some dirty testing to find out more about how this pass D stuff work out in 2K7...

[Vinatieri for Prez]

There's been some wonderment on this point too, actually.

It's not just wonderment. Jim already has said that the DBs may use a number of different ratings within one coverage. So, while zone is the most predominant rating used in that coverage, it's not the only one.

If not the case, then as the coverage descriptors show, you would pretty much use nothing else but the zone rating for the safeties for any coverage.

[QuikSand]

It's not just wonderment. Jim already has said that the DBs may use a number of different ratings within one coverage. So, while zone is the most predominant rating used in that coverage, it's not the only one.

If not the case, then as the coverage descriptors show, you would pretty much use nothing else but the zone rating for the safeties for any coverage.

So, you're certain about that, eh?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

So, you're certain about that, eh?

I dunno. Isn't that what Jim intimated here:

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=55675

[QuikSand]

Well, here's the actual Q&A selection:

6. When BnR coverage talks about safeties being in a zone, does that mean the safety's zone coverage rating is used (or is it still BnR)?

With '07, pass coverage is a lot more sophisticated than in the past. Each position uses different weights for each rating in each coverage set. Even the pass pattern run makes a difference (that can't be game-planned yet, which is part of why I'd like to add playbooks in the future). I don't talk about engine details a lot, because I want people to figure these questions out for their own teams and learn without my help. But you will see bump skills matter more for a cornerback than a safety in that defense. Not that bump skills are all a cornerback needs to cover a receiver successfully in that situation.

It does seem like some people have interpreteed that statement as meaning the safety plays zone, and his zone rating matters most.

But that isn't what it says. It says "bump skills matter more for a cornerback than a safety in that defense." While it might be tempting to think that if he's not talking about bump coverage, he must be talking about zone coverage... but that is not what he said.

It's at leat possible, for instance, that the real issue is that safety in the bump 2-zone needs to properly rely on things like (for instance) play recognition and such... and that his effectiveness on the play is largely a function of that stuff (the non coverage ratings) than anything else.

I don't claim to know what the hell is going on, to be honest. You may be totally right - that safeties play zone. Hell, maybe safteis never, ever use the bump coverage rating at all. I don't know. The documentation doesn't really help clear things up, nor does this Q&A element, in my view. My point is basically that I don't think this is clear in any particular direction.

[QuikSand]

Step back. Think about the safety in a standard secondary scheme. What does he play?

In a completely zone scheme, he obviously covers an assigned zone. And in a complete man scheme, he basically covers one guy in man-to-man coverage.

Is bump and run something completely separate from man or zone? From the ratings scheme in FOF, since they are listed as three separate options, it seems that way, but in real football, not really. On a team that runs a "bump" scheme, we know what the corners do -- they line up right across from their assigned receiver, chuck him at the line to try to disrupt the pattern, and then they play tight man coverage.

What about safeties? Well, in some bump schemes, they can be pulled right up to the line, to face an extra receiver and actually "bump" him. But pretty often, the safety drops back, is assigned a zone, and is looking to either step up in run support, or to provide reserve coverage for receivers whose patterns fall into their zone. A standard bump coverage scheme, including the cover 2, is basicaly asking the safety to play "zone overage."

So, even before FOF 2007 came around and made things more complicated -- what skill was "bump and run coverage" for a safety to begin with? Somehting completely different than man or zone? Or just something like "the ability to handle the safety coverage effectvely in a bump scheme?" (implicitly meaning zone, or man, or whatever he's called upon to do) Let's assume, to try to be consistdeent with its presentation in the game (as a third, seprable, skill) that this latter interpretation is accurate in FOF.

That leads to a possible theory about this game, at least. Maybe BNR is really separate from man and zone after all, and that in that scheme it really is treated as a separate skill completely. Yeah yeah, it's really probably mostly playing zone for a safety, but still it's treated as something separate in the game (and it has been as long as BNR has been a separate rating in FOF).

And if that's true... then maybe bump coverage is still the only coverage skill that matters in a bump scheme. And if that's true, then what Jim mist be talking about in his cryptic comments must be the non-coverage ratings bring more important than for a cornerback.


Again, I don't claim to have any keen insight here. I don't think we have "the answer" on this, and Jim seems to want it that way. I'm quite baffled about what to do with a safety who has great bump skills and no other coverage skills to speak of. But this line of thinking is also consistent with what he has said about his game so far... so I'm not ruling it out quite yet.

[Ben E Lou]

I agree with 100% of Quik said, and would expound on one point


And if that's true... then maybe bump coverage is still the only coverage skill that matters in a bump scheme. And if that's true, then what Jim mist be talking about in his cryptic comments must be the non-coverage ratings bring more important than for a cornerback.Yup. My current interpretation of what he's saying is that BnR skills make up, say, 75% of a CB's effectiveness in the BnR scheme, but BnR skills make up, say, 50% of a S's effectiveness in the BnR scheme. Such an interpretation is consistent with "But you will see bump skills matter more for a cornerback than a safety in that defense. Not that bump skills are all a cornerback needs to cover a receiver successfully in that situation."

[QuikSand]

I agree with 100% of Quik said, and would expound on one point

Yup. My current interpretation of what he's saying is that BnR skills make up, say, 75% of a CB's effectiveness in the BnR scheme, but BnR skills make up, say, 50% of a S's effectiveness in the BnR scheme. Such an interpretation is consistent with "But you will see bump skills matter more for a cornerback than a safety in that defense. Not that bump skills are all a cornerback needs to cover a receiver successfully in that situation."

Well, I agree with that wholeheartedly, but it doesn't explicitly say what's in the balance of what makes the DB effective in that scheme. For a safety, if your numbers above are correct... I still think it's unclear what the remaining 50% is -- is it some mix of the various non-coverage skills, or does it include in part or in whole his zone coverage rating?

I am inclined to believe the former, but that isn't really buttressed by much.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Alright QS, you raise some good points.

I will operate under the assumption that Jim is careful and precise with his words on this question (otherwise, what's the point). I also will operate under the assumption that he didn't want to spell it out for us as even within his answer, he states he doesn't want to talk about engine details alot. I guess my biggest mistake was thinking "coverage ratings" when he said different weights for each "rating" in his answer. That may have been a mistake.

However, in terms of pure coverage ability though, there are some ratings for DBs we can dump out: special teams, endurance, P/K returns, and run defense. Also, I believe punishing hitter and interception ratings only apply as single dice rolls to affect a play (ie. is it a pick or is does the hit jar the ball loose on the catch?). As far as DBs goes, this leaves only M2M, BnR, Zone, and Play Diagnosis -- thus, only the coverage ratings and play diagnosis.

So parsing Jim's answer with an eye towards the fact he would choose his words very carefully, here is what I can add. There are 5 key parts to his answer about BnR coverage, specifically in the context of the role of the safety's ratings.

1) Pass coverage in '07 is more sophisticated than in the past.
2) Each position uses different weights for each rating in each coverage set.
3) Even the pass pattern run makes a difference.
4) But you will see bump skills matter more for a cornerback than a safety in that defense.
5) Not that bump skills are all a cornerback needs to cover a receiver successfully in that situation.

No. 1 means something has been changed from 2K4. It's a significant change that has moved from what used to be a simpler formula. I'll also point out that after playing MP, Jim is well aware of the often-used strategy of getting cheap DBs good in only one coverage category (and believe he mentioned this in some other discussion about what learned in playing MP).

No. 2 means that ratings will be used differently depending on the position of the player, and that the coverage selected will determine what that weighting is.

No. 3 means that those weights can even change within a coverage simply based on the pass pattern of the offense. This also means that no matter what you do or select on defense, the offensive choices can change the weighting of ratings.

No. 4 means that in running the BnR coverage (which the help file specifically calls for the CB to play M2M and the S to play zone), the BnR rating is more important to the CB than the safety.

No. 5 means that a CB needs more than BnR skills to be successful in BnR coverage.

So, what does this all mean? No one knows for sure. Well, actually Jim knows, but I don't. But here is my guess based on the above.

2K4 was simpler. My guess is that once you chose a coverage, only those ratings were used (much like what QS is saying). I totally agree that was the way it likely used to be. But also note that play diagnosis was still a rating in 2K4. However, as Jim stated, coverages in 2K7 is "more sophisticated." It has to mean more of an intertwining of the coverage skills. Otherwise, if things remained the same (or you just simply added play diagnosis to the equation), why would Jim say 2K7 is "more sophisticated?" Why would he provide an in-depth description of the coverages in the help file and specifically call out the different positions and what they do? I think he was going for much more sophistication than 2k4. So, I just find it hard to believe it's just play diagnosis and BnR used here because I don't see that being any different than 2K4. It has to be a mix of the coverage ratings because I believe that's what No. 5 for the CB means. I see that as being a mix of BnR and then M2M. That's logical and matches real life too.

Thus, I firmly believe to be succesful in BnR as a CB the more BnR and M2M you have, the better.

So, what about the safety? That's what we're really dwelling on here anyways, right?

I think No. 4 is key here. There is absolutely no doubt that that part of the answer means that a safety's BnR rating MATTERS in BnR. Not as much as the CB, but the skill still matters. You can't get away from that. It matters, regardless of the fact the help file says the safeties play zone. But the real question is how much does it matter? Is it a mix with another coverage rating (like zone) like the CB or with simply play diagnosis? Or is there no mix at all, and it just doesn't carry as big a modifier in the formula. I hearken back to No. 1 where Jim says coverage is more sophisticated. If it's the latter result, then it would seem to be exactly like or too similar to 2K4. So, I think it's the former -- a mix of coverage ratings. This also fits with No. 3, where the pass pattern can change the weightings of the ratings I believe. So, I think even a safety's M2M may come into play, especially if the offense floods the secondary with 5 wideouts.

Some final thoughts. Let's also not forget that safeties may play as backups to CBs and may be nickel or dimebacks. So, they're ratings in all coverage categories are important for those reasons too.

I don't know. Maybe I am putting way to much emphasis on Jim's comment that coverage is more sophisticated in 2K7 and what I think was his dislike for the one-rating DB.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

To add, the mistake in my prior post was stating that zone is the "predominate" rating in the BnR scheme. It may very well still be BnR, but I believe the zone rating finds its way in there.

[QuikSand]

I think No. 4 is key here. There is absolutely no doubt that that part of the answer means that a safety's BnR rating MATTERS in BnR. Not as much as the CB, but the skill still matters. You can't get away from that. It matters, regardless of the fact the help file says the safeties play zone. But the real question is how much does it matter? Is it a mix with another coverage rating (like zone) like the CB or with simply play diagnosis? Or is there no mix at all, and it just doesn't carry as big a modifier in the formula. I hearken back to No. 1 where Jim says coverage is more sophisticated. If it's the latter result, then it would seem to be exactly like or too similar to 2K4. So, I think it's the former -- a mix of coverage ratings. This also fits with No. 3, where the pass pattern can change the weightings of the ratings I believe. So, I think even a safety's M2M may come into play, especially if the offense floods the secondary with 5 wideouts.

Interesting thought here -- might lead to a sort of "hybrid" addition to my earlier thinking. One I hadn't thought of in exactly these terms.

I think we basically agree that in real football a safety, in a cover 2 scheme, is basically being called upon to play what we'd objectively call man coverage or zone coverage. The main question is -- is that guy in FOF relying on his bump skills, his man/zone skills, or perhaps a combination of the two?

Maybe your safeties in a bump setup are actually reflecting back on some combination of bump and the other coverage suited to the route thay are being asked to cover. if teh play was a 5-WR spread formation, maybe the game pulls teh FS up to the line to actually bump the Y receiver at the line -- and in that case, perhaps he's being called on to use both bump and man coverage skills. Or, in most cases, he'd dropping back and covering a TE or WR who has slipped into his deep zone, and there he's employing both his bump and zone skills.

I guess that would be yet another interpretation of the skills being used on a given play, that remains consistent with the things Jim has said about the new game. Fair enough.

The whole thing is still rather unsettled in my mind, but until something is basically ruled out by a direct statement or a very compelling study effort, I guess we have to leave it on the table as a possibility.

[QuikSand]

I don't talk about engine details a lot, because I want people to figure these questions out for their own teams and learn without my help.

Incidentally, that's a really frustrating response on this issue. I don't even know how I'd set up a good way to test something like this. I suppose you could run dozens and dozens of seasons, and see what sort of stats you get from specific safeties with certain slanted skill sets.

Sounds like a damned load of work just to try to glean even a basic understanding of something that any coach, or any GM, would certainly know just as part of his role on a team.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Incidentally, that's a really frustrating response on this issue. I don't even know how I'd set up a good way to test something like this. I suppose you could run dozens and dozens of seasons, and see what sort of stats you get from specific safeties with certain slanted skill sets.

Sounds like a damned load of work just to try to glean even a basic understanding of something that any coach, or any GM, would certainly know just as part of his role on a team.

I agree. The vast majority of people are not testers. That's just a simple fact. And most are going to play one or two dynasties before the next version. Remember there are many who play that don't even (or rarely) visit this site. Again, that's my belief. Essentially, all these people play blind with coverage never knowing what matters in coverage. I don't get Jim's take on this, but he seems to stick with it.

A better response from him would be "in BnR where the safeties play zone, the BnR and zone ratings would be used to figure out the basic coverage ability in the scheme before other factors/variables are added into the mix." (if that was indeed how it worked). That doesn't delve much at all into the engine and would clear things up. I think it's a poor marketing decision, but it's his game and for some reason . . . I'm still buying it.

But, we've been having this debate for years and nothing is going to change apparently.

[Ben E Lou]

I am inclined to believe the former, but that isn't really buttressed by much.Same here, but, like you, my thoughts on it aren't really much more than a guess. http://www.fof-ihof.com/phpBB2/images/smiles/icon_sigh.gif (javascript:emoticon(':sigh:'))

[timmynausea]

I am really frustrated with this as well. It makes it impossible to know how I want to set up my team and gameplan my D.

I tried to set up a test to isolate the safeties somewhat. I used the same team, same season, same gameplan, injuries off, the only changes from one test to the other were the safeties. Cohesion in the secondary was exactly the same, and chemistry was close with no conflicts for either, 2 affinities for 1 and 1 for the other. I ran through ten times with safeties leaning strongly toward bump and run skills (over 70 in bump and under 30 in zone), and ten through with safeties leaning strongly toward zone (vice versa) and even managed to come really close to matching up play diagnosis between FS (both around 95) and SS (47 for both). For the gameplan I just went with a recommended one and tweaked every coverage situation slightly toward bump and run and away from zone. I didn't want to do anything too drastic with the gameplans, as I felt that if safeties were relying primarily on Zone and almost never on Bump, the gameplan didn't need to be too extreme to isolate that.

The results were pretty close to the same. The zone team did just slightly better in most categories, averaging about 5 yards better in total D, passing D and a half a point less per season. Individually, the safeties all were within the same range in PDpct (from 75-85). Only 1 of the 4 (the zone SS) was over 80 PDpct consistently.

This was not a very in depth test, but I wanted to try a simple set up to determine whether or not the game was using just Zone or just Bump ratings in these circumstances. As I said before, my thinking was, if Bump basically didn't matter at any time for a safety, the BNR safeties would do considerably worse. They didn't.

Not sure exactly sure how much we can conclude from that or what exactly to test from here, but my gut tells me that one of the main changes in the new game was to make cover men use all their coverage skills more to safeguard against teams stocking up on guys that are crappy over all and excellent at one type of coverage. It's just a hunch at this point, but I think really specialized players will plummet in value and jack of all trade types will become favored.

[Warhammer]

My .02 based upon my WAFL team.

First, my thoughts on FOF2k4 was that you could find players that excelled at a particular position, and they would excel. For the most part, I was right. I have always had pretty darn good defenses, except for against the extreme style teams which give many players problems.

When I started with FOF2k7 in the WAFL, I was blessed with two CBs that have almost identical skills. 80+ in M2M, 55+ in zone, and 55+ in BnR. The result was both had a pass D rate of over 80%, one was 82.5% gave up 39 catches and had 15 passes defense and 2 INTs. The other, gave up 38 catches, 15 passes defensed, and 5 INTs.

My safeties were both solid players as well, but there was a clear #1 guy, and a clear #2 guy. The #1, was 90+ in both M2M and zone, with a 44 in BnR. The #2 was 60+ in M2M, 90+ in zone, and 34 in BnR. The #1 guy was originally the FS. However, the #2 guy was giving up a ton of stuff (or so it seemed). I switched them up, and the SS was the #1 guy, and the FS was the #2 guy, and things improved.

The #1 guy allowed 22 catches, had 14 passes defensed, and 1 INT. The other allowed 26 catches, had 8 passes defensed and 2 INTs.

What is interesting is that with players with very similar skill sets, they posted nearly identical numbers. The safeties played well after the position switches and had decent numbers. I think what is happening is the following:

The SS is taking the TE, it seems that whenever the SS gave up a lot of balls, the TE was getting a portion of them. This makes sense. It also makes sense that when I switched the guy that was better at both M2M and BnR to them, that the defense improved.

When the FS gave up a lot of passes, it seemed that a WR was getting most of the balls that day. My guess, is that the FS is the one responsible for double covering the receiver, and depending on the pass route and coverage sometimes becomes the primary defender. In cases where this happens, it depends upon the route run to determine what coverage is being used.

So I have a few guesses based upon what I did:
1) Zone coverage is the primary coverage skill for safeties. Both of my safeties were well over 90 in their zone d, and they were both solid defenders against the pass.
2) It appears that the secondary coverage skill for safeties is M2M. There was a 30 point difference in M2M ratings between my safeties. The safety with the better M2M rating had nearly twice as many passes defensed as the other safety did.
3) BnR may have played a lesser role in differentiating the safeties, but my SS (the #1 safety) only allowed more than 2 passes caught only one time, and that was 4 catches in one game. With the amount of BnR I ran, if his sub-50 rating in BnR was being exploited, I never saw it.
4) The strong side M2M weak side zone, and vice versa are two more coverages where the safeties are not going to be in BnR coverage.

I think what is happening is that a combination of skills are being used each play. What is happening in the case of the safeties is that their zone defense is so good that it compensates for their deficiencies elsewhere, even my #2 safety didn't perform poorly.

Where my CBs are concerned, I ran a fair amount of BnR, and even though they didn't excel in that style of defense, they still played very well on the year (we had the most or second most passes attempted against us), better than their BnR ratings would have suggested. Their zone defense ratings were around 60, but I think their M2M coverage skills came to the fore in their case, and is a big reason why they played so similarly (except for INTs, where one had a 40, and the other had a 70+).

[Noop]

Bump and Run - To me means how well he can jam the wr at the LOS.
Man to Man - Is his ability to stay with the WR after he has jammed the WR.
Play Rec - Allows the DB to jump routes.
INT - If he jumps the route will he get the int, pass defense or maybe miss time it.

[MIJB#19]

Incidentally, that's a really frustrating response on this issue. I don't even know how I'd set up a good way to test something like this. I suppose you could run dozens and dozens of seasons, and see what sort of stats you get from specific safeties with certain slanted skill sets.Exactly. I've been tempted to try a couple of things, but so far I haven't gotten a "Eureka" moment to think about a way to do it. Although, given that I'm about to face the run-and-stun (TM) again next Thursday, I have at least some reason to motivate myself to get some testing done in the next few days. ;)

The only thing I learned through SP playing was that starting CBs who are great in zone and poor in the rest, will end up being abused a lot, while the nickelback type will post the numbers I was used to see for zone-alone corners. Meanwhilst, my safeties posted familiar pass defense numbers, but that might be tainted due to the exposure of the corners. (Note that the game plan was 100% the AI's doing, I didn't touch anything).

[BrianD]

Don't NFL teams sometimes bump receivers at the line and then drop back into zone coverage?

If I was designing a text-sim football game, I would use the BnR skills of the CBs to negatively impact the timing skill of the QB. I would further use the BnR skill of the safeties to handle the hand-off of receivers between the CBs and the safeties...which could create a gap in coverage.

I would assume that medium length routes would go against the safeties play-diagnosis and zone coverage skills and only a little bit of their M2M skill. With long routes it would be more of their play-diagnosis and M2M skills and less zone. It seems like on the short routes safeties would be reacting to the ball much more while on the long routes, the safeties would have to turn and run with the receiver and turn into more of a man defender.

I have no idea how closely my thinking matches with Jim's, but that is how I would do it.

[liquid_zen01]

Here's three things to consider:

Head coach's motivation skill (yours and theirs)
Endurance of your defenders, all of them (if your line tires and fails to provide late game pressure on their QB...)
Opposition QB's two-minute offense rating, and 4Q comeback ability (is that a possible hidden rating?)

I've found that my teams did far better in the 4th quarter when I have a coach with Excellent motivation, and also that certain QB's are just a lot stronger throughout the whole 4Q, rather than just the last 2 minutes... just my unscientific observations though.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Here's three things to consider:

Head coach's motivation skill (yours and theirs)
Endurance of your defenders, all of them (if your line tires and fails to provide late game pressure on their QB...)
Opposition QB's two-minute offense rating, and 4Q comeback ability (is that a possible hidden rating?)

I've found that my teams did far better in the 4th quarter when I have a coach with Excellent motivation, and also that certain QB's are just a lot stronger throughout the whole 4Q, rather than just the last 2 minutes... just my unscientific observations though.

These are good points. And yes, at least in 2K4, Jim discussed that there is hidden 4th quarter comeback skill.

[MrBigglesworth]

These are good points. And yes, at least in 2K4, Jim discussed that there is hidden 4th quarter comeback skill.
That skill was influenced by his past number of fourth quarter comebacks, right?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

That skill was influenced by his past number of fourth quarter comebacks, right?

Yes.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Ok, so what does the new help file on the patch add to the coverage discussion in this thread?

We have received many questions about how a player's coverage ratings translate into these coverage options. The answer is complex. On each play, a defensive player is assigned a coverage rating based on the chosen coverage, the position he plays and the targetted receiver.

Cornerbacks, even when in zone coverage, need to have man-to-man and/or bump-and-run skills because they are almost always responsible for a wide receiver close to the line of scrimmage. And safeties, especially the free safety, even when in man coverage are often essentially playing a zone. The strong-side linebacker is often assigned to the tight end.

We recommend you try out different lineups, especially in the Nickel and Dime situations, and see which coverages work best for your players. There's a lot of flexibility in this system.

Double Coverage:

You may assign double coverage based on the cornerbacks. One cornerback is always assigned to the flanker, and one to the split end. Your choice affects which side each cornerback covers. If you choose to orient the cornerbacks left and right, then they stay on the left or right side regardless of which sides the flanker and split ends choose. If you choose to orient the cornerbacks based on their abilities, then your top cornerback will always cover the opposing team's best wide receiver.

In double-coverage, a safety (usually the free safety first) automatically joins one of the cornerbacks. This doesn't mean there won't be double coverage elsewhere, just that it's automatic in this case. This is also what the game reports in the play-by-play. When the cornerbacks stay on one side or the other, your choices are to double-cover either the split end or the flanker. When they cover based on ability, your choices are to double-cover either the top or the second-best receiver.

Double-coverage percentages indicate what percentage of all plays a safety is in automatic double coverage.

So, it appears at least for CBs, you need good ratings all around, especially M2M/B&R. As for Safeties, it is sounding like zone is the most important rating, and perhaps the only important rating (at least for free safeties). However, it does appear as far as double coverage goes, the free safety will need a good M2M rating.

[MrBigglesworth]

As for Safeties, it is sounding like zone is the most important rating, and perhaps the only important rating (at least for free safeties).
This is what I feared heading into the GEFL season, where I play almost exclusively BNR. My safeties had next to zero zone and zero zone. But through six games they are both having the best seasons of their careers. Small sample size obviously but, my SS has 5 defensed and 6 caught (84.9%) when last season (under 2k4) he had 10 defensed and 36 caught (80.8%). Through my own anecdotal evidence, I'm not ready to say that zone is the most important rating yet.

[QuikSand]

Cornerbacks, even when in zone coverage, need to have man-to-man and/or bump-and-run skills because they are almost always responsible for a wide receiver close to the line of scrimmage.

Okay... so if we're running a 1-deep or 2-deep system, we can dictate what the corners do -- they either bump at the line, or they play back in loose man. Got it.

When we drop to 3-deep, 4-deep, or the (maybe) the man/zone split coverages, it isn't clear to me what they do. Do they play loose man? Bump? Some short zone style? is there anything to guide us there? (I may be missing something -- the quoted item above is all I found in the help file that seemed relevant)


Also... what sort of coverage skills does my SLB need to cover that tight end? Is he in the scheme set for the CBs (loose man, bump, or something unknown as above)?

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Yeah, it just seems like Jim does not want to tell us all come high or hell water. This was his second attempt at it. I'm getting the message.