Thought we always had the same formula for drop/knockdowns . I think it is being sensitive due to the tighter coverage . Both numbers have gone up along with better coverage adjustments .

No. JDB added a nerf in 0.4.3 to prevent the long passing game, and he hasn't pulled it out.

Ah...I thought there was always nerfs to longer passes , but that is tied only to arm strength .

Rivals had a lot drops week one. Some where near one every ten catches . Nfl is like 15 per.

Taking out that nerf would help, but how much? Our qb threw less than 30 % of passes to wrs so the longest passes we attempted were to backs and TES in the deep flats. Plenty of drops there, but so were longer RAC completions .

The knockdown drop logic has to have some range between the two choices like "just off his finger tips" or "just out of reach" or " defender was gearing up for a big hit" or "the reciever felt defenders presence coming" As close coverage doesn't always lead to a knock down or drop.

The thing that is really making frustrated, though, is JDB has stopped listening when we point out problems with the game.

I pointed out immediately that INTs were going to go up with the change in ball placement, and he was like "nah, they're fine." But they are up somewhere in the range of 50-120% even accounting for game planning.

We've been pointing out that drops are ridiculous and WRs are nerfed because of the old, crappy SP vs SP coverage code, and he's like "nah, they are inline with where they should be." But, really, I haven't seen a QB throw the ball more than 20 yards in the air (from launch point to catch point) -- which is ridiculous -- and most ***** that travel more than 10-12 yards in the air have a 50/50 chance of being "dropped" ... whatever dropped means.

4.5 corrects what it needed to correct, but the nerfs needed to be removed and the interception percentage turned way down.

A few wildly inaccurate passes in the first quarter a USFL game. This game was particularly strange. My QB started 2/7 and finished 16/25.

1) https://usflwfl.myfootballnow.com/watch/2683#495636
a) Wildly inaccurate pass on a hook route.

2) https://usflwfl.myfootballnow.com/watch/2683#495637
a) Another wildly inaccurate pass. The QB throws it to where the WR would be if he didn't get jammed at the line. QBs are not recognizing the jam and switching reads or coming back.

3) https://usflwfl.myfootballnow.com/watch/2683#495647
a) Oh, look, another wildly inaccurate pass on a hook route.

4) https://usflwfl.myfootballnow.com/watch/2683#495653
a) This ball gets thrown between two receivers. I'm not sure which one was supposed to be the target. If it is the listed one, this pass is way off the mark too.

The turnovers are ridiculous. They have been for quite some time. Particularly the last 3 code releases: 0.4.3, 0.4.4, & 0.4.5.

" Ultimately in a 16-game season, there’s just a whole lot of luck involved with winning football games and for all that commentators will talk about defensive schemes forcing turnovers this season, it’s just as important to be lucky as to be good."

This is from Harvard stats.

The real question is how are they happening. We all get how fumbles work here...I will say no more, but pertaining to interceptions Harvard also noted the luck goes away for QBs like Tom Brady .

The only real world relationship is see effective here is accuracy . Tom's would be near 100, and so would be any guy who throws little ints. I have a guy with sub 50 accuracy in 4.4 who is like night and with a short scheme. 23 tds 25 ints, but as his accuracy slowly climbed (from 31 to 48) so did effectiveness .

This leads me to think of how tight coverage is now compared to how accurate qbs are. Is 75 a minimum for a decent qb to not throw ints? Most of my qbs are 90+ and have been forever so I'm not sure how a inaccurate guys should be throwing, but in my one small sample of 25 ints with a 60 rated qb says yes. Other questions arise about other qb tangible ratings in combo with accuracy to be successful , but i trend towards scheme for not getting turnovers over them.

Only cause how wildly the pendulum is swinging for ints, cause by the small window of success available now. Defenders helping out is causing some ints now, but I have thrown 1 int in three games in rivals so I like the help....it makes zone schemes more effective and has devalued blitzes that leaves guys in one on ones..

Yes, turnovers in rivals is about double , but my team falling a little high of the nfl averages probably cause my qb is accurate . I am not saying that turnovers are good, but I looked back to some 4.2 teams and my turnover rates were low compared to the nfl.

There is and happy medium but my bets, right now that an inaccurate qb won't lead to happy results . There is alot of holes in certain defensive calls and the way defenders jump the flats routes is all or none. So, imo defensive could be even better in other areas. Which leads me to saying in general outside passing offenses are hampered for a bit.

He could always lower the INT rate. That's not a big deal, but some guys aren't getting sacked and if that happens the might not throw any ints either. Still, I would rather look at the non obvious answer, and tinker with the accuracy rating, velocity , reads/dump, end route senerios and qbs scramble/throwaway logic.

I would like to see the long penalty taken out as well. As these outside at ten or 15 yards is a 25 pass right up the middle, and we've all see that RB scoot right up the middle for a deep gain. The qbs had no trouble completin those in 4.3 and 4.4, but good dbs can recover when that 10 extra yards is added because it was an out pass and not a slant in.

I'm getting pretty sick of seeing passes doink off of wide open receivers.
And I whole heartedly agree about the nerfs....to me a nerf just makes 2 problems instead of one. And is pretty much an admission that the original problem can't be fixed.

Playing with qbs with sub 20 accuracy results in drops at 3 or five yards almost every time . 20 yard passes see the same results with 99 accuracy . Are the qbs effectively using less than 20% of of accuracy scores in longer passes ? .

Higher accuracy does improve distance passing, but not exactly linearly. Also, strength now impacts completion rate on longer passes as well.