Zone defense

[tg88forHOF]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jagsfan24

Doesn’t work all the time because of gameplay mechanics but yes I know that’s how you help stop it

Nothing should work all the time against a known high-percentage passing concept.

[xCoachDx]

Quote: Originally Posted by SolidSquid

It doesn’t even seem like a ratings issue, it’s like a cpu logic/animation issue. Call man vs a slant and when the wr breaks towards the middle of the field, the cb will open towards the sideline(the opposite way the wr is breaking) before even attempting to cover the slant. That’s why they are always so open.

This. Not only are they breaking to the sideline, but well after the cut too. Leaves like five yards of separation.

[tg88forHOF]

Honest question: what does everybody consider to be a "success" for pass coverage?

If the pass is complete, does that automatically mean the coverage failed, no matter what the gain vs. down and distance was? Does the coverage have to cover every route well enough that it consistently forces incompletions or interceptions in order to be considered "working"?

I ask because in these threads, whether it's this one on zone coverage, or the man coverage one that came up the week before, that seems to be everybody's standard: if a pass is completed, the coverage failed.

The reality is, a lot of NFL coverage schemes are predicated on limiting passing gains. Incompletions are great, picks are awesome, but those aren't always possible, so limit completions to short routes or dumpoffs, and have guys in position to immediately tackle that short receiver.

A lot of NFL defenses would look at a 3-4 yard completion underneath that was immediately tackled as a win. They'd consider a series where they gave up a few 1st downs, but ultimately either forced a punt or held the opponent to a field goal attempt to be a successful series.

Are people here looking at it the same way?

[tru11]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

Best way I have found to stop slants in M2M is to select Coverage Adjustments -> Underneath

Should be inside instead on underneath.

Underneath is more for drag routes.

Well it used to be that way lol


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[timmg]

Quote: Originally Posted by tru11

Should be inside instead on underneath. Underneath is more for drag routes. Well it used to be that way lol Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Yep these adjustments help

[timmg]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

Honest question: what does everybody consider to be a "success" for pass coverage? If the pass is complete, does that automatically mean the coverage failed, no matter what the gain vs. down and distance was? Does the coverage have to cover every route well enough that it consistently forces incompletions or interceptions in order to be considered "working"? I ask because in these threads, whether it's this one on zone coverage, or the man coverage one that came up the week before, that seems to be everybody's standard: if a pass is completed, the coverage failed. The reality is, a lot of NFL coverage schemes are predicated on limiting passing gains. Incompletions are great, picks are awesome, but those aren't always possible, so limit completions to short routes or dumpoffs, and have guys in position to immediately tackle that short receiver. A lot of NFL defenses would look at a 3-4 yard completion underneath that was immediately tackled as a win. They'd consider a series where they gave up a few 1st downs, but ultimately either forced a punt or held the opponent to a field goal attempt to be a successful series. Are people here looking at it the same way?

This.......

[SolidSquid]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

Honest question: what does everybody consider to be a "success" for pass coverage? If the pass is complete, does that automatically mean the coverage failed, no matter what the gain vs. down and distance was? Does the coverage have to cover every route well enough that it consistently forces incompletions or interceptions in order to be considered "working"? I ask because in these threads, whether it's this one on zone coverage, or the man coverage one that came up the week before, that seems to be everybody's standard: if a pass is completed, the coverage failed. The reality is, a lot of NFL coverage schemes are predicated on limiting passing gains. Incompletions are great, picks are awesome, but those aren't always possible, so limit completions to short routes or dumpoffs, and have guys in position to immediately tackle that short receiver. A lot of NFL defenses would look at a 3-4 yard completion underneath that was immediately tackled as a win. They'd consider a series where they gave up a few 1st downs, but ultimately either forced a punt or held the opponent to a field goal attempt to be a successful series. Are people here looking at it the same way?

I’m fine getting beat routes, you can successfully cover a route and get beat by a good pass or great catch. Also being close enough to a receiver when they make a catch that you can make a tackle immediately is still good coverage to me.

A receiver open by more than 4 yards is utter failure to me. It doesn’t happen in the NFL the windows are tight.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by SolidSquid

A receiver open by more than 4 yards is utter failure to me. It doesn’t happen in the NFL the windows are tight.

Many times in last night's game, the WR injury riddled Packers playing a bunch of undrafted WR's up from the practice squad and no name TE's, had wide open players all over the place.

I agree, that was utter failure on the Falcons. lol