CrazyRazor wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
raymattison21 wrote:
The problem is the blocking it can't handle the speed difference . But I guess it how you look at it. We can't pick a punt block defend play or a punt block play either cause the offense here uses man /zone blocking scheme and would get confused .
Can someone attempt this in MFN-1 so we can work on it this season?
I adjusted my roster on special teams. I'm not sure if I have my 90+ speed DB in the right spot or not. We'll see.
I hope someone else attempts this as well.
This might be a Pandora s box. I went back to looking a t the effect of parabolizing ratings...if I understand that correctly . Speed has changed some, but back on topic, CR might be on to something and we could avoid the box for now . For simplicity .
I looked at the first block again and the time from snap to punt was slow compared to the nfl. We should be on or under 2 seconds consistently . That one was at least 2.5 if not a bit longer.
Perhaps he bobbled the ball a bit, as that does happen on occasion IRL, but take that half second off and it probably wouldn't be a block. Does holding moderate snap to punt time or does that only take effect for FGs?
Touching on speed again . ...I have been unsuccessful in all leagues applyin this tactic vs. Punters. Vs Non punters I might have 20 + blocks. My guys might be a bit slower or less technically sound, but in mfn an elite wr blocked one vs me . And vs. Non punters have had 80 speed players block kicks. So there seems to be an effective range. 90 speed 90 acceleration vs. Punters imo, from what I studied .
But this is where the box opens. I used kickoffs to get a range of field speed (spd&acc and an adjustment for weight).
At 2.5 yards the thrust(acc) begins to lose effect and speed and weight/fatigue penalty take over. By five yards the lighter speed guy gains ground and by 10 (when he'd be reaching the punter ) the thrust effect is gone. About 10% ground was lost due to being heavier (50lbs) and 10% more if the thrust was sub 30.
The tackle was 100 pounds heavier (about 20 points slower ) and turns looking around for something to block . During this time, the 2.5 yard range , thrust is not playing an enough of an effect . Imo its more now after the parabolic change, but not close enough to the way real players move.
The DE is one yard out..the Ts are just not quick enough to get there at that more obtuse pursuit angles when you combine it with field speed. So imo, upping thrust might do something .
But deeper in the box for a root cause that would touch on many parts of the game.
IRL tall guys (lean) are faster. That tackle would be bit quicker and the db a bit slower . The lighter guy is faster but the difference would be smaller . Possibly closing this small door. Fatigue should fee changed to body mass index as well. Closing the door even more . 6'7 310 lbs is quite lean compared to 6'1. **** have less leverage , but we're not talking bull rushes or gap integrity here. The game is way off here and it effects blocking in relation to real football.
Still , a simpler solution is to shorten the time from snap to punt. I haven't studied kick times other than this play , but I bet alOT of kicks are slow.
Other parts of 4.5 I have noticed similar effects of DL/OL play is the pass rush. My smaller guys are doing a bit better rushing the passer . Maybe cause qbs don't out run any pressure , but I have 220 pounders holding their own vs. 300 pound tackles . Guys around 250 and 260 are edge rushers now. I like that part, but it seems slightly exploitable vs. punts. As there is no threat to fake run ....
Like I said height /arm span (length ) should play more of a role vs. the pass rush/punt rush. Short guys typically are not great one on pass rushers vs. A big tackle. His arm span is almost 2.5 yards. The range that these guys are getting beat in. One could easily deflect the pass rush angle of a smaller guy with one hand . Changing the final outcome. We're talking feet/ inches and a half second here....a very small range to work with.
