INT Returns for TD FOF7

[beeznik]

Is anyone noticing that a lot of INTs seem to be returned for TDs? I haven't done any research, but looking at box score/watching games, it seems like there are too many.

[Ben E Lou]

Is anyone noticing that a lot of INTs seem to be returned for TDs? I haven't done any research, but looking at box score/watching games, it seems like there are too many.Well, this should be fairly easy to check the the exports. Checking it now...

[Ben E Lou]

(It's actually not terribly easy to find how many picks were returned for TDs in the real NFL. I *think* there were 71 in 2012, but if someone else wants to verify that, it would be helpful.)

[beeznik]

NFL Football Player Stats & Stats Leaders - Interception Return Touchdowns (http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/player-stat/interceptions-returned-touchdowns)

Counted up 72. Close enough. I may have added one since you have to manually count them.

[Julio Riddols]

So if it were evenly distributed, each team would see about 2 of these a season.. I could see variation taking that to maybe 8 or so max. Then again we could just check the end of season totals for a league.

[Julio Riddols]

Only 62 last season in my SP league.

[NawlinsFan]

It does seem high, but then again maybe it does because it's my team that has most of them! :lol:

[beeznik]

Seems higher than the last version, for sure. Maybe the last version had too little then?

[Ben E Lou]

Yup. Just checked the CCFL. It was way low. We were getting around 30 per season there. Checking a couple of other leagues...

[Ben E Lou]

IHOF's entire history on FOF2K7

<table id="table_results" class="ajax pma_table"><thead></thead><tbody> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2013</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2014</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2015</td> <td class="data">25</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2016</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2017</td> <td class="data">15</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2018</td> <td class="data">26</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2019</td> <td class="data">17</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2020</td> <td class="data">19</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2021</td> <td class="data">34</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2022</td> <td class="data">22</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2023</td> <td class="data">32</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2024</td> <td class="data">21</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2025</td> <td class="data">25</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2026</td> <td class="data">32</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2027</td> <td class="data">28</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2028</td> <td class="data">23</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2029</td> <td class="data">30</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2030</td> <td class="data">35</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2031</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2032</td> <td class="data">38</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2033</td> <td class="data">36</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2034</td> <td class="data">27</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2035</td> <td class="data">28</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2036</td> <td class="data">34</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2037</td> <td class="data">42</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2038</td> <td class="data">27</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2039</td> <td class="data">33</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2040</td> <td class="data">34</td></tr></tbody></table>

[Ben E Lou]

So yeah. Sounds like this may look like fumbles upon FOF2K7's release. Fumble frequency was too low in FOF2K4 and Jim increased it for FOF2K7 to make it accurate, but because a fair number of people had gotten used to too few fumbles, an accurate number seemed like too many.

[EagleFan]

So yeah. Sounds like this may look like fumbles upon FOF2K7's release. Fumble frequency was too low in FOF2K4 and Jim increased it for FOF2K7 to make it accurate, but because a fair number of people had gotten used to too few fumbles, an accurate number seemed like too many.

Fumbles or INT for TD?

[BretttheJet]

I actually think the major issue is, is that there seems to be a lot of 'end-of-half' interception returns for touchdowns. They all just seem to be concentrated rather than spread out like we might see in the NFL. Hmm. I haven't played much though.

[Ben E Lou]

Fumbles or INT for TD?Fumbles. I was talking about FOF2K7's release there.

[MIJB#19]

Re: FOF2K7
I vaguely remember a fix about the INT returned for TD frequency getting toned down in FOF2007, either at the initial release (which seems to go hand in hand with the IHOF stats, for example) or in a patch.

[EagleFan]

Fumbles. I was talking about FOF2K7's release there.

Confused even more, how does that fit into the question about interceptions returned for a touchdown?

[Ben E Lou]

Fumbles:FOF2K4-->FOF2K7
Interceptions Returned For TDs:FOF2K7-->FOF7

[RedDoby]

This may be premature. After week 3 of the first year in my league there are 24 int's for td's.

[Front Office Midget]

It seems concentrated too much in individual players. My first season saw Eric Weddle with 9 INTs, 7 returned for TDs.

Last year, Xavier Rhodes had 7 INTs, 5 for TDs. I saw Revis with 7 TDs, 4 for INTs.

This is in 4 SP seasons.

It seems to me that even if the overall numbers are fine, individuals are too high.

I'd also say that RB numbers seem too high, as I've had a 2000 yard RB each of the 4 seasons, and their YPC is all 5.3 or higher.

Other than Pick 6s and RB numbers, FOF7 seems fine.

[dubb93]

I'd also say that RB numbers seem too high, as I've had a 2000 yard RB each of the 4 seasons, and their YPC is all 5.3 or higher.

Other than Pick 6s and RB numbers, FOF7 seems fine.

I haven't dug in a ton, but in about 30 SP seasons I've never seen a running back go over 1850 yards. My injury setting is 215, what is yours?

[Front Office Midget]

My results are at the default 100. I don't believe the only thing keeping NFL backs from going over 2000 yards is injuries, on the other hand, I'm happy to hear about your results. Perhaps mine are an anomaly.

[rockmedic109]

I've just had C.J. Fogle {rated 88 running back} get his third consecutive 2000 yard season. But this was with "Smashmouth" offense modified to use west coast passing distances.

[azjoe_02]

I've only finished year 3 of a SP career, but here are my pick 6 numbers:

2015 - 96
2014 - 82
2013 - 86

Maybe a little high, but nothing I noticed without checking for it.

I'll look again after several more seasons and see it moves...

[azjoe_02]

Next two seasons...

2017 - 62
2016 - 69

Can't explain the drop off, but this is clearly backing up what Ben pointed out - higher than the past versions, but in line with real life (NFL).

[Ben E Lou]

Was that a fictional league start, azjoe? That would explain it. There is extreme low cohesion for the first few seasons of fictional league starts, causing offenses to perform significantly worse than they will for the rest of your career.

[jzicc]

some numbers from the NFL -- regular season


but here's the ESPN #s for regular season for the last 4 years:
2013 --65
2012 -- 71
2011 -- 49
2010 -- 57

So this year in the CCFL will end up 78ish (we are at 74 with 1 game to play)--- (approx) 20% higher than the 4 year average

2010 NFL Team Defense Stats - National Football League - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/defense/year/2010)

[Ben E Lou]

As I said at the CCFL, the numbers in MP are going to be artificially high for a while because most people haven't adjusted their game plans to the new game. 20% sounds about right.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola:

The CCFL passing stats bear witness to my comment above.

League-Wide QB Rating: 80.5: Haven't seen a rating that low in over 20 years in my longest SP career.
League-Wide Completion Percentage - 58.7: That only happened once in a 50-year SP career--in the first season, when cohesion is at its lowest.
League-Wide Yards Per Completion: 11.59. Typical SP numbers are 10.5 to 10.8. It basically never gets above 11.0
League-Wide PR Pct: 21.4. Also unprecedented in my SP career.

BOTTOM LINE: In MP, we're throwing significantly longer passes than the game expects, therefore we get a lower completion percentage, more interceptions, and more sacks. More interceptions leads to more opportunities for pick sixes.

[jzicc]

More concerning is the ratio --- which I can't see how that's going to change (you are also forgetting that Defensive secondary with big INT bars will now be more valuable and there will be skewing towards those players)

NFL 2013 --65 TDs /502 total interceptions (13%)
NFL 2011 -- 49/506 -- (10%)


CCFL (wk 16) - 74/ 429 (17%)


To go with your prior post reasoning ----
1) there should be more interceptions than the NFL (not)
2) there must be coding in the game that allows longer passes that are picked off to be returned for TDs at a greater rate (I doubt it would be coded that way)

[jzicc]

the league rate of the CCFL for int's is 2.7%

the nfl rate is (2000-2012)
<table id="tablepress-539" class="tablepress tablepress-id-539 dataTable" style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px !important; border-collapse: separate; border-spacing: 1px; background-color: rgb(205, 205, 205); font-size: 8pt; width: 450px; text-align: left; clear: both;"><tbody class="row-hover" role="alert" style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;"><tr class="row-12 even" style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px;"><td class="column-1 " style="padding: 4px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: rgb(208, 208, 214) !important; color: rgb(61, 61, 61); font-size: 12px; background-position: 0px 50%; background-repeat: initial initial;">Total</td><td class="column-2 " style="padding: 4px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: rgb(208, 208, 214) !important; color: rgb(61, 61, 61); font-size: 12px; background-position: 0px 50%; background-repeat: initial initial;">218750</td><td class="column-3 " style="padding: 4px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: rgb(208, 208, 214) !important; color: rgb(61, 61, 61); font-size: 12px; background-position: 0px 50%; background-repeat: initial initial;">100%</td><td class="column-4 " style="padding: 4px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: rgb(208, 208, 214) !important; color: rgb(61, 61, 61); font-size: 12px; background-position: 0px 50%; background-repeat: initial initial;">6689</td><td class="column-5 " style="padding: 4px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; background-color: rgb(208, 208, 214) !important; color: rgb(61, 61, 61); font-size: 12px; background-position: 0px 50%; background-repeat: initial initial;">3.1%</td></tr></tbody></table>

Analyzing Interceptions: 2000 to 2012 — FootballPerspective.com (http://www.footballperspective.com/analyzing-interceptions-2000-to-2012/)

[Ben E Lou]

Uhhhh...I am operating on the assumption that it is coded that way. Seems like the easiest way to keep people from throwing long and skewing stats too much like we did in FOF2K7. Combine that with taking away the ability to run up the score by throwing long when leading by a few TDs, and things fall nicely in line with the desired numbers.

But regardless of how it's done, clearly, based on the results reported repeatedly by others, there's something skewing the CCFL's numbers. If it's not game planning (and I still pretty strongly suspect that's a big part of it,) the other obvious possibility is that it could be that the league's talent is different than what FOF7 expects.

[jzicc]

some more interesting stuff

Interceptions are much more likely to be returned for touchdowns now — FootballPerspective.com (http://www.footballperspective.com/interceptions-are-much-more-likely-to-be-returned-for-touchdowns-now/)

[jzicc]

some other CCFL comparisons to the NFL

NFL (using 2012 numbers)
Roughly
10% of passes thrown are 20 +
20% are 10-19
50% are 0-10
20 % are behind the line (inc. throw into grounds)

-----
CCFL completion rates by zone are pretty close but the breakdowns by distance (% of total passes)

16% of passes thrown are 20 +
33% are 10-19
51% are behind line -10

so INT RATES in the CCFL should be closer to 3.5-4% -- (passes over 20 yards have like a 6% int rate in the NFL)

vs. the current CCFL 2.7%;

---

that means the CCFL is about 120 INT's short of where it should be -- but if the rate of pick-6's was the same as currently -- There would be about 20 more for the year -- which would be insane.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm not sure what the point of all of that is with regard to the CCFL. As has been stated earlier, the vast majority of the league's players were generated with a different game and the game plans are very different from where the stats were balanced as well. I'd be interested in seeing that sort of comparison to a mature SP league, but I wouldn't think that the sort of comparison that you're doing is at all actionable.

[ShaneTheMaster]

I think this discussion should include fumble return for TDs.. something that appears to be higher than normal in FOF7 (to me), as well.

[jzicc]

League-Wide Completion Percentage - 58.7:

this is encouraging as plugging in the inordinate longer passes equates an NFL % of approximately 57.3% if passes were thrown as in the skewed CCFL;

so it's not that far off from a pass completion %

[jzicc]

I'm not sure what the point of all of that is


just pointing out that INT rates and pick -6 rates are off (which is contradictory to how the thread was going originally) ; I'm sure a lot of the geeks here will enjoy the comparison and the links .

I'm not complaining about the game as it is a lot better...

[Ben E Lou]

just pointing out that INT rates and pick -6 rates are off (which is contradictory to how the thread was going originally) ; I'm sure a lot of the geeks here will enjoy the comparison and the links .And that's where I'm saying that your data is flawed. You can't draw that conclusion based on a MP league created with a different game and influenced by 31 owners. It needs to be done on a mature SP league or a SP league with default rosters. Otherwise the data is significantly skewed.

[jzicc]

I think this discussion should include fumble return for TDs.. something that appears to be higher than normal in FOF7 (to me), as well.

LIMITED DATA SET ALERT ---
for CCFL -- TDS returned total number was real close (off by 1 or 2 -- can't remember) but total fumbles is too low 318 vs 491 (quick add of a column) in the NFL

[azjoe_02]

Was that a fictional league start, azjoe? That would explain it. There is extreme low cohesion for the first few seasons of fictional league starts, causing offenses to perform significantly worse than they will for the rest of your career.

Yes, fictional league. Didn't think of that (low cohesion) as a factor, but makes perfect sense.

[loregnum]

In my previous league where I played 8 seasons there were a lot of INT TDs for some guys which probably skewed things. For example, the career leader has 10 return TDs on only 25 INTs. There is another guy who has 7 TDs off 11 picks.

I find the stats engine in this game is really off. Kickers are for the most part lousy, passer ratings are lower than they should be and rushing yards per carry figures are too high.

What have noticed is that career figures for individual players somewhat balance out yet that seems to be because they will either have one great year (if they are lousy otherwise) or one poor year (if they are good otherwise) so it makes the average more normal.

Many times I have seen a handful of RBs over 5 ypc for most seasons then they have one very poor season of say 2ypc so it drops the career average to a more realistic figure.

Now this is in the single player mode. Maybe MP is different

[MIJB#19]

Fwiw:
IHOF's entire history on FOF2K7

<table id="table_results" class="ajax pma_table"><thead></thead><tbody> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2013</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2014</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2015</td> <td class="data">25</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2016</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2017</td> <td class="data">15</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2018</td> <td class="data">26</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2019</td> <td class="data">17</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2020</td> <td class="data">19</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2021</td> <td class="data">34</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2022</td> <td class="data">22</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2023</td> <td class="data">32</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2024</td> <td class="data">21</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2025</td> <td class="data">25</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2026</td> <td class="data">32</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2027</td> <td class="data">28</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2028</td> <td class="data">23</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2029</td> <td class="data">30</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2030</td> <td class="data">35</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2031</td> <td class="data">24</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2032</td> <td class="data">38</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2033</td> <td class="data">36</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2034</td> <td class="data">27</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2035</td> <td class="data">28</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2036</td> <td class="data">34</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2037</td> <td class="data">42</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2038</td> <td class="data">27</td> </tr> <tr class="odd"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2039</td> <td class="data">33</td> </tr> <tr class="even"><td class="right data not_null nowrap">2040</td> <td class="data">34</td></tr></tbody></table>After 6.5 games (we're in week 7 with 16 teams having had their bye week already) in the first FOF7 season, the IHOF record is already nearly broken with 40 interceptions returned for a touchdown.

[MIJB#19]

Seeing continuation of struggling offenses in IHOF (on pace for 94 for the season after 10 of 16 games) and in particular my own team (8 in 10 games), I figured it was time to do some better research than what has been posted so far.

The last 8 season in the NFL (source for collection: NFL.com)
2013 tot int: 489 for 6,920 yd (14.2 avg) and 65 td (13.3%)
2012 tot int: 458 for 7,594 yd (16.6 avg) and 70 td (15.3%)
2011 tot int: 498 for 7,041 yd (14.1 avg) and 48 td (9.6%)
2010 tot int: 495 for 6,987 yd (14.1 avg) and 56 td (11.3%)
2009 tot int: 518 for 7,566 yd (14.6 avg) and 48 td (9.3%)
2008 tot int: 457 for 7,399 yd (16.2 avg) and 52 td (11.4%)
2007 tot int: 527 for 7,407 yd (14.1 avg) and 51 td (9.7%)
2006 tot int: 506 for 6,878 yd (13.6 avg) and 48 td (9.5%)
====================================
8-season avg: 493.5 for 7,224 yd (14.6 avg) and 54.75 td (11.1%)

The average (returned for touchdown) is clearly just above 50. Seasons 2012 and 2013 have been quite the boost up compared to the previous six seasons, but those six seem to be awkwardly similar with all so close to 50 anyway, a big spike up or down was basically overdue, no?

If IHOF (see Ben's numbers above) is a good example of how a FOF-season plays out, then the numbers had been lower than in the real world and a fix wasn't a bad idea at all.

I'm still tempted to think that 94 for an entire league is too much with the given numbers, but 8 in 10 games for a single team could just be a case of incredible bad luck. Heck, just ask Matt Schaub what a difference a simple 4-game stretch can make...

[jzicc]

MIJB -- how many total IHOF total int's Projected?

[Ben E Lou]

Seasons 2012 and 2013 have been quite the boost up compared to the previous six seasons...I'll bet that SP with default rosters is calibrated to 2012/2013, not to the previous seasons.

[ShaneTheMaster]

I'll bet that SP with default rosters is calibrated to 2012/2013, not to the previous seasons.

That wouldn't seem to be consistent with the way Jim uses real life stats to tune the engine (per his discussion on QB performances in the new game vs real life)

[Ben E Lou]

That wouldn't seem to be consistent with the way Jim uses real life stats to tune the engine (per his discussion on QB performances in the new game vs real life)Sure it would. I don't think he has ever done anything like what he is doing now with QB performances. In every other version, he's just gone for the latest season or two, I'm pretty sure.

[MIJB#19]

Has anyone done research on what kind of plays these interception returns happen on? Ben's theory kind of suggests that we're doing something wrong in game planning. I'm noticing that most of the pick sixes are medium to short passing plays, rather than the long and deep passes you'd suspect them to be. Or maybe I'm looking at it wrong and the short passes actually are more subject to getting picked off than long passing plays.

[MIJB#19]

Fwiw:
After 6.5 games (we're in week 7 with 16 teams having had their bye week already) in the first FOF7 season, the IHOF record is already nearly broken with 40 interceptions returned for a touchdown.IHOF settled for 98 in the first FOF7 season.

[Ben E Lou]

That's interesting. I was thinking that they were more often on longer passes. No research, just an impression.

[gstelmack]

A pick-6 should come more often on short passes - less offense to move through. Throws to the flat that are cut off, for example.

On a deep throw you have to make your way back through most of the offense.

[Ben E Lou]

Sure, in real life. I *think* it works differently in this version. (See my speculation earlier in the thread about this.)

[Ben E Lou]

Dola: We know from FOF2K7 and gameplan analyzer that interception frequency increased as pass distance increased. It could be as simple as that pick-six likelihood is the same on all interceptions, and because picks happen more frequently on long passes, pick-sixes happen more frequently on long passes.

Data from FOF2K7 is here: Gameplan Analyzer Info (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/ccfl/forum/showthread.php?t=1932&p=11609&viewfull=1#post11609)

[MIJB#19]

To put things a little more into perspective, the overall number of interceptions in aforementioned first FOF7 season in IHOF saw a decrease in total interceptions (in brackets # of pass attempts):
2037: 489 int (17082)
2038: 525 int (17476)
2039: 491 int (17594)
2040: 498 int (17389)
2041: 491 int (17305)
2042: 460 int (17227), 8,185 yd (17.8 avg), 98 td (21.3%)

So, overall the league (IHOF) is actually throwing less interceptions this season compared to the 500ish before the switch. The yardage is high, compared to the NFL stats posted earlier, and the percentage returned for a TD is very high compared to the NFL.

[gstelmack]

Crap, now you're going to make me revive Gameplan Analyzer.

[MIJB#19]

In contrast, my first three (and only) SP seasons (default rosters, playing Denver):
SP2013: 467 int, 8,338 yd (17.8 avg), 94 td (20.1%)
SP2014: 488 int, 8,138 yd (16.7 avg), 96 td (19.7%)
Sp2015: 460 int, 7,705 yd (16.7 avg), 74 td (16.1%)

[chinaski]

Crap, now you're going to make me revive Gameplan Analyzer.

Yes please! I used that more than anything.

[gstelmack]

WOOF 2013:

<table summary="This table shows Pick6 statistics" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="210" width="309"><colgroup><col style="width:48pt" span="4" width="64"> </colgroup><tbody><tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td colspan="8" class="xl70" style="height:15.0pt;width:192pt" height="20" width="256">League Interceptions for TDs</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl65" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64"> </td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl65" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="center" width="64">Plays</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl65" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="center" width="64">Pick6</td> <td class="xl65" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="center" width="64">Pct</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">Screen</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">2,412</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">3</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.12%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P0To4</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">2,075</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">6</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.29%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P5To8</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">4,793</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">17</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.35%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P9To12</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">3,362</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">18</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.54%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P13To18</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">1,984</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">19</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.96%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P19To26</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl67" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">1,269</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">13</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">1.02%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P27To39</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">641</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">9</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">1.40%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> <tr style="height:15.0pt" height="20"> <td class="xl66" style="height:15.0pt;border-top:none; width:48pt" height="20" width="64">P40Plus</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">327</td> <td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td class="xl68" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">3</td> <td class="xl69" style="border-top:none;border-left:none;width:48pt" align="right" width="64">0.92%</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

[gstelmack]

Better table:

<table summary="This table shows Pick6 statistics" border="1"> <caption>League Interceptions for TDs</caption> <tbody> <tr> <th>
</th><th>Plays </th><th>Ints </th><th>Pct </th><th>Pick6 </th><th>PctOfAll </th><th>PctOfInts </th></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">Screen </td><td class="normal" align="right">2,412 </td><td class="normal" align="right">21 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.87% </td><td class="normal" align="right">3 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.12% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">14.29% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P0To4 </td><td class="normal" align="right">2,075 </td><td class="normal" align="right">17 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.82% </td><td class="normal" align="right">6 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.29% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">35.29% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P5To8 </td><td class="normal" align="right">4,793 </td><td class="normal" align="right">87 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">1.82% </td><td class="normal" align="right">17 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.35% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">19.54% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P9To12 </td><td class="normal" align="right">3,362 </td><td class="normal" align="right">88 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">2.62% </td><td class="normal" align="right">18 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.54% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">20.45% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P13To18 </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,984 </td><td class="normal" align="right">90 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">4.54% </td><td class="normal" align="right">19 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.96% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">21.11% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P19To26 </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,269 </td><td class="normal" align="right">81 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">6.38% </td><td class="normal" align="right">13 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">1.02% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">16.05% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P27To39 </td><td class="normal" align="right">641 </td><td class="normal" align="right">47 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">7.33% </td><td class="normal" align="right">9 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">1.40% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">19.15% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P40Plus </td><td class="normal" align="right">327 </td><td class="normal" align="right">27 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">8.26% </td><td class="normal" align="right">3 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.92% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">11.11% </td></tr></tbody></table>

[gstelmack]

So what that tells me is:

- More ints at longer distances
- A smaller percentage of ints at long ranges are returned for TDs
- The first outweighs the second
- One season is a small sample size, someone with a multi-season single player career should run GamePlanAnalyzer on it and grab this table from the miscellaneous to confirm.

[Ben E Lou]

someone with a multi-season single player career should run GamePlanAnalyzer on it and grab this table from the miscellaneous to confirm.I've got a fairly large 7.0b career to use for this.

[Ben E Lou]

So what that tells me is:

- More ints at longer distances
- A smaller percentage of ints at long ranges are returned for TDs
- The first outweighs the second
- One season is a small sample size, someone with a multi-season single player career should run GamePlanAnalyzer on it and grab this table from the miscellaneous to confirm.All four of these are correct, including the "one season is a small sample size" bit. Some clear patterns emerge in a large data set. Longer passes are intercepted far more frequently than shorter ones. (A bomb is more than seven times more likely to get picked off than a screen or 0-4.) Shorter interceptions are significantly more likely to be taken back all the way (screen roughly twice as likely as a bomb) than longer interceptions. However, because of the much higher likelihood of longer passes getting intercepted, longer passes are 3-4 times more likely to end up as pick-sixes as shorter ones.

What I find particularly interesting and relevant to the comments earlier about game-planning:

1. I've noticed that my stock PAV game plan is quite popular in MP leagues.
2. That game plan uses 19-26 yard passing more than any other distance.
3. 19-26 yard passes are the most likely passes to wind up being pick-sixes.

[Ben E Lou]

<table summary="This table shows Pick6 statistics" border="1"> <caption>League Interceptions for TDs</caption> <tbody> <tr> <th>
</th><th>Plays </th><th>Ints </th><th>Pct </th><th>Pick6 </th><th>PctOfAll </th><th>PctOfInts </th></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">Screen </td><td class="normal" align="right">227,823 </td><td class="normal" align="right">2,006 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.88% </td><td class="normal" align="right">473 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.21% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">23.58% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P0To4 </td><td class="normal" align="right">191,522 </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,724 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.90% </td><td class="normal" align="right">360 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.19% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">20.88% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P5To8 </td><td class="normal" align="right">417,481 </td><td class="normal" align="right">6,688 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">1.60% </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,367 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.33% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">20.44% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P9To12 </td><td class="normal" align="right">289,212 </td><td class="normal" align="right">7,618 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">2.63% </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,521 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.53% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">19.97% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P13To18 </td><td class="normal" align="right">155,977 </td><td class="normal" align="right">6,089 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">3.90% </td><td class="normal" align="right">1,159 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.74% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">19.03% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P19To26 </td><td class="normal" align="right">101,323 </td><td class="normal" align="right">5,316 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">5.25% </td><td class="normal" align="right">918 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.91% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">17.27% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P27To39 </td><td class="normal" align="right">54,609 </td><td class="normal" align="right">3,281 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">6.01% </td><td class="normal" align="right">466 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.85% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">14.20% </td></tr><tr> <td class="highlight">P40Plus </td><td class="normal" align="right">28,984 </td><td class="normal" align="right">2,047 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">7.06% </td><td class="normal" align="right">215 </td><td class="highlight" align="right">0.74% </td><td class="highlight" align="right">10.50% </td></tr></tbody></table>

[MIJB#19]

Two things that I'm making of these numbers:
* it makes sense that shorter passes are less likely to picked off AND more likely to result in a six-pointer to wrong way. Maybe teams are too conservative in passing distance compared to what the game is trying to emulate.
* I'm not seeing big difference between the SP and limited MP data, making me conclude that pick-sixes are more likely in FOF7 than in the 'real world', regardless of human interference with the game plan.

[MIJB#19]

1. I've noticed that my stock PAV game plan is quite popular in MP leagues.
2. That game plan uses 19-26 yard passing more than any other distance.
3. 19-26 yard passes are the most likely passes to wind up being pick-sixes."The defense looked familiar with that play?"

[gstelmack]

I have to check my charts to see if I have a breakdown of picks when familiar and picks when not, but I might be able to add that if I don't.

[Ben E Lou]

"The defense looked familiar with that play?"I doubt that familiars are particularly at play. That pass distance causes the most pick-sixes in a SP league with the "human" team on auto-gameplanning, so taht distance isn't overused.