Warrior General Games

CB #1 and CB #3 are both assigned to cover WR #1

CB #1 is lined up far outside. CB #3 is lined up inside (by the FS) CB 4 who is set to cover WR #3

WR blocks CB #3, but CB #1 doesn't attempt to cover WR #1 at start of the play

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5656320
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5656394
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5656488
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5657183
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5658092
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5661376

Edit: - following reason is really given for it not being a bug?
I honestly thing this isnt a bug. To me it looks like the CB #1 doesnt cover the WR #1,

That's the whole reason it was reported as a bug, because CB#1 who is assigned to cover WR #1 doesn't cover him.


Now it goes on to say there is a point where he moves toward the WR - (yes after the ball is thrown CB reacts just like a CB in a zone or covering another WR would react)

Are there any links and or times in which the CB more closely covers the WR or does this happen EVERY time?

really trying to stop that teams screens huh? rde, cb, and cb3.haha

Originally posted by maizenhops
really trying to stop that teams screens huh? rde, cb, and cb3.haha
I think I might steal the play... can't think of any other way to stop a screen.

My LOT has a rather large, uhh..... AoI.

That does look rather odd, not sure if it is because of the hesitation WR1 gives at the beginning of the play or not but it probably isn't right.

Originally posted by Pwned IRL
Are there any links and or times in which the CB more closely covers the WR or does this happen EVERY time?

That was all 6 times they ran the screen. You can run scout tool on Razorback offense (or Warrior defense) for the game and those are the only 6 WR screens that show up on scout tool.

Nice test, Rage, good idea.
Were there any times in the game that you ran that play and the offense ran a different pass play? Wondering how the CB1 would react at the start against a slant or a streak when lining up wide like that.

Originally posted by TrevJo
Nice test, Rage, good idea.
Were there any times in the game that you ran that play and the offense ran a different pass play? Wondering how the CB1 would react at the start against a slant or a streak when lining up wide like that.

The CB would be in trouble against most pass routes lined up like that.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1594862&pbp_id=5660027

Originally posted by Pwned IRL
Are there any links and or times in which the CB more closely covers the WR or does this happen EVERY time?

The irony is that the only way to get someone to cover this WR is to have them blitz from the outside and have them run on low aggression blitzing to pick up the screen.

I don't believe the guy in coverage is suppose to close with the screen recipient. Looked like your DE was on a zone that one play and tried, just not up to the task?

Oh, for the guy asking for more links of a WR screen. You don't have to limit yourself to just the team in the link, you can check pretty much anyone's team and you will find similar results.

Originally posted by Dr. E
I don't believe the guy in coverage is suppose to close with the screen recipient.

So the player assigned to cover the receiver isn't supposed to try to cover the receiver. That makes sense.

Okay.

I did some researching.

Seems the reason for this funkiness has got to be that DPC play being used.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1583484&pbp_id=144288

Against regular defenses, the WR3 picks up that CB1 and blocks him, where as on that DPC play, it seems the WR3 picks a different threat to block and the CB1 acts like he waits to be blocked by nobody.

I am going to think this one over. Not sure how they would address this issue. I'm sure he's got things set up a certain way in order to even allow screens to work any of the time. Could be wrong.

What do you think Rage?

Originally posted by Pwned IRL
Okay.

Against regular defenses, the WR3 picks up that CB1 and blocks him, where as on that DPC play, it seems the WR3 picks a different threat to block and the CB1 acts like he waits to be blocked by nobody.


I agree with this assessment.

I originally designed the play the way I did hoping to draw WR #3 over to block CB #1, with hopes the DE and CB #3 would double team WR #1.

As it turned out, WR #3 blocked CB #3 instead. That is fine, but I would expect CB #1 to make more of a movement to cover the WR.

Originally posted by Rage Kinard
So the player assigned to cover the receiver isn't supposed to try to cover the receiver. That makes sense.



I didn't say it was right or wrong. I just pointed out that on every other screen that is what happens so why would it be different on the WR screen.

Originally posted by Dr. E
I didn't say it was right or wrong. I just pointed out that on every other screen that is what happens so why would it be different on the WR screen.

They do try to close sometimes
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1636989&pbp_id=2649929
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1636989&pbp_id=2650181
http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1636989&pbp_id=2651078


It's definitely not consistent on other screens, but I've had SS close on assigned man on strong side screens as well. I just can't recall specific games or instances to go back and look them up.