Welcome to the new Beta version of the MyFootballNow website! Please note that while using the Beta website, some features may not work correctly and other features are not complete. Some elements, such as notifications and chat, may act strangely during the time that both versions of the site are available. If you need to return to the old version, click on the button below.
Return to old website
People who liked this post
TheAdmiral
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by TheAdmiral @ 12/06/2020 8:25 am
CrazySexyBeast wrote:
The biggest trend I have noticed, as players gravitate towards the 2.1.2 FL hitch (iform norm) and the 2.2.1 Strong I Big TE Post and TE Deep Corner, is that the 1 deep man/ man / man dime plays - and the dime formation in general, has become... I want to use the word useless but.
The better way to phrase it would be "far less viable."
Either one or the other does not work in the best of teams, and the move towards offensive sets that require nickle/quarter D, is noticeable.
I've yet to get either man/man/dime normal play to both work at the same time. Though the personnel is the same, I never get mutual efficacy. I end up "hotstepping" between which ever one is working at my data point collections. Sometimes - to be really darning... I'll use BOTH!

I do think we would be remiss to leave out that the AI, regardless of how a GM sets rules for a particular set (in this thread the hitch), that certain plays will dubiously be called more often than others. Also true on D.
The AI "seems" to gravitate towards the hitch as the leading play called for the short pass in the 2.1.2.
Please keep in mind I do not use offensive rules.
In my last 32 games it is 2 hitch calls to about .75 of the other 6 short 2.1.2 pass plays I've used.
I've definitely tried to lessen the blow, so to speak as I've tried to find a way to not be called a cheat simply because it's in my playbook. ;)
Perhaps it's not players abusing, but the AI play selection within a set that can result in the perception of "abuse of exploits.... ERRR BROKEN PLAYS."
Let's call it 33/33/33: abuser/game planners/no off rule users and 1% chaos theory.
The same can be said for other dominant plays, both offensively and defensively.
Why else would a GM have 2x 1deepman Nickle plays - and one being called 20 to 5 over the other within the same formation?
That last block is certainly an entirely different thread, and let us not divulge upon it here, please and ty.
Keep it up seth!


I wonder if the 'GP Distance adjustment speed' plays a part in this - or if there is something similar hidden in a Coaches AI, where he will continue to call one play over another from the same set/formation until either A - it stops working, B - the average yards per play drops below a set amount or C - it's set to alternate between plays but drops plays that don't get a set yardage.

Without knowing how the Coach AI is coded and whether it's a 'smart' AI it's just guesswork

With regards the 1 Deep Man/Nickel defenses. It may depend on what the Linebackers are supposed to do as to which play gets preference, eg one is LB Zone, one is LB Blitz1, one is LB Man etc - This then comes back to Coaching preference (Zone, M2M, Blitz1) and the LB defense matrix where you may have the zone set to 40%, M2M set to 10% and Blitz1 set to 10%
setherick
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by setherick @ 12/06/2020 8:37 am
GP adjustment does have something to do with it, but not like you think.

Defensive Short, Medium, and Long is dependent on your opponent's Offensive Short, Medium, and Long. This means your defense is dependent on your opponent's GP adjustment.

This is why when you are doing distance specific game planning use rules.
Androwski
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by Androwski @ 12/06/2020 5:01 pm
This might be a dumb question but: How are we supposed to make a rule to play an exact defensive play against an offensive formation? If I want to to stop the 2/1/2 formation with the "Double WR1" def. play, it will include the rest of the defensive plays with same formation, sec, linebackers... right? Am I doing something wrong?
setherick
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by setherick @ 12/06/2020 5:31 pm
Androwski wrote:
This might be a dumb question but: How are we supposed to make a rule to play an exact defensive play against an offensive formation? If I want to to stop the 2/1/2 formation with the "Double WR1" def. play, it will include the rest of the defensive plays with same formation, sec, linebackers... right? Am I doing something wrong?

Yes, it will. You have to be careful with not overusing blitzes for instance, but all base defenses (no blitz) can be called as many times as possible against any set without getting overuse penalties.

So, here's a popular example: calling the FZ against the 203.

Your rule goes <down>, <distance>, Normal Backfield, Man Secondary, Zone Linebacker. That limits that rule to only one play.

One of the great travesties of game planning is that I CANNOT select the <x> plays I want to use in <y> situation on offense and defense.
Androwski
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by Androwski @ 12/06/2020 7:20 pm
setherick wrote:
Yes, it will. You have to be careful with not overusing blitzes for instance, but all base defenses (no blitz) can be called as many times as possible against any set without getting overuse penalties.

So, here's a popular example: calling the FZ against the 203.

Your rule goes <down>, <distance>, Normal Backfield, Man Secondary, Zone Linebacker. That limits that rule to only one play.

One of the great travesties of game planning is that I CANNOT select the <x> plays I want to use in <y> situation on offense and defense.
Got it, thanks setherick, I thought there was a way to do it I didn't know.
CrazySexyBeast
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by CrazySexyBeast @ 12/06/2020 9:32 pm
every time one uses the GL 1d zone (3deepman) play one MUST understand that IF they have a LB B1 play, that the GL ATT 1 & 2 plays will be your demise.
the most important thing i ever did on D was to eliminate the ATT plays from my game plan unless vs the 2.3.0.
GLZ is best vs the 2.2.1 pass only player.... Even if the opponent mixes in a run, the GL use of the ATT plays can be a benefit (if you get yer ratios right)
I run hard Nickle vs the hitch, mostly because the other pass plays available require me to do so.
FWIW, N 1d, 2d, and 4/3 slb outside bltz are what works for me at less than 2 yards per attempt against.
Of course I still get blown the fruck up at least 1-2 x per game as a result of my choice to absolve the GLZ and 4/3 zone ins. Frankly the 46 2 deep is too limited to include on a practical, holistic defensive game plan basis, and will interfere with all of your other rules using 2dsecondary sets.
whenever we want to get sneaky, the options of eliminating plays that work to achieve it, or finding an easier path are the choices.
it is too hard to depend on sneaking a 46 or specific 43 just for 2-4 plays per game.
Pick your poison, do your rules based on play demand and not fear of the hitch.
It's far to risky to run a GLZ/4:3 (46) option vs the hitch unless the hitch is the ONLY pass play used for the formation.
CrazySexyBeast
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by CrazySexyBeast @ 12/06/2020 9:47 pm
Seth, what i really want to know is:
The actual attributes of the players used for your data sets.
Youve completely ignored the player in your analysis, which detracts from the quality of your work (high grade stuff to be sure).
Not knowing the players used - efficiencies or deficiencies by formation by position, really skews your results.
It's why I take your knowledge with a grain of salt. Databasing is not the be all and/or end all, and there's an obvious failure to incorporate the player itself in your results.

Last edited 12/07/2020 3:58 am
setherick
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by setherick @ 12/06/2020 9:52 pm
CrazySexyBeast wrote:
Seth, what i really want to know is:
The actual attributes of the players used for your data sets.
Youve completely ignored the player in your analysis, which detracts from the quality of your work (high grade stuff to be sure).
Not knowing the players used - efficiencies or deficiencies by formation by position, really skews your results.

I don't ignore it. It largely doesn't matter.

As long as you have fast players with non-0 numbers, the only thing that matters is play-vs-play. Player-vs-player accounts for <20 plays in any game.
CrazySexyBeast
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by CrazySexyBeast @ 12/06/2020 10:02 pm
then why do I have so much success where you don't?
The player.
You can not dismiss player attributes when trying to show the big picture.
You can get generalities, but you teach in absolutes as a result.
I've always taken your knowledge as a starting point, but always understood the "base" of it's roots.
Simple. Not deep. General. Not specific.
And the specifics have made all the difference - at least for me.
"The basest of the base" ~ Shakesphere.
i dont mean to insult, but i do mean to point out what is lacking regarding the "final" solution presented by just running numbers and playing by spreadsheets alone.
Last edited 12/07/2020 4:05 am
CrazySexyBeast
Re: Analytic Game Planning: Defending the Hitch (and maybe other plays)
by CrazySexyBeast @ 12/06/2020 10:09 pm
So, show me the players used for your data collection.
It's a simple ask.