He did throw 55 passes, which is a lot. He was still > 60%.

The algorithm is dramatically different than it was when high accuracy resulted in lower completion rates (that was I think a 0.4.3 change but might have been 0.4.4). The completion rate is now completely tied to the accuracy of the passer (which includes calculations about pressure, pass distance, etc) + the catching skills of the WR (which includes several factors like the catch attribute, defender presence, height vs defenders, etc)

To be clear, I'm fine with the knockdown rates as long as knockdowns are tied to Punish.

Indirectly they are ... right now, if the ball is not caught (punish/courage has a strong impact in that) and a DB is close enough to knock the ball down, they are getting the knockdown. Right now there is nothing else preventing a knockdown stat, but I can add a layer in the decision to reduce knockdowns for players with lower punish attributes.

That would help. I would want to know that high punish is the reason that a defender is making a play and not that the ball was just uncatchable.

If bump is keeping defenders close...maybe the cover/route skill could be layered in as well. Just so punish doesn't become overpowered . Same for the catch rating.

We had a lot of catch overs last game as passes seemed near or on target . We just gronked them to death. I thought it was realistic as our TE was in the slot often.

I wasn't really questioning the completion percentage. It was more the fact that over 70% of the passes not completed were knocked down. That seems high. I mean, maybe this is related to setheric's point about "punish". In the real NFL, I don't think that many passes are "knocked down". Maybe I am splitting hairs about why a pass was not complete. Some times it is knocked away, so times its a well timed hit (punish), some times its a drop, some times its just good coverage by the DB that makes it difficult for the WR to catch the ball. Maybe that is what I am looking for clarification on. Was this really 15 knockdowns or were there some of these other scenarios in there as well?

My opponent's QB threw 50 passes, 22 incompletions, and my defense had 15 knockdowns.

Also, I've been wondering about the "... got away with a hold on that play." What is that all about? Really trying to make this realistic by having missed calls? Saints fan won't appreciate that.

This indicates that the DB successfully altered the path of the WR but it was not significant enough for the flag to be thrown. That happens all the time in the NFL - but it's not normally commented on; since you can't actually see it happen, there's an indication in the play-by-play to let you know that it did indeed happen.

If

here's a good example of having it in the play by play: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/9252#1685831

Without the hold this is a TD.

Should we change the text from 'got away with a hold' to something less incriminating? Any ideas?

Why not something simple like, "[DBplayername] knocked the WR off his route", or, "[WRplayername] couldn't get into position because of the defender"?