Yes, I used the exact same game plan for our game.

Game 3:

Combined Stats: 42/86, 633 Yards, 8 TD's, 1 INT, 8 sacks, 96.46 QBR

Touchdowns

Short Passes:
Offensive Play: Singleback Big Ins and Outs
Defensive Play: 4-3 Under Double Safety Blitz
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1764956

Offensive Play: I Formation Normal FL Hitch
Defensive Play: 4-3 Normal Man OLB Flat Zone - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765102

Offensive Play: I Formation Normal FL Hitch
Defensive Play: 4-3 Normal Double Safety Blitz - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765032

Offensive Play: Weak I Normal Skinny Posts
Defensive Play: 4-3 Normal Man OLB Flat Zone - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765154

Medium Passes:
Offensive Play: Shotgun Normal HB Flare
Defensive Play: Nickel 3-3-5 CB1 CB3 Blitz - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1764924

Offensive Play: Shotgun 2 RB 3 WR WR Curl
Defensive Play: Nickel Normal Double WR3
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1764946


Long Passes:
Offensive Play: Shotgun 5 Wide 5 WR All Go
Defensive Play: Quarter Normal CB3 CB5 Blitz - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765001

Offensive Play: Weak I Big TE Deep Post
Defensive Play: Goal Line 3 Deep Man - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765071

Interceptions:

Medium Pass:
NEGATED:
Offensive Play: I Formation 3WR Slot Corner Long
Defensive Play: Nickel Normal Shallow Zone Deep - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1764988

Long Pass:
Offensive Play: I Formation Normal SE Post
Defensive Play: 4-3 Normal WLB MLB Blitz - Pass Key
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9696#1765151

https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/player/16100

This fs is listed as a db in the chart but when I played them he played Dt alot. It's not like he can stop the run but maybe pass blocking is a little messed up here. As they played two dbs on the dline , they got pretty good pressure and sacks.

The correlation with passing is my qbs are missing alot of wide open dump offs or short routes. Whether it be poor reads, an ill timed lob when it should have been a rocket, or the qb takes a sack when guys are wide open. It looks bad...Same for goes when they catch it....the dbs are jumping routes and allowing big gains.

Across the league , slow backs are getting 5 - 10 yards a reception and fast ones like 20 to 30 per. It's an all or noNE senerios as thier catch rates are 40 to 60%. WRs are getting higher catch rates.

Something seems off in the dump-offs section of the code. Higher catch rates and less yards after the catch for backs. I really feel there is a less of a need to use the short passes in this version of 4.6. But I do see aspects of chipping away at an opponent or going deep in order to open the game up. Catching them off guard/outmatched still seems very important . Pending the players field speed

Touching on general feedback. I said if if we're easier to pass to the wr1 the release would be better . My thoughts on this changed but stayed the same. Same critiques like reads..quick passes , lack of qb mobility . ..and so one .

Being on the same but slightly altered code I see another huge jump in what select plays seem to work better than others . In terms of timing and reads equaling quality targets . As this version is different opening up the long passes again, but qbs are looking worse as a whole. This is In a general view with keeping in mind the feedback of the passing game making little sense 4.5 and so on.
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9766#1778529

This play the ball is thrown very quickly and the CB jumps the route. It was a good read.by the qb but I am not sure why he didn'twait for the post route to complete first . As if the qb ignored them and immediately targets the shortest route. He was open , but clearly covered by another player by the time the pass gets there. Only cause the qb rushed the pass.

On could say the db is reacting too quickly off ball. Once the ball is released he completely ignores his assignments . I like this aspect but think not all players should react like this all the time. It's really blowing up numbers in a bad way. IRL alot of these guys would be preoccupied with thier assignment for a longer time. While in zone maybe not, but in man.

Really short passes and quick dump off s like this would be hurt the most vs. Man /blitzes as the pass comes quick in those senerios .

I would like to see blocking function much like man coverage changes where high skill ratings slow will slow defenders some . Not just a win or a loss. After the player gets behind the blocker it's a footrace forcing qbs to rush reads.

If the qb not going to notice/take account for those off ball defenders each release will come with these drastic changes in aligning plays with reads and targets . As the general comments is who wants to do testing and rosters changes just to align things for a successful team. The plays and ratings should dictate that, but it doesn't cause these reads are far from intelligent . Or make any sense to RL football. I could make these throws.

Yes, the hard ones have become easier with the this release , but the easy ones are now harder. I am touching on line play/blocking here cause it would open up different reads at different times throughout the play . Not to mention sacks/pressure is broke pretty bad.

Short passes equal too little sacks, but poor reads. Long passes have better resds/timing but the lack of mobility/new man coverage has qbs throwing in to tight windows at a rate that is 3× higher than the nfl for all passes .

Chalk it up to off ball defenders or whatever , but blocking/ zone play are pretty off and the play overuse penalty is a chess game most don't want to play . I am almost ok with taking that out, but not with how bad pass and run blocking still are.

4.6 you want that cover guy to lose and roll somewhere. It's still pretty simple, but making it look/feel good the direction to go seems complicated . 3rd options and one are seeing the worst of it . I am working around those plays to up qb numbers

That's the difference of 4.3 to now and why I think feedback has been rough . The wr1 was nerfed but the underlying issue is the qb play in general . Odd things make it happen and the users common sense is what's nerfed.

https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9766#1778709

Plays like this are messing with numbers as well. Simple adjustments to defensive alignment would Change the outcome. As there is no reason for the NB to line up on the weak side. Huge hole that defeats good reason to play zones. IRL he'd line up strong side aND have a better angle at making a play . Our code has the lb at a clear disadvantage in terms of alignment pre snap.

This is every zone play and the offense has a non football advantage . 4.6 is a bunch of small errors muddling numbers to prove what really happening. Pending a good zone defender in proper alignment that qb might not have even tried that throw. Which he had two consecutive completions here to a hole in the zone that never should have been there in the first place.

Thanks for the feedback! Some of my observations, not to argue your points but just to move the conversation forward in the perspective of back-end logic:


On this play, the first read was for the TE, which is why he didn't wait for the post routes to complete. I don't know offhand what the probability was (that would not have been the highest weighted route, I don't think, but it was a short pass call so I'm not sure how it compares to the post routes offhand) - he would have waited for the other routes to complete if they were his primary as he was not rushed due to pressure.


Hm, looking at the defensive play call here I'm not sure how it should be played. The CB did the right thing and stuck with his WR, but if the LB had filled the void left by that route wouldn't his zone been left open? Is this poor play by the defense or a good play call against that particular defense?

The first one makes sense . It would need to say wr post or something like that to have the wr the primary . Really I see no chance for a second read cause the te will always look open if the defender is not in press.

The other problem I see here is the qb didn't take in to account the CB in the flat that jumped the route. The cbs momentum should have had him deeper down feild . Loosen that up and plays might look better . Or have the qb see off ball defenders a little better .

That makes to makes the primary covered and the cb have to follow his man either for a target his way or the qb could look elsewhere . Allowing for more sacks on short passes that are covered as well

The 2nd one the players did what was assigned . The problem is only the alignment . Most zone schemes still have a strong and weak side . Here with the TE and slot on the right. it becomes the strong side which make the NB on the wrong side. Because of it the LB covers the flat but is not line up lined up correctly and at a disadvantage . Someone still should be over that slot making the LBs responsible for only hooks/curls

In a 4 deep there I had 3 under. 2 outside guys in flat /curl/hook responsibility and one guy in the middle for curl/hooks depending the flow of the routes. These flooded the right. Which is good vs. Zone but even better cause that NB should have been on the strong side.

LB: Curl Flat Righthook/curl/ left
WLB: Curl Flat Rightok
CB (3): Hook Leftcurl/flat left he should be on lined up on the strong side though

This is how I see it . In bold for responsibilities

If the slot were on the other side then yes what your saying is true, because that offensive alignments would call for the NB to be on the right, but not here. That play had the TE in to block and two defenders would be around that slot running an out. Really the RB probably is the best/most likely option here if alignments were correct

The slot will be the only one vs. This zone if nothing is changed in terms of alignment . The responsibility you have for the NB is on the left hook but hes lined up on the right? Is there a left hook zone on the right side? Kind of confusing to me.

https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9766#1778518

Here's another play that targeted the wr1 alot in 4.5 and now it's pretty bad. My opponent was 0-3 that game and we're 0-5 this season before I pulled it. Yes, it's a te/wr2 designation and in 4.5 it picked the 3rd option alot, but why such a severe shift ( in who the qb actually targets ) with such a little tweak?

To me it points at qb reads/timing results because recivers are getting further down feild now? I don't really know. Reads are more aligned with plays now, but why throw to that double covered TE almost ever time now. The TE and WR have to complete thier routes to trigger that same 3rd option (wr1 here) target, but I think that will rarely happen even though it looked like the smart read as the middle continues to open up .

TE stats league wide are probably are below 50% completion rate . How many of those are bad reads like this . Too many imo, but I will try to solely test all these supposed broken plays/reads I am speaking hypothetically about. In stead of this small sample .

Just to touch on the mlb here. He had no assignment . The fb stayed in to block . He drifted nicely with the TE and as the pass was released he ran away from the ball . Why? But thats another layer I am speaking of that's muddling passing stats.

I'm pushing an update that should reduce the probability that a QB will throw into tight coverage. I'll lock this thread and create a new one.