FOF Great Debate III: Ignore Play Diagnosis

[QuikSand]

This will be a series of threads designed to provoke debate about a matter in the FOF 8 game, around which there appears to be some uncertainty. We will pose the topic as a statement, and invite your responses to start with either PRO or CON, as you indicate whether you agree, or disagree, with the stated assertion.

Today's statement for debate:

Ignore Play Diagnosis. The game includes a variety of ratings, many of which seem to have intuitive connections to real life football assets. A linebacker who excels at play diagnosis/recognition seems less likely to bite on a play fake, or to be lured out of position by line angles, that sort of thing. In FOF, we'd want that to show up in something... but we have no history of anyone, ever, pointing out that it meaningfully correlated to anything good in-game (beyond maybe the guess that it must matter, but knowing that it shows up among monster players who are good at everything). So, we can safely ignore the Play Diagnosis bar as a meaningful indicator in FOF 8.

Respond in this thread, please, starting with a clear statement in all caps of your position, PRO or CON.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

T but we have no history of anyone, ever, pointing out that it meaningfully correlated to anything good in-game

Heh. Thought I posted it in a league. It correlates strongly to the TFL leaders. It appears to be a saving throw against the play having any success at all.

[Ben E Lou]

In 100+ years of the GML with FOF8, meet your all-time TFL% leader (once sacks are backed out.) 87 of his 431 non-sack tackles have resulted in a loss of yardage.

http://gml.fof-belco.com/playercard.php?playerid=110050

Among players with >500 tackles? It's this guy: http://gml.fof-belco.com/playercard.php?playerid=29512 179 of his 932 non-sack tackles resulted in a loss of yardage.

Just checked his rating. His average PD over the course of his career was 81.5.

[Ben E Lou]

Dola: For those not in the GML, per my scout, McKnight has 100 (so, 100+?) in play diagnosis.

[MIJB#19]

Con

It will sound repetitive after Ben's comment, Play Diagnosis correlates with tackles for a loss and also with overall run defense. I'm still struggling to find the right balance between the skills "run defense" and "play diagnosis" in terms of determining which one is more important towards the overall team run defense and the balance between spending cap space on overall value or players with one or two good bars.

[QuikSand]

useful thread, even if mostly to reveal my ignorance... i can't be the only person who missed that revelation

thanks

[QuikSand]

maybe the in-game comment about "blows up the play" (or something similar) correlates to these dice rolls based on play diagnosis

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

maybe the in-game comment about "blows up the play" (or something similar) correlates to these dice rolls based on play diagnosis

The stats piece of it made me notice the correlation. I think the phrasing you mention in Solevision is why I believe the implementation is a "saving throw" type thing--that the higher the PD, the more likely that the guy is just gonna stop the play before it has any chance of success.

[Hammer]

Diagnosis hooks up with intelligence on the SOL combine. Another question would be what would you like to see higher after a rookie reveal? Intelligence or PD?

[QuikSand]

I'm energized now. Just selected a defensive player (low-weight DE who might end up at OLB instead, in my 3-4 front) who appears to have maxed-out Run D, Play D, and Endurance. Looking forward to many blown-up plays.




Washington: KickStand takes DE Chance Victor with the 3.5 pick.

Run Defense		66<->97
Pass Rush Technique		9<->40
Pass Rush Strength		45<->76
Man-to-Man Defense		34<->66
Zone Defense		41<->72
Bump-and-Run Defense		33<->64
Play Diagnosis		69<->100
Punishing Hitter		10<->42
Endurance		69<->100
Special Teams		43<->74

HT	WT	RAW	ADJ	DASH	SOL	BENCH	AGI	BRJU	POS	%DEV
76	285	5.6	6.1	5.05	39	31	7.21	125	-	41

[tzach]

CON -- Ben and MIJB described one of the key points of PlayD above, i.e. correlation with TFL. I see the same trend in my data.