Elite RB with no OL

[Higgs44]

How does an elite RB continue to amaze when his OL is flat out awful?

His OL

OC Conatay 34 run block 48/48 OA
OG Klein 42 run block 34/34 OA
OG Thompson 44 run block 48/48 OA
LT Kinney 21 run block 32 /32 OA
RT Fehrman 38 run block 30/30 OA
TE Kay 46 run block 34/34 OA

RB is 86/86 Bo Jackson

The Rest of the Offense..

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/8638/oaklandoffense.jpg

If this guy is ONLY really running, how does he keep doing it when his supporting cast is so sub par????

[Ben E Lou]

First off, how well is he doing?

Second, that o-line isn't "flat-out awful" by any stretch. The ratings scale in FOF throws people off. That 30/30 right tackle isn't your second cousin who was on the practice squad at Eastern Kentucky. He's Minnesota's Ryan Cook, a guy who was good enough to start seven games in the NFL this year on a team that had a pretty fair running back. (Cook is rated 30/30 in a game start I just had.) If I have my numbers correct, a guy rated 30 in FOF is really 450 in the 375-625 ratings scale that the game uses and a 60/60 is a 525. While the difference between a 30 and a 60 player might appear to be huge, the difference between 450 and 525 isn't really THAT huge. It is borne out in the game's single-word descriptions. He's running behind three "Average" linemen in the middle, and two "Fair" ones on the outsides. (And I firmly believe that the C and Gs are more valuable in the running game than the tackles, fwiw.) At any rate, what I see above is an all-time great RB running behind a slightly below average o-line. And if you've been using the draft files, as it seems, I'd argue that the line he's running behind may not even be below average for the league. (There's less talent than FOF expects in those files.)

[Higgs44]

First off, how well is he doing?

Second, that o-line isn't "flat-out awful" by any stretch. The ratings scale in FOF throws people off. That 30/30 right tackle isn't your second cousin who was on the practice squad at Eastern Kentucky. He's Minnesota's Ryan Cook, a guy who was good enough to start seven games in the NFL this year on a team that had a pretty fair running back. (Cook is rated 30/30 in a game start I just had.) If I have my numbers correct, a guy rated 30 in FOF is really 450 in the 375-625 ratings scale that the game uses and a 60/60 is a 525. While the difference between a 30 and a 60 player might appear to be huge, the difference between 450 and 525 isn't really THAT huge. It is borne out in the game's single-word descriptions. He's running behind three "Average" linemen in the middle, and two "Fair" ones on the outsides. (And I firmly believe that the C and Gs are more valuable in the running game than the tackles, fwiw.) At any rate, what I see above is an all-time great RB running behind a slightly below average o-line. And if you've been using the draft files, as it seems, I'd argue that the line he's running behind may not even be below average for the league. (There's less talent than FOF expects in those files.)

Last 3 seasons hes avg 2300 yards on the ground

this season hes at 479 4.74 ypc in 4 games

So what your saying is scrap the OL drafting and just trade the house for a few stud players and you'll be fine?

[Ben E Lou]

Well, it's not quite so simple to "just trade the house for a few stud players." In SP, it's impossible. In MP, it's also pretty much impossible unless you're playing against a league full of idiots.

[RedKingGold]

Second, that o-line isn't "flat-out awful" by any stretch. The ratings scale in FOF throws people off.

Considering you're in a historical league, this has an even bigger effect. The historical draft files produce much lower league-wide talent because they're based off the 1980's/1990's NFL which had 28 or so teams.

In a historical league, a 35/35 player is basically the equivalent of a 50/50 player from FOF-generated draft/roster files.

[Higgs44]

Well, it's not quite so simple to "just trade the house for a few stud players." In SP, it's impossible. In MP, it's also pretty much impossible unless you're playing against a league full of idiots.

Its not that hard, when your trading multiple 1st round picks and such.

How about a 70 rated OT plus 2 or 3 1st round picks for a stud RB or WR. You can replace the OT with a 30 rated OT and not miss a beat.

This can especially be helpful if you have a bad team and the guy thinks you'll be terrible.

[Higgs44]

Considering you're in a historical league, this has an even bigger effect. The historical draft files produce much lower league-wide talent because they're based off the 1980's/1990's NFL which had 28 or so teams.

In a historical league, a 35/35 player is basically the equivalent of a 50/50 player from FOF-generated draft/roster files.

Then can u explain to me how this offense is having problems running the ball and offense in general.

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/6771/jagsoffense.jpg

[Ben E Lou]

Could be any combination of these...

1. COHESION--I hadn't noticed it before, but that first team should have very good running cohesion. The second one isn't going to be very good at all.
2. GAME PLAN--It could be a crappy game plan. Is this SP or MP?
3. COACHING--Coaching makes a difference, too.
4. CHEMISTRY--Conflicts and affinities make a difference.
5. SCHEDULE--Could have played a tough schedule.
6. BAD DICE ROLLS--Sometimes the dice are just unkind. You mentioned that you've only played four games. The sample size may simply be too small.

[Higgs44]

Could be any combination of these...

1. COHESION--I hadn't noticed it before, but that first team should have very good running cohesion. The second one isn't going to be very good at all.
2. GAME PLAN--It could be a crappy game plan. Is this SP or MP?
3. COACHING--Coaching makes a difference, too.
4. CHEMISTRY--Conflicts and affinities make a difference.
5. SCHEDULE--Could have played a tough schedule.
6. BAD DICE ROLLS--Sometimes the dice are just unkind. You mentioned that you've only played four games. The sample size may simply be too small.

This is a MP league...HFL

So Cohesion matters that much? That u could have 30 rated players and they out perform 50-70 rated ones? I really cant fathom in any way how that should happen.

I believe the GP is by far the most important thing in FOF, I will never truly understand it, and will be the 1st to admit that. It says one thing in the help file and the game does another, so if you dont know the "cheats", it wont matter.

I just thought the patch was supposed to help teams play to their ratings and not lean so much on the GP.

Chemistry...
1st team has 1 affinity in starting 5
2 of the starting 5 on 2nd team have affinities, 1 exceptional affinity

no conflicts on either team on OL, each team has 1 total conflict on offense in general.

[RedKingGold]

Then can u explain to me how this offense is having problems running the ball and offense in general.

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/6771/jagsoffense.jpg

Because of this:

Could be any combination of these...

1. COHESION--I hadn't noticed it before, but that first team should have very good running cohesion. The second one isn't going to be very good at all.
2. GAME PLAN--It could be a crappy game plan. Is this SP or MP?
3. COACHING--Coaching makes a difference, too.
4. CHEMISTRY--Conflicts and affinities make a difference.
5. SCHEDULE--Could have played a tough schedule.
6. BAD DICE ROLLS--Sometimes the dice are just unkind. You mentioned that you've only played four games. The sample size may simply be too small.

[Ben E Lou]

This is a SP league...HFLHuh?

[Higgs44]

Huh?

I meant MP of course

[Ben E Lou]

It says one thing in the help file and the game does another, so if you dont know the "cheats", it wont matter.Not following this, either. Can you give some examples of where it says one thing and does another? I know that the Help File is lacking in some places, but I'm not familiar with very many places where it's flat-out wrong. If it is, I'd like to add those places to my list.

[Ben E Lou]

I meant MP of courseAh, if it's MP, I'd point to game plans in both cases, either by the team planning or by the opponents. Game plans matter, sure. Humans are prone to doing REALLY stupid stuff that hamstrings their teams in ways the AI would never do.

[Higgs44]

Not following this, either. Can you give some examples of where it says one thing and does another? I know that the Help File is lacking in some places, but I'm not familiar with very many places where it's flat-out wrong. If it is, I'd like to add those places to my list.

I havent looked in so long it would take me a while to find them again. I stopped using the help file a few years ago after it wasnt helping.

[RedKingGold]

I'm with you Higgs. I also stopped using the help file when it did not tell me whether the X button meant "Sprint" or "Dive."

[Steel]

I said I was done posting on this topic in HFL, but like in the thread over there, Higgy loves to leave out important facts for this discussion. These are the ratings of all his starters:

LE Childress - 81 run D
NT Dronett - 27 run D
RE Spellman - 23 run D
SLB Junkin - 36 run D
SILB Brooks - 48 run D
WILB Noga - 34 run D
WLB Scroggins - 22 run D
Backup ILB June James(I guess he's usually the starter) - 22 run D
LCB Leatherwood - 25 run D
RCB Bajway - 24 run D
SS Henley - 40 run D
FS Wooodson - 33 run D

Not exactly the the '85 Bears, is it? My team has 98 cohesion in the run game, which I explained to him multiple times that makes a difference, especially when his defensive front is 63 cohesion, and his secondary is 54. And like was already stated, this is a historical league, and Bo Jackson is the 2nd highest rated player in the league, behind WR Jerry Rice. In the previous seasons, my game plan was run heavy. This season it's actually more balanced, 137 passes to 128 runs. Anyone wants to see the complete breakdown of Bo, here ya go:

RB Bo Jackson Player Details (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/hfl/ben/playercard.php?playerid=18926)

[Higgs44]

I said I was done posting on this topic in HFL, but like in the thread over there, Higgy loves to leave out important facts for this discussion. These are the ratings of all his starters:

LE Childress - 81 run D
NT Dronett - 27 run D
RE Spellman - 23 run D
SLB Junkin - 36 run D
SILB Brooks - 48 run D
WILB Noga - 34 run D
WLB Scroggins - 22 run D
Backup ILB June James(I guess he's usually the starter) - 22 run D
LCB Leatherwood - 25 run D
RCB Bajway - 24 run D
SS Henley - 40 run D
FS Wooodson - 33 run D

Not exactly the the '85 Bears, is it? My team has 98 cohesion in the run game, which I explained to him multiple times that makes a difference, especially when his defensive front is 63 cohesion, and his secondary is 54. And like was already stated, this is a historical league, and Bo Jackson is the 2nd highest rated player in the league, behind WR Jerry Rice. In the previous seasons, my game plan was run heavy. This season it's actually more balanced, 137 passes to 128 runs. Anyone wants to see the complete breakdown of Bo, here ya go:

RB Bo Jackson Player Details (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/hfl/ben/playercard.php?playerid=18926)

It actually had nothing to do with my defense... in general i asked how a terrible OL can produce so well... reading is fundamental my lil friend.

Next time read before you insert your foot into your mouth. the taste isnt as bad then ;)

[Steel]

It actually had nothing to do with my defense... in general i asked how a terrible OL can produce so well... reading is fundamental my lil friend.

Next time read before you insert your foot into your mouth. the taste isnt as bad then ;)

I can link everyone to the HFL site where you are crying on about 3 separate posts because I ran all over you and you claim your D should be good enough to stop me. It's also an example of some of the types of defenses I'm facing throughout the league. Stop whining:lol:. Sorry you lost man. Seriously though, get over it.

[Higgs44]

I can link everyone to the HFL site where you are crying on about 3 separate posts because I ran all over you and you claim your D should be good enough to stop me. It's also an example of some of the types of defenses I'm facing throughout the league. Stop whining:lol:. Sorry you lost man. Seriously though, get over it.

go ahead...it still doesnt make up for the fact you posted in a thread without reading it... Reading Is Fundamental... they created a whole line of books on it...you should check it out.

You beat me... congratulations... but we both know who won when it mattered most...in the Super Bowl ;)

So put that in your pipe and smoke it :lol:

Now if you dont mind, id like to get back to this thread... which is why a shitty OL can create a 2300 yard rusher. And the "team" concept is vastly over rated.

[Izulde]

Cohesion does have an important effect, though, as everyone in this thread have pointed out.

[Izulde]

dola,

and Ben and RKG both explained why that offensive line isn't as bad as you think it is.

[Higgs44]

dola,

and Ben and RKG both explained why that offensive line isn't as bad as you think it is.

So the consensus is scrap getting good OL, because a 30 rated one is just as good... and get that 1 stud weapon... thats how this game works??? really???

I would really just like to get a confirmation on this so i know how to go going forward.

[Higgs44]

It's also an example of some of the types of defenses I'm facing throughout the league.

Its funny you should mention this....

Why is it that Jumbo Elliot whos rated 85/85, has such a hard time in the same league filled with such bad defenses like you just mentioned.

He's a career 34% Block Percent with 16 pancakes and 13 sacks allowed in 4+ seasons, 62 games.

[Ben E Lou]

You're missing it. You said "shitty" and "flat out awful." The line is neither. It's still a significant way between "shitty"/"flat out awful" and "great." You're acting like we said it's a great line. We didn't. We just said that your characterization is wrong. There is a substantial difference between a line filled with 30/30 guys and a line filled with 60/60 guys.

And once again, you seem to be missing that there are other factors at work. The cohesion piece is an obvious one, plus now that we know that it's a league filled with humans, who knows what bad teams he is facing, and what worse defensive game plans he's running up against?

[Ben E Lou]

Its funny you should mention this....

Why is it that Jumbo Elliot whos rated 85/85, has such a hard time in the same league filled with such bad defenses like you just mentioned.

He's a career 34% Block Percent with 16 pancakes and 13 sacks allowed in 4+ seasons, 62 games.A bad human game plan can easily account for that, or any of the other factors mentioned repeatedly here.

[Ben E Lou]

...or bad running backs running behind him.

[Ben E Lou]

Oh, and sacks allowed don't have all that much to do with the offensive linemen. Those are much more on the QB.

[Izulde]

Besides which, 13 total sacks allowed over 4+ seasons is pretty low. That's what, roughly 3 sacks a season?

[Higgs44]

Besides which, 13 total sacks allowed over 4+ seasons is pretty low. That's what, roughly 3 sacks a season?

I was referring more to the fact his block % is so low.

[Ben E Lou]

...which is heavily dependent on the RBs and the game plan.

[Izulde]

...which is heavily dependent on the RBs and the game plan.

Aren't KRBO also randomly assigned? I thought I remember reading that somewhere.

[Ben E Lou]

No, it's not random, but it is dependent on the success of the play. If a lineman does his job perfectly and the RB fumbles, there's no KRB assigned, for example.

[Higgs44]

...which is heavily dependent on the RBs and the game plan.

Hes got a decent/good RB... 58/58 with a 73 hole rec, mediocre speed, avg'd over 4ypc in his season + (2nd season).

4.03 rookie season 4.61 in 4 games this year.

I guess we will chalk this up to GP then?

[Higgs44]

You're missing it. You said "shitty" and "flat out awful." The line is neither. It's still a significant way between "shitty"/"flat out awful" and "great." You're acting like we said it's a great line. We didn't. We just said that your characterization is wrong. There is a substantial difference between a line filled with 30/30 guys and a line filled with 60/60 guys.

And once again, you seem to be missing that there are other factors at work. The cohesion piece is an obvious one, plus now that we know that it's a league filled with humans, who knows what bad teams he is facing, and what worse defensive game plans he's running up against?

Is it a bad GP for defense to put your guys looking for the run in approximately 70% of the time... when u go up against a guy you KNOW will run it that much?

[Raiders Army]

Just to throw this out there, but the historical draft files rarely have good defensive linemen (read that as good, not great...there's probably a handful of great defensive linemen in the drafts). The average defensive lineman is worse than the average offensive lineman.

My two cents.

[Higgs44]

Just to throw this out there, but the historical draft files rarely have good defensive linemen (read that as good, not great...there's probably a handful of great defensive linemen in the drafts). The average defensive lineman is worse than the average offensive lineman.

My two cents.

Thats true... Bruce Smith is #1 I believe at 69. It just doesnt really hold water in this case though.

[Steel]

go ahead...it still doesnt make up for the fact you posted in a thread without reading it... Reading Is Fundamental... they created a whole line of books on it...you should check it out.

You beat me... congratulations... but we both know who won when it mattered most...in the Super Bowl ;)

So put that in your pipe and smoke it :lol:

Now if you dont mind, id like to get back to this thread... which is why a shitty OL can create a 2300 yard rusher. And the "team" concept is vastly over rated.

A totally different league that has nothing to do with this discussion. You are so intelligent. You look more and more foolish with every post you make. And I run for 2300 yards per year because I'm a beast. Hit me on AIM. Maybe I'll teach you how to run effectively, since you cry about not being able to do that, as well.:cool:

[Higgs44]

A totally different league that has nothing to do with this discussion. You are so intelligent. You look more and more foolish with every post you make. And I run for 2300 yards per year because I'm a beast. Hit me on AIM. Maybe I'll teach you how to run effectively, since you cry about not being able to do that, as well.:cool:

Im sorry did u win a SB in HFL that i dont know about? I got one of those too. For a big talker, Ive never seen u win jack. I have however seen u come up short on a few occasions. So you must not be as beastly as u think.

[Hammer]

So people still actually think cohesion is worth a damn? I've spent hours trying to find its existence in testing, using a variety of methods, without success. Hell, even solecismic support acknowledge its screwed.

I think the poster has stumbled on the simple fact that OL isn't worth as much in FOF as in real football.

[Hoya1]

how many different ways can you ask the same question, get the same answers, and ask the same question again?

[Ben E Lou]

Hell, even solecismic support aknowledge its screwed.
If this is true, please post that response for all to see.

[Hammer]

I discussed this privately with you way back Ben by pm, remember? Posted all my results off to Ethan, who confirmed the cohesion was obviously not working as intended. He stated he would pass the results over to Jim who would handle the situation.

I don't tend to post studies on FOFC anymore. People will believe what they want to believe. Neutral doesn't seem to exist to some people, it seems more about trying to find an angle to confirm their beliefs. Not at all aimed at you Ben, you contribute some great stuff.

I have gone at it from various angles. Simming 15 years ahead before starting the study most recently. Yoda pointed out cohesion is relative and maybe doing it from year 1 of a league was causing lack of effect. Fair point, but still nothing doing, no cohesion effect. By all means, have a bash yourself. I have seen enough to have a firm opinion now.

[RedKingGold]

So people still actually think cohesion is worth a damn? I've spent hours trying to find its existence in testing, using a variety of methods, without success. Hell, even solecismic support acknowledge its screwed.

I think the poster has stumbled on the simple fact that OL isn't worth as much in FOF as in real football.

Your constant screaming that cohesion is broken is based on a flawed study you posted several patches ago.

You will continue to be seen as a loon on that issue unless and until you post a relevant and recent study about cohesion.

[RedKingGold]

I can't prove anything definitive about cohesion, therefore, I'm going to claim victory, take my ball, and go home.

Got it. Thanks for playing.

[Hammer]

Multiples studies actually. I have posted various studies in the leagues I play in. A couple I have just kept to myself as the result were duplicate to what I posted. I did a lot of work on the 6.3 patch, that was the most recent. I'm not overly bothered if you, or anyone sees me as a loon. I have no sinister reason to bring cohesion to its knees, it is what it is.

But seriously, you really think name calling will convince me to share my work RKG? I'm the loon that handed you your ass year after year in the GEFL. What does that make you. The loons bitch?

Don't why I post here, I only try to contribute the best I can. Laters.

[Ben E Lou]

I discussed this privately with you way back Ben by pm, remember?No, we didn't really discuss it. I have an archive of all of my old PMs. I just checked it for the last 2 years. In December of 2009, (before the 6.3 patch cycle was finished,) I PMed you and suggested you send your results to support. You said you would. That's the only interaction I've had with you via PM during that time frame other than a quick request for me to chime in on something at VNFL in mid-2009.

Posted all my results off to Ethan, who confirmed the cohesion was obviously not working as intended. He stated he would pass the results over to Jim who would handle the situation.

I don't tend to post studies on FOFC anymore. People will believe what they want to believe. Neutral doesn't seem to exist to some people, it seems more about trying to find an angle to confirm their beliefs. Not at all aimed at you Ben, you contribute some great stuff.

I have gone at it from various angles. Simming 15 years ahead before starting the study most recently. Yoda pointed out cohesion is relative and maybe doing it from year 1 of a league was causing lack of effect. Fair point, but still nothing doing, no cohesion effect. By all means, have a bash yourself. I have seen enough to have a firm opinion now.I'm not asking for studies. I'm asking for you to paste where Ethan actually said that cohesion isn't working. I'd like to see his exact words there.

[Ben E Lou]

I did a lot of work on the 6.3 patch, that was the most recent.Hammer, I don't have a dog in this fight. I just want to get to the bottom of the issue. That said, I must say that statements like this do not help your credibility very much.

[RedKingGold]

Multiples studies actually. I have posted various studies in the leagues I play in. A couple I have just kept to myself as the result were duplicate to what I posted. I did a lot of work on the 6.3 patch, that was the most recent. I'm not overly bothered if you, or anyone sees me as a loon. I have no sinister reason to bring cohesion to its knees, it is what it is.

Nothing personal. I'd just like to see these "multiple studies".

But seriously, you really think name calling will convince me to share my work RKG? I'm the loon that handed you your ass year after year in the GEFL. What does that make you. The loons bitch?

Again, nothing personal. Besides, I attribute those playoff losses to marc, he was a good gameplanner.

Don't why I post here, I only try to contribute the best I can. Laters.

This seems like a bitch way to go out, but YMMV.

[Hammer]

I will have a look on my home PC Ben, I might still have the original from Ethan.

Marc is my buddy RKG, but to be fair his input was very marginal. Besides he isn't particularly good at FOF. You were beaten by a loon. Excuse me for being a bitch, it can be a little frustrating when you put hours into testing only not to be taken seriously.

I just feel work on here tends to get picked apart if your not in the "in crowd". I would suggest anyone who is curious do a study themselves - that way you can satisfy your own criteria. Maybe things have changed in 6.4, and were part of those mysterious "engine tweaks" Jim alluded to. I would love to see that quite honestly for the good of the game.

[RedKingGold]

Marc is my buddy RKG, but to be fair his input was very marginal. Besides he isn't particularly good at FOF. You were beaten by a loon. Excuse me for being a bitch, it can be a little frustrating when you put hours into testing only not to be taken seriously.

Wow, way to throw marc under the bus. Some friend you are.

[Ben E Lou]

I just feel work on here tends to get picked apart if your not in the "in crowd". I don't think that's true. Tium's groundbreaking combine work was met with universal approval. The guy who did the defensive combine study (name escapes me) got a great response.

Hammer, I think the issue with the study is twofold:

1. The study contradicted something that, by mounds of anecdotal evidence, many people "know" to be true.

2. The original study had a number of questionable assumptions that led to some questionable conclusions.

3. The original study had some flawed methodology in it.

So, yeah, when people see flawed methodology and questionable assumptions leading to a conclusion that contradicts mounds of anecdotal evidence, they tend to discount the whole study. I really think it has nothing to do with who published it.

[Hammer]

Ben if you think everythings cool all well and good. I certainly do agree with you that some studies are greeted well, and fairly. But it isn’t always the case. A number of new players don't post on this forum, as they tend to get ridiculed and patronized by people who are keen to pretend they know more than they actually do. It is the perfect place to ask FOF questions with the collection of minds we have here, but as I say a number of people shy away. Which is a shame. It seems chest pounding and belittling is more the agenda to some these days.

Take our friend RKG. I’m trying to have a sensible discussion with you and he aggressively throws himself into the mix - I’m a bitch, loon, and now I have throw my friend under a bus. I doubt Marc is crying in his soup. Its a game he isn't particularly good at, whats the big deal with that? The world doesn’t revolve around FOF. Lighten up.

As for the work I have done Ben, well, I pretty much feel FOF is a bit like religon. If your mind is made up your not going to listen. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convert those that don't want to be converted. I appreciate you have an open mind to the subject, others don't. My advice is do the studies yourself, then any concerns you have go out the window.

[Ben E Lou]

Ben if you think everythings cool all well and good. I certainly do agree with you that some studies are greeted well, and fairly. But it isn’t always the case. A number of new players don't post on this forum, as they tend to get ridiculed and patronized by people who are keen to pretend they know more than they actually do. It is the perfect place to ask FOF questions with the collection of minds we have here, but as I say a number of people shy away. Which is a shame. It seems chest pounding and belittling is more the agenda to some these days.That's a slightly different angle than the "all studies not done by FOF elite get ridiculed" one, and you're probably right there. That said, I've also seen cases of people taking shots at FOF/Jim in an "insider" sort of way. These weren't intended to belittle the newbie posting, but they were taken that way.

But when it comes to FOF studies, I can only recall a small handful of ones *not* done by RKG, MalcPow, Celeval, or me in the last 4ish years or so. Your cohesion one was the only one that I recall getting met with great resistance. If there were others, I just don't remember them.

Take our friend RKG. I’m trying to have a sensible discussion with you and he aggressively throws himself into the mix - I’m a bitch, loon, and now I have throw my friend under a bus. I doubt Marc is crying in his soup. Its a game he isn't particularly good at, whats the big deal with that? The world doesn’t revolve around FOF. Lighten up.I'd agree that RKG is one of the chief offenders when it comes to what you mention above.

As for the work I have done Ben, well, I pretty much feel FOF is a bit like religon. If your mind is made up your not going to listen. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convert those that don't want to be converted. I appreciate you have an open mind to the subject, others don't. My advice is do the studies yourself, then any concerns you have go out the window.Well, on *this* particular issue I have done some digging, and have come up with the opposite conclusion as yours. That's why I want to see the email from Support. My guess is that you maybe misinterpreted the response, but maybe I'm wrong there.

[Yoda]

Is it a bad GP for defense to put your guys looking for the run in approximately 70% of the time... when u go up against a guy you KNOW will run it that much?

If I am going against someone who I know runs 70% of the time, chances are my gameplan is going to be more like 80 or 90% run defense, if not 100.

[Yoda]

In a historical league you have to keep in mind that the way the files are done that the stars are WAY better than the average players. Where the average starter in a fictional league might be 50-55, in a historical league, it will be 35-40. Which is a significant difference when applied across a whole team.

[Yoda]

What I said on cohesion in general was that cohesion is relative. That if you start a new league, the league only sees that one year. That to truely test the effects of cohesion, you'd need to take a league that was like 10-15 seasons in, then take the top cohesion team and run test that way.

If I get some freetime anytime soon, I'll try and run one.

[Steel]

Im sorry did u win a SB in HFL that i dont know about? I got one of those too. For a big talker, Ive never seen u win jack. I have however seen u come up short on a few occasions. So you must not be as beastly as u think.

You won that on 6.2 a long time ago, which was before I even knew FOF existed, lol. You've been playing this game how long, compared to me? You SHOULD have more wins, and SBs. But as far as head to head matchups, I have the advantage on you, period. You cry in both the leagues we're in together about your game plan not working. You rarely give credit to the other opponent. And honestly, playoffs in a lot of cases are dice rolls. My PFL team should prove that. A game plan that wins 12+ games a season, then I lose in playoffs because of special teams, or fumbles, or penalties, or all the above. Like I stated after my last PFL playoff game, I'm not stressing over trying to win a SB anymore. I'm having fun. Serves no purpose to game plan for hours on end like some do, only to lose because of 2 blocked FGs or something crazy, when I had 550 yards of offense compared to my opponent's 300. When you can rush for 2000 yards in multiple leagues, multiple times, and throw for 5000 yards in multiple leagues, multiple times, and not bitch and complain about your game plan working, maybe I'll take you seriously. Until then, I won't. And the more you continue to post here about why I can run the ball at will whenever I want, and you can't is quite comical to me. Especially since some of the answers you got here, were the ones I already gave you over at HFL! But hey, I guess you don't want to listen to the guy who has played the game 2-3 years less than you. Heaven forbid that guy know more about the game than you, right? And heaven forbid you believe that guy can actually educate you on how the game works:cool:. Again, I'm done posting on this topic. If you want to continue talking nonsense, that's fine, just talk to yourself. I'll just be sitting back with my :popcorn: watching. And the offer still stands for you to hit me up on AIM if you want some pointers on game planning.

[Disturbed]

I've won bowl games with teams with bad cohesion and with teams with good cohesion.

The only thing I can contribute to this is that my teams with really good cohesion scores were more steady and seemed to be a lot more consistent. I could just stick a game plan in, walk away, and just check for injuries each week with my good cohesion teams.

[Raiders Army]

Got it. Thanks for playing.

FWIW that's a dick move "quoting" him and putting words that he never said in there.

Maybe I'm wrong (I have had a couple beers), but I don't see where he said what you quoted.

[Higgs44]

You won that on 6.2 a long time ago, which was before I even knew FOF existed, lol. You've been playing this game how long, compared to me? You SHOULD have more wins, and SBs. But as far as head to head matchups, I have the advantage on you, period. You cry in both the leagues we're in together about your game plan not working. You rarely give credit to the other opponent. And honestly, playoffs in a lot of cases are dice rolls. My PFL team should prove that. A game plan that wins 12+ games a season, then I lose in playoffs because of special teams, or fumbles, or penalties, or all the above. Like I stated after my last PFL playoff game, I'm not stressing over trying to win a SB anymore. I'm having fun. Serves no purpose to game plan for hours on end like some do, only to lose because of 2 blocked FGs or something crazy, when I had 550 yards of offense compared to my opponent's 300. When you can rush for 2000 yards in multiple leagues, multiple times, and throw for 5000 yards in multiple leagues, multiple times, and not bitch and complain about your game plan working, maybe I'll take you seriously. Until then, I won't. And the more you continue to post here about why I can run the ball at will whenever I want, and you can't is quite comical to me. Especially since some of the answers you got here, were the ones I already gave you over at HFL! But hey, I guess you don't want to listen to the guy who has played the game 2-3 years less than you. Heaven forbid that guy know more about the game than you, right? And heaven forbid you believe that guy can actually educate you on how the game works:cool:. Again, I'm done posting on this topic. If you want to continue talking nonsense, that's fine, just talk to yourself. I'll just be sitting back with my :popcorn: watching. And the offer still stands for you to hit me up on AIM if you want some pointers on game planning.

Actually your wrong... shocking I know... but theres a reason why my QBs nickname is Mr 6.3... and not Mr 6.2

Also... this is about the reasoning of the game, not you, I used u as an example of how ridiculous it is that a OL with 30 rated players can create a 2300 yard rusher.

People have said cohesion, etc, etc... but i see leagues where cohesion means squat and guys win regardless.

They also say a 30 rated player isnt "that bad", to which i say... why not? Why should a 30 rated player be any good at all? Why shouldnt a 69 rated DE just school a 30 rated OL???

These are the questions that I believe are messed up with the game.

[Higgs44]

I've won bowl games with teams with bad cohesion and with teams with good cohesion.

The only thing I can contribute to this is that my teams with really good cohesion scores were more steady and seemed to be a lot more consistent. I could just stick a game plan in, walk away, and just check for injuries each week with my good cohesion teams.

+1
I dont think my PFL teams had great cohesion, Im almost positive the first year didnt.

[Higgs44]

So people still actually think cohesion is worth a damn? I've spent hours trying to find its existence in testing, using a variety of methods, without success. Hell, even solecismic support acknowledge its screwed.

I think the poster has stumbled on the simple fact that OL isn't worth as much in FOF as in real football.

I can tell u this, to a man, I probably will never take one in the 1st round again, no matter what.

If a 30 rated OL isnt that bad... whats the point.

[Tasan]

I think its because you have Jeff George at QB.

[Jughead Spock]

Also... this is about the reasoning of the game, not you, I used u as an example of how ridiculous it is that a OL with 30 rated players can create a 2300 yard rusher.

People have said cohesion, etc, etc... but i see leagues where cohesion means squat and guys win regardless.

They also say a 30 rated player isnt "that bad", to which i say... why not? Why should a 30 rated player be any good at all? Why shouldnt a 69 rated DE just school a 30 rated OL???
[real football logic] Why would it be so ridiculous to think that a group of 30-somethings with good cohesion could out-perform a group of 60-somethings with less? Especially in the OL. [/rfl]

As to the ratings, Ben has already pointed out that it's not like everything under a 60 is 'failing'. Also, a 30-something might be outstanding in RB or PB (or both), and have zeroes at blocking strength and/or EN. The overall rating isn't all that key, just looks good on the roster page.

And as you said, you have a stud RB. It's Barry Sanders syndrome, makes the OL look like pro bowlers.

[Higgs44]

Why would it be so ridiculous to think that a group of 30-somethings with good cohesion could out-perform a group of 60-somethings with less? Especially in the OL.

As to the ratings, Ben has already pointed out that it's not like everything under a 60 is 'failing'. Also, a 30-something might be outstanding in RB or PB (or both), and have zeroes at blocking strength and/or EN. The overall rating isn't all that key, just looks good on the roster page.

And as you said, you have a stud RB. It's Barry Sanders syndrome, makes the OL look like pro bowlers.

Ive posted how bad the RB bar is, no 30 rated player has good bars, neither do these.

As for Barry Sanders... you do realize hes had the most negative gains in NFL history right?
Barry Sanders holds the NFL record for the most carries for negative yardage (336 carries for -952 yards)?

[Jughead Spock]

Yes, he was truly awful.

[Higgs44]

Yes, he was truly awful.

Not awful... just not as great as u think. Theres a reason he never did squat when it counted most.

You cant sit here and tell me negative runs dont kill... sorry.

As for his OL... i believe he had an all pro in Lomas Brown, and Mike Utley was pretty good until he broke his neck. Lets not forget he also had Herman Moore taking pressure off him.

[Pyser]

wow...

[Jughead Spock]

Ok.

[A-Husker-4-Life]

Barry Sanders in 1997;

335 rushes
2053 yards
11 Rtd's
6.1 yards per rush ****

Yup Higgs, he's was completely awful..

[MIJB#19]

This thread certainly went down the drain. Bummer, this was an interesting topic. Oh well...

[Higgs44]

Barry Sanders in 1997;

335 rushes
2053 yards
11 Rtd's
6.1 yards per rush ****

Yup Higgs, he's was completely awful..

No one said he was awful... and if u had any clue about real football, you'd know stats sometimes lie. The fact that Barry got caught behind the line of scrimmage so often, put his team in a bind quite often.

I saw Barry play with my own eyes, from day 1 and know what he was capable of, problem was, he danced too much in the backfield to give his offense any stability, so it was either break a long TD or punt.

A great winning RB doesnt take negative gains and busts a long one. Teams cant win like that, and the Lions never did. Remember he played in the running back era, not the aerial display that the game is now.

And as for my original topic... i dont believe u need a great OL in this game for a great running game... so no point in taking one early anymore. All u need is a few 30 rated guys and great cohesion.

[Dutch]

To Recap

Higgs complains that a great RB should not be able to produce great stats behind a "shitty" offensive line...then cites Barry Sanders and the Detroit Lions offensive line as an exact replica...which produced great RB stats...but that the Lions never won a championship...which leads us back to the original RB and his team which apparently never won a championship either.

Did I get all the facts of this case right?

[Jughead Spock]

Well, actually I cited Barry. But since he didn't run for 2300 yards, he's apparently a 30-ish RB behind a 60-ish OL. It's a shame he held back the potential Hall-of-Fame careers of Wayne Fontes and Scott Mitchell. Selfish bastard.

[Dutch]

Well, actually I cited Barry. But since he didn't run for 2300 yards, he's apparently a 30-ish RB behind a 60-ish OL. It's a shame he held back the potential Hall-of-Fame careers of Wayne Fontes and Scott Mitchell. Selfish bastard.

hehe, Agreed!

[Higgs44]

To Recap

Higgs complains that a great RB should not be able to produce great stats behind a "shitty" offensive line...then cites Barry Sanders and the Detroit Lions offensive line as an exact replica...which produced great RB stats...but that the Lions never won a championship...which leads us back to the original RB and his team which apparently never won a championship either.

Did I get all the facts of this case right?

Your actually wrong... but whos counting.

I never brought up Barry Sanders, someone else did.

I cited that Det actually had 2 good OLmen, 1 which was an all pro. Not to mention I cited they also had a very good WR in Herman Moore to alleviate the pressure off Barry. This team with Bo Jackson has none of what I just mentioned...for the 2nd time now.

If your gonna be too lazy to actually read the comments, please dont bother commenting.

[MacroGuru]

Your actually wrong... but whos counting.

I never brought up Barry Sanders, someone else did.

I cited that Det actually had 2 good OLmen, 1 which was an all pro. Not to mention I cited they also had a very good WR in Herman Moore to alleviate the pressure off Barry. This team with Bo Jackson has none of what I just mentioned...for the 2nd time now.

If your gonna be too lazy to actually read the comments, please dont bother commenting.

Funny, I think I remember Emmitt Smith making a statement that if Barry would have ran behind his line, he would have been still chasing the record back when he broke it.

1 all pro does not make an OL and regardless of what you think, the Lions have never had a good OL..they had a decent one when Mitchell decided he wanted to play out of his mind.

No matter...back to the topic at hand..

OL I tend to get a solid LT, a strong center and the rest with decent run blocking, pass blocking doesn't have to be the best for me and I have generated some pretty great rushing attacks...it also helps to have a passing game that can off set the run.

[Higgs44]

Funny, I think I remember Emmitt Smith making a statement that if Barry would have ran behind his line, he would have been still chasing the record back when he broke it.

1 all pro does not make an OL and regardless of what you think, the Lions have never had a good OL..they had a decent one when Mitchell decided he wanted to play out of his mind.

No matter...back to the topic at hand..

OL I tend to get a solid LT, a strong center and the rest with decent run blocking, pass blocking doesn't have to be the best for me and I have generated some pretty great rushing attacks...it also helps to have a passing game that can off set the run.

When did I ever say they had a good OL??? I said they had 2 good players on their OL.

The POINT was the team i showcased had nothing besides Bo Jackson... people seriously READ before commenting.

People always want to bring up Barry Sanders when it comes to a 1 man show, but he wasnt, he had help... the team I showcased had NOTHING else but Bo Jackson.

Does no one see why someone would want to question the game because of that? Theres not 1 legit threat on that Oakland roster outside Bo Jackson, and yet he runs rough shot through the league.

[Dutch]

Theres not 1 legit threat on that Oakland roster outside Bo Jackson, and yet he runs rough shot through the league.

How many championships have they won with one superstar player? Didn't you say it was zero? This isn't exactly making me think I should just go get the best RB I can find and dump the rest of my players.

And what happens to Bo Jackson when a couple of stud WR's are added to the mix? Will they just be ignored so Jackson can get 2300 yards? Or will they both be 1800 yard receivers along with Jackson's 2300 yards? I don't think that either. So what happens?

Look, there is only one football. Bo Jackson's #'s are most likely going to be skewed a bit because there is nobody else to get the ball as much......and he is a good RB...and as it's been pointed out, that O-Line is not bad, it just doesn't have super ratings guys on it. They seem pretty functional to me.

WARNING: REAL-LIFE EXAMPLE

If you don't think a stud RB can't make a difference, check out the 2010 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Carnell Williams (a 3rd down back) earned a 2.0 ypc average the first half of the year (when he was the starter) behind the Bucs HEALTHY O-line. Lagarrette Blount (a power back) earned a 4.0 ypc average the second half of the year (when he was the starter) behind the Bucs make-shift O-line as injuries accumulated.

Granted, there were a lot of factors that went into Blount's success beyond Blount himself, but the point is that sometimes the O-line isn't the end all be all of this game.

FOF has tried to mirror that and as Ben pointed out, part of the misconception is that a player with low ratings is deemed "shitty" when in reality, every player in FOF is considered worthy enough to be on the playing field.

In any event, for reference...

Bucs offensive line gets huge contributions from unlikely sources

<!-- blog post content -->If someone would have told Bucs coach Raheem Morris that his starting offensive line would consist of a right tackle making his first NFL start (James Lee), a left guard playing in his second career game (Ted Larsen) and a center who isn’t really a center (Jeremy Zuttah), it’s likely he would have been hard-pressed to express much confidence.

But that was the Bucs’ reality on Sunday, and the results were surprisingly promising. Though QB Josh Freeman was sacked twice (one of those was the fault of TE John Gilmore), the offensive line had one of its best days, despite missing starting RT Jeremy Trueblood to a knee injury and two days after starting left guard Keydrick Vincent was waived.

Freeman was able to stand confidently in the pocket and deliver passes of 47 and 53 yards to Mike Williams and Arrelious Benn, respectively, and RB LeGarrette Blount had sizable lanes through which to run largely because of the play of an offensive line that took the aggression to the Cardinals rather than the other way around.

[Dutch]

By the way, IRT Barry Sanders and his negative yardage carries. If you are correct that 1 in 10 carries resulted in negative yardage.

Negative Barry (11% of the time)
336 carries
-956 yards

...then the following would be true...

Positive Barry (89% of the time)
2726 carries
16,225 yards
5.95 ypc

So for the duration of his career, 9 out of 10 times, Barry Sanders would average 6 yards per carry. Not bad behind a pedestrian offensive-line (at best). He must've been pretty damned good.

[Higgs44]

By the way, IRT Barry Sanders and his negative yardage carries. If you are correct that 1 in 10 carries resulted in negative yardage.

Negative Barry (11% of the time)
336 carries
-956 yards

...then the following would be true...

Positive Barry (89% of the time)
2726 carries
16,225 yards
5.95 ypc

So for the duration of his career, 9 out of 10 times, Barry Sanders would average 6 yards per carry. Not bad behind a pedestrian offensive-line (at best). He must've been pretty damned good.

Does this take into account all the LONG runs he used to have, minus the very short ones? Because as any knowledgeable football fan would tell u its about consistency. A RB who bust's very long gains can have a nice YPC avg, look effective on the surface, and not be as good as a guy who avg's a solid 4 ypc with no long gains.

[Higgs44]

How many championships have they won with one superstar player? Didn't you say it was zero? This isn't exactly making me think I should just go get the best RB I can find and dump the rest of my players.

And what happens to Bo Jackson when a couple of stud WR's are added to the mix? Will they just be ignored so Jackson can get 2300 yards? Or will they both be 1800 yard receivers along with Jackson's 2300 yards? I don't think that either. So what happens?

Look, there is only one football. Bo Jackson's #'s are most likely going to be skewed a bit because there is nobody else to get the ball as much......and he is a good RB...and as it's been pointed out, that O-Line is not bad, it just doesn't have super ratings guys on it. They seem pretty functional to me.

WARNING: REAL-LIFE EXAMPLE

If you don't think a stud RB can't make a difference, check out the 2010 Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Carnell Williams (a 3rd down back) earned a 2.0 ypc average the first half of the year (when he was the starter) behind the Bucs HEALTHY O-line. Lagarrette Blount (a power back) earned a 4.0 ypc average the second half of the year (when he was the starter) behind the Bucs make-shift O-line as injuries accumulated.

Granted, there were a lot of factors that went into Blount's success beyond Blount himself, but the point is that sometimes the O-line isn't the end all be all of this game.

FOF has tried to mirror that and as Ben pointed out, part of the misconception is that a player with low ratings is deemed "shitty" when in reality, every player in FOF is considered worthy enough to be on the playing field.

In any event, for reference...



Why is everyone missing the point? Seriously?

I understand theres 1 football... you tell me how an NFL team would prepare to face an obvious 1 dimensional team? A team with only 1 legit weapon on it. Do u think they would play the run just about every down? bringing that 8th man into the box every time?

Now thinking this, how do u think that one dimensional team would fare? Do u think that player would avg over 5 ypc in 7 seasons?

Everyone keeps bringing up references to NFL teams, but in all the NFL, ive never seen a team with just 1 guy do anything. That is the issue at hand.

Also... if a 30 rated player isnt getting dominated by a much superior rated player, whats the point of a ratings system? I mean, everyone says Bo is rated so high so hes so good, yet a guy whos rated 69 going against a 30 rated OL, isnt as similarly dominant? Seems a bit hypocritical.

[Ben E Lou]

Also... if a 30 rated player isnt getting dominated by a much superior rated player, whats the point of a ratings system? I mean, everyone says Bo is rated so high so hes so good, yet a guy whos rated 69 going against a 30 rated OL, isnt as similarly dominant? Seems a bit hypocritical.
You seem to be completely ignoring the post I made and pretending that ratings are the only things that matter. They're not. Remember?

Could be any combination of these...

1. COHESION--I hadn't noticed it before, but that first team should have very good running cohesion. The second one isn't going to be very good at all.
2. GAME PLAN--It could be a crappy game plan. Is this SP or MP?
3. COACHING--Coaching makes a difference, too.
4. CHEMISTRY--Conflicts and affinities make a difference.
5. SCHEDULE--Could have played a tough schedule.
6. BAD DICE ROLLS--Sometimes the dice are just unkind. You mentioned that you've only played four games. The sample size may simply be too small.

So it has happened for several years, so we can discount 5 and 6. However, 1-4 are still crucial. For one thing, we just ran a convincing test on cohesion that it can be a HUGE deal, and the screen shot you posted shows us that the team in question has GREAT o-line cohesion.

C--yr 11
G--yr 6
G--yr 8
T--yr 6
T--yr 3
FB--yr 6

#2--game plan: odds are people aren't game planning correctly to stop him. And it's also possible that the owner is running a lot times that people aren't expecting it to pump up his stats.

#3--coaching: can make a big difference, I'm fairly sure

#4--chemistry: again, haven't seen this addressed, but how's chemistry for the Jackson team?

I left off...

#7--training camp settings: the owner could be pumping up running in TC to absurd levels

Point being, there are so many other factors that can increase and decrease performance that are completely unrelated to ratings. You seem to be ignoring that fact.

[Higgs44]

1)How long does it take to have a good cohesive team? 4 of the front 7 have been together at least 6 years and yet they are a 63.

2)GP's...
He ran, I went run D 70% on just about all downs

3)Coaching
Jax
DC
Kicker G, DL VG, LB EX, DB EX, YT EX
HC
Mot AVG, Disc VG, OFF EX, DEF EX, INJ EX

OAK
OC
QB VG, RB VG, WR AVG, OL EX, K GD, YT GD
HC
Mot EX, Disc EX, OFF EX, DEF EX, INJ VG

4)Chemistry
I have 2 conflicts...both on Offense, both are backups.
I have 9 Affinities

The Oakland Raiders have 3 conflict... 2 of which are starters
They have 7 Affinities

5)Ratings
They have no bearing

[MacroGuru]

2)GP's...
He ran, I went run D 70% on just about all downs


What was your base D?? did you run goal line primarily or were you caught in nickel and dime? Did you blitz? How often? multiple players?

These are all questions which will effect whether or not you can stop him...I have a defensive game plan specifically for teams like this where I have to make some minor tweaks dependent upon my squad, but if he has any type of QB or WR you will get torched in the air..

[Higgs44]

in theory... i could make some trades and take a bunch of 6th and 7th round OL in a draft and start them all from day 1, and in what... 6 seasons or so have a dominant OL?

[Jughead Spock]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - What Ben said, like seven times already.

Why is everyone missing the point? Seriously?

I understand theres 1 football... you tell me how an NFL team would prepare to face an obvious 1 dimensional team? A team with only 1 legit weapon on it. Do u think they would play the run just about every down? bringing that 8th man into the box every time?

Now thinking this, how do u think that one dimensional team would fare? Do u think that player would avg over 5 ypc in 7 seasons?

If this is indeed the point, you're playing in an MP league. Everyone *should* be stacking to stop Bo, and in the real NFL they would. Not all MP GMs are paying attention. It's also an inherent 'weakness' in this type of sim, there are no gameday decisions or adjustments - i.e., 'OMG BO IS KILLING US, STACK 10 IN THE BOX'. And even when teams do, a great back will still bust open a good defense sometimes. Even Barry.


Also... if a 30 rated player isnt getting dominated by a much superior rated player, whats the point of a ratings system? I mean, everyone says Bo is rated so high so hes so good, yet a guy whos rated 69 going against a 30 rated OL, isnt as similarly dominant? Seems a bit hypocritical.

The FOF rating isn't the same as Madden, or a 0-100 straight scale. Yes, 30 is worse than 60, but not half as good. The scale assumes - correctly - that anyone on the field is at least x level of a pro, it's varying degrees from there. Like the NFL. There's very little difference between most players at a position, a lot of their performance comes from other things.

[Higgs44]

What was your base D?? did you run goal line primarily or were you caught in nickel and dime? Did you blitz? How often? multiple players?

These are all questions which will effect whether or not you can stop him...I have a defensive game plan specifically for teams like this where I have to make some minor tweaks dependent upon my squad, but if he has any type of QB or WR you will get torched in the air..

I went 1 deep in all extreme run... mostly 2 deep in other run situations... very lil zone in pass only... no blitzing.


Im looking at a lot of nickle and dime packages... dont know why, since i geared the GP to play the run 70%.

[Higgs44]

The FOF rating isn't the same as Madden, or a 0-100 straight scale. Yes, 30 is worse than 60, but not half as good. The scale assumes - correctly - that anyone on the field is at least x level of a pro, it's varying degrees from there. Like the NFL. There's very little difference between most players at a position, a lot of their performance comes from other things.

By this logic, my 22 run bar isnt really a 22, because hes good enough to be on the field, so hes only slightly worse than a guy with a 70 run bar.

So if this is true, its true that you dont need good rated players. You just need cohesion and a good GP.

[Ben E Lou]

By this logic, my 22 run bar isnt really a 22, because hes good enough to be on the field, so hes only slightly worse than a guy with a 70 run bar.

So if this is true, its true that you dont need good rated players. You just need cohesion and a good GP.Put your good cohesion, good game plan, and mediocre players up against my good cohesion, good game plan and
good players, and I'll beat you 8 or 9 times out of 10. It *all* matters.

[Higgs44]

Put your good cohesion, good game plan, and mediocre players up against my good cohesion, good game plan and
good players, and I'll beat you 8 or 9 times out of 10. It *all* matters.

point is...u cant have good players at all positions. And since a 70 rated DE cant abuse a 30 rated OL... seems only logical not to waste time with OL. So, imo, bypass em and build up everything else and you will be better off.

but in the end... offense still rules the roost.

[Ben E Lou]

I went 1 deep in all extreme run... mostly 2 deep in other run situations... very lil zone in pass only... no blitzing.My guess is that somewhere in your defensive scheme is part of your problem when it comes to your team: too much of the same thing on defense. But really, apart from that, do you think teams geared up to stop Barry? Do you think they geared up to stop Walter? What about Jim Brown? The Juice? Of course they did. Just because you're in run aggressive, 1-deep doesn't mean that you'll shut down top-tier players. Great players make great plays, especially if you know how to game plan and what bars to


Im looking at a lot of nickle and dime packages... dont know why, since i geared the GP to play the run 70%.Any time you face 4-WR or 5-WR (and maybe 3-WR...I don't remember), you'll be in nickel or dime. The game automatically uses those packages.

[Higgs44]

can anyone answer this question?

1)How long does it take to have a good cohesive team? 4 of the front 7 have been together at least 6 years and yet they are a 63.

[Ben E Lou]

point is...u cant have good players at all positions. And since a 70 rated DE cant abuse a 30 rated OL... seems only logical not to waste time with OL. So, imo, bypass em and build up everything else and you will be better off.And your opinion is wrong. *shurg*

but in the end... offense still rules the roost.Meet the 2027 IHOF Bowl Champion Tucker Tigers.

IHOF: Tucker Tigers 2027 (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/ihof/ben/teampage.php?teamid=3&year=2027)

[Higgs44]

My guess is that somewhere in your defensive scheme is part of your problem when it comes to your team: too much of the same thing on defense. But really, apart from that, do you think teams geared up to stop Barry? Do you think they geared up to stop Walter? What about Jim Brown? The Juice? Of course they did. Just because you're in run aggressive, 1-deep doesn't mean that you'll shut down top-tier players. Great players make great plays, especially if you know how to game plan and what bars to

The difference is... they ALL had help. Bo Jackson in this game doesnt. At worst they presented another option in the offense, tell me where u see another option in this Oakland offense?


Any time you face 4-WR or 5-WR (and maybe 3-WR...I don't remember), you'll be in nickel or dime. The game automatically uses those packages.

lol... did not know that. Seems a bit counter productive if i have a strong front 7 and weak secondary. Wouldnt someone want to put u in nickle/dime all the time then?

[Ben E Lou]

can anyone answer this question?

1)How long does it take to have a good cohesive team? 4 of the front 7 have been together at least 6 years and yet they are a 63.First off, the number you see reported is only the 11 guys who started the most recent game. If you had an injury, the 63 is inaccurate. Second, the number you see reported is relative to the rest of the league. If there's another team in your league with a front 7 that's been together for 8 years, that number will look smaller. Conversely, if everyone else in your league is shifting guys in and out of the D7, that team with 4/7 having been together for 6 years would be a 100.

[Higgs44]

And your opinion is wrong. *shurg*

i dont see how... have u tried it? If I draft 5 OLmen in 1 draft from say rounds 5-7, and they max out around 35-45 and the cohesion goes through the roof, you gonna tell me they wont be good?

Seems its a lot easier to get a cohesive bunch on OL than in a front 7.

[Ben E Lou]

The difference is... they ALL had help. Bo Jackson in this game doesnt. At worst they presented another option in the offense, tell me where u see another option in this Oakland offense?The Juice rushed for 2,003 yards on a team that didn't make the playoffs. Everyone knew Buffalo was going to run it. We've already discussed Barry. Payton played on some teams that had no other real threat. I chose those three specifically because they had great years on teams where no one was particularly worried about anything else being a real threat.




lol... did not know that. Seems a bit counter productive if i have a strong front 7 and weak secondary. Wouldnt someone want to put u in nickle/dime all the time then?If it's just 4-WR and 5-WR, the defense would become way too familiar with the small number of plays you would run. And even if 3-WR is included in that, you need the right QB and right game plan to get away with doing all 3-WR/4-WR/5-WR. It's not that easy.

[Ben E Lou]

i dont see how... have u tried it? If I draft 5 OLmen in 1 draft from say rounds 5-7, and they max out around 35-45 and the cohesion goes through the roof, you gonna tell me they wont be good?

Seems its a lot easier to get a cohesive bunch on OL than in a front 7.They'll be good. Sure. But they won't be great. The great team will beat them. Plus, endurance would be an issue. And finally, you're not taking into account how the salary structure works in 6.3 and later. Very few people would have the stomach to pay those guys what they'd ask for.

[Jughead Spock]

The difference is... they ALL had help. Bo Jackson in this game doesnt. At worst they presented another option in the offense, tell me where u see another option in this Oakland offense?



I would LOVE to hear the other options on any of those offenses that kept teams from stacking 8 in the box.

[Higgs44]

They'll be good. Sure. But they won't be great. The great team will beat them. Plus, endurance would be an issue. And finally, you're not taking into account how the salary structure works in 6.3 and later. Very few people would have the stomach to pay those guys what they'd ask for.

define a "great" team, because I dont see many teams with great players at every position.

I think im gonna try this...i have a ton of picks for a rebuild team in USFL. Do they all have to start from day 1 or can they be backups and just be on the team for say 6-7 years, then year 7-8 or so just put them into the starting lineup?

Would the cohesion immediately shoot up?

[Jughead Spock]

I *believe* cohesion is based on actual plays together, but could be wrong there.

[Ben E Lou]

I *believe* cohesion is based on actual plays together, but could be wrong there.Nope. That's why I did the tests in the other thread in the manner that I did (and likely a big part of why J.C. Moln (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/woof/ben/playercard.php?playerid=12377) and Wendell Pravato (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/ihof/ben/playercard.php?playerid=15741) are doing just fine.) All indications are that it's based solely on the "Joined Team" field.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

And there's *some* justification for that (besides the obvious one.) Moln had gone through seven training camps and six seasons of practice, film watching, and whatnot with the Gators before he became the starter.

[Higgs44]

I would LOVE to hear the other options on any of those offenses that kept teams from stacking 8 in the box.

Payton: Willie Gault, and a very good OL
Brown: had Pete Brewster and Ray Renfro... both of which were in top 10 receiving at various points. not to mention Bobby Mitchell.
Juice: may have been the exception, but I dont know how good or bad his OL was.

Happy?

[Jughead Spock]

Cool, good info. That other thread is def. good reading.

[Ben E Lou]

ROFL at Willie Gault. That's rich.

[MacroGuru]

I went 1 deep in all extreme run... mostly 2 deep in other run situations... very lil zone in pass only... no blitzing.


Im looking at a lot of nickle and dime packages... dont know why, since i geared the GP to play the run 70%.

This here is why he torched you...

If I am playing this team and I am gearing all out to focus on Bo, I am running a 5-2 almost the entire game...forcing goal line play in almost all my plays....maybe 85 to 15 on Nickle/Dime that way if he does go into 4 or 5 WR, yeah..I will get torched but I can get to the QB faster....

I am in the USFL with ya Higgs....I haven't game planned against anyone yet this season, but when I was had Hartford a while ago (Back when I drafted Gray at RB) I had some great game plans put together....trust me, you focus to stop one way you are destined to get torched the other...

[Higgs44]

ROFL at Willie Gault. That's rich.

He was one of the fastest guys in the NFL at that time, and was always good for around 700-800 yards. he also avg'd 19.9 ypc his career. Its a lil easier to find running room when 1 or 2 players have to watch out for the deep ball at all times.

Point is... he was a threat.

[Izulde]

Okay, Al Davis.

[Jughead Spock]

Payton: Willie Gault, and a very good OL
Brown: had Pete Brewster and Ray Renfro... both of which were in top 10 receiving at various points. not to mention Bobby Mitchell.
Juice: may have been the exception, but I dont know how good or bad his OL was.

Happy?


Well, I'm laughing, so guess so. :lol:

[MalcPow]

Please join my division in one of the leagues I play in. That's really the best way to test your strategies. And I appreciate all the help I can get.

[aston217]

Ah, if it's MP, I'd point to game plans in both cases, either by the team planning or by the opponents. Game plans matter, sure. Humans are prone to doing REALLY stupid stuff that hamstrings their teams in ways the AI would never do.

And if I could figure this out, I could stop sinking my teams!

Woah, holy cow, I posted this response when I was on page one and hadn't read the rest of the thread yet. Oops, sorry to interrupt here! :P