Zone DBs jumping routes allows for more deep passes. Long pass plays would be less than 40 yards if these guys didn’t do that. Old 4.6 had better zone and no one had a long passes vs us all season long

There are automatic reads in 4.5 and 4.6 . The old 4.6 didn’t have the same ones. It was more related to the defense call. These are the “money “ plays ....the ones users complained about . Saying there’s only one way to win.

To me the long and short labeling just simulates the 1,3, and 5 step drops a qb will take. Where the ball goes after that and the YAC is almost predictable. Creating the low or high comp% or YPP average between plays sets.

Staying on 4.6 results. There was 1 hurry in the Victory championship game out of 95 pass attempts. 4 ints and only one long pass to a wr vs. a deep safety who jumped the route bad. The hurry came from a SS probably playing the Nickel back.

Run all the stats you want on 4.6 ...... maybe you’ll catch something we have seen here in beta. This beta code has only been active for a handful of games. The prior one had better pressure.... making blitzing a more viable call... this one will make everything you said even more important, causing even less plays to be called....thus making play abuse even more of a chess match.

There was 2 drops in the Victory championship game..... and low 60% comp rates. Only two true zone plays called out of 130 play calls. Any nfl game plan wouldn’t even make it the big game here.

Adding plays and familiarity within that coaches scheme is always a great idea but I would rather fix glaring problems first.

That 4.6 championship game should have had so many more qb runs,scrambles , sacks and hurries. The long run was 14 yards and fix safeties jumping routes bad the long pass would have been to a back out of the backfield....well besides the nickel blitz call vs a slow FS with no deep help

If you want punt blocks down and the 46 play nerfed . Mission accomplished (as of now) if you want a different better game fix ints and pressure. That will require the work done months ago to go back on the table as zone is weak compared to man and it’s too easy to pass on blitzes .

Put these two 4.6 versions together and increase pressure but allow QBs to run again. Work on LBers with no coverage assignment and only have backs on wheel routes going deep. If guys blitzed more the long runs would go up but the poor reads by QBs and the throws into double coverage almost requires a game plan with these money plays....and the same could be said for the defense.

I'm not seeing anything in your comments about improving the poor QB play in the current beta code.

No one denies the value of lowering the long passing drop rates. That would be a quick fix of sorts, but cbs in man would still be making unreal off the ball plays and safeties in deep zone would still be jumping routes bad allowing for longer passes in the first place.

I was was speaking strictly of a cause and effect thing. Currently only pass blocking and speed was changed..... it changed other areas as well which change stats. I think some miss how sensitive and intertwined the code is.

In 4.5 I played with a team that wasn’t the best. I played every game without knowing the exact ratings of any player. Grades and playing time were given by film and stats alone .

In addition I tallied stats for throws in double coverage and whether they were completed/ intercepted which drew a picture of passing into tight windows... and compared to nfl stats throwing into tight windows. Simply said our is way high. Here I mainly blame reads which is purely QBs related driven by the pressure and talent of receivers to cover guys.

Poor reads equals poor QBs play cause the speed gaps are too large due to weight.

Other stats were which positions caught or missed those throws in to double coverage/ tight windows.

For cover guys I had a stat that showed yards receded, and whether they were beat due to getting beat in man or zone.... or being in great position to allow for the catch anyway . That painted another picture to prove man coverage it too tight. As a cause and effect thing QBs would do better if man wasn’t so strong.

Another stat I tracked was tackle for loss and all this is to prove what was theoretical. Too many of those as well due to the gaps in speed due to weight. Currently those are way down in beta as I had 18 tfls in one game under 4.5 with one guy. Run blocking wasn’t touched but running has changed.

Changing pressure on the defensive side as well as changing how a QB handles pressure will both change stats and play. So both are changes that will effect poor qb play. Same for coverage and same for changing speed gaps. They are all doing something.... the question is what angle to pursue to get the desired results.

Taking those drops out is powerful but it won’t change throws into double coverage or the fact pressure is ridiculous low. Leaving zone at such a disadvantage opens doors to limited play books on both sides.

Like I said pressure need s to be so low cause QBs would be even worse but I will ask again.... why are there so many throws into to tight windows in the first place?

If the problem is throwing into tight windows, why are you advocating for tighter coverage?

I'm also still confused why the "solution" to the speed problem was to narrow the difference between a slow and fast player, rather than fix the speed distribution by position.

This was when he tested the 2-1-2 SE Post as every single offensive play, which as you said would be no one's game plan and thus produced atypical results and a wrong reaction to it.

Looking more closely at film and logs, it looks like the calculation for drops is broken at every distance level. In my most recent game, we combined for 11 drops in 91 pass attempts (12%)

I know NFL stats are not always a perfect comparison, but the worst team in the league last year averaged 2.25 drops (7%) per game. More than half the league was under 5%.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2019/advanced.htm