Warrior General Games

Originally posted by jdros13
Do you really think that the QB should have to throw a bad pass to get a loss? Where that pass was caught is basically where the normal screen should be caught, so that if you play a blitzing defense and have your CBs exposed you are at risk of a dot breaking a tackle and getting a big gain.




or maybe the D caused the bad pass? hmmm brain teaser.

If you know the screen is coming and you can stop it then you need to change what you're doing. If they mix in with other stuff then yeah it's tough to stop for under 4 yards. You can't stop everything out of strong I either if they use the offensive FB at FB on every play. I can't stop from shitting every day. It's just how it is.

I personally don't run it that much as an OC unless I see a team can be open to it.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1565509&pbp_id=6892867 This play was pretty early in the season but this is a D you'd look for to exploit

Originally posted by jdros13
Everyone could run this play and I don't personally think there is an ethical issue with running it or anything close to that. But anyone arguing that this play is not broken (even if you are really awesome at stopping it) is kidding themselves.

I need to stop defending the bolick now.

It's needs a tweek, yeah. So do some others but we as DCs adapt and do what we have to do to stop it. That's all I'm getting at, if you can't stop it then change what you're doing.

Originally posted by jdros13
Originally posted by zero

bolick if you were selling out to stop the screens, then Providence might need a new DC next season

and honestly I'm a bit disappointed in bhall for apologizing... come on dude

Originally posted by most people


Lincoln had the better gameplan

if you look at the defenses he was running....at least in the ones I looked at he had 4 defenders committed to the screen. That should be enough.

If they made the route go 1 yard deep and the HB didn't become a lead blocker it would be much more realistic. You could play it 1-on-1 with a good tackling dot and take your chances or have the FS in support to play it a little safer. As it is now (and has been for a couple of seasons) it's the safest play for the offense to run while also being arguably the most dangerous play for the defense to try to defend. That's not a good combination.

I really think both of you have missed the boat and not tested enough variables over the course of the season to figure out what works against the WR screen. It takes a ROLB and the RDE - extra CBs do nothing and the FS does nothing. The RDE must be positioned on the inside of the LOS (not outside the tackle) to time the collision, and the ROLB has to be as close as you can get him. That will stop it for an incompletion or less than 2 yard play 90% of the time

Originally posted by jdbolick
Clearly I am a terrible DC. Why don't you tell everyone how great you are while you're at it?

when have I ever commended myself as being a good DC? ask anyone in the Alpine forums and it is actually the opposite. I can't believe cav hasn't fired me yet after 10 or so seasons

as an Asst WL OC all I can say is

You play to win the game
You wanna crown their ass?
Playoffs?
Cant win with em, cant do it
The better team lost
I'm 40..I'm a man

Originally posted by JTsNiners

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1565509&pbp_id=6892867 This play was pretty early in the season but this is a D you'd look for to exploit



Totally agree - this is the type of defense it should work against. It shouldn't be run for positive yardage on this defense when the initial tackle is made though: http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=1574554&pbp_id=12232543

Originally posted by zero
I really think both of you have missed the boat and not tested enough variables over the course of the season to figure out what works against the WR screen. It takes a ROLB and the RDE - extra CBs do nothing and the FS does nothing. The RDE must be positioned on the inside of the LOS (not outside the tackle) to time the collision, and the ROLB has to be as close as you can get him. That will stop it for an incompletion or less than 2 yard play 90% of the time

Read what you just wrote and think about it - I know what you need to do in GLB as it stands right now, but why in the world should you have to commit the RDE and ROLB to stop the WR Screen? That really makes sense to you - that putting 3 CBs and a FS in that area does nothing but dropping the RDE into a zone will keep it to a 2 yard gain if the tackle is made?

edit: forgot to put the play link in on the first one.

Originally posted by jdros13
The SB play requires at least 3 dots, usually 4, to have any chance to contain it and it is impossible to stop for a loss, which means you have a broken play. Along with the guaranteed positive yardage you have the guaranteed firing of YAC attack stacking with quick feet/spin/slippery/BT% gear. It's a tough situation without many options other than to flood the area with the RDE, keep the FS back to hopefully pick up the pieces and pray.

It's not "impossible" to stop for a loss, some WR's actually stay behind the LoS to make the catch, but that is rare and this is pretty spot-on. Still, if this play is so overpowered, why is okay for anybody to use it ever? How many times can you use it in a game before it is unfair? How many playoff teams used it in their games today? How many teams used it enough to go over the imaginary unfair mark? Isn't making it a taboo play unfair to tackle-breaking receivers? Should those agents that spent $75+ making their WL tackle-breaking receivers starting 2 years ago have known better?

It's rhetoric. We all knew how the play was working this season, if you talked to Bort & Catch about it, jd, and they didn't change it (yet), then that's that. You could have done more to slow it down, you may have won if you had, or you may have lost to plays that took advantage of you selling out to defend the screen. You still may have lost if they didn't run that many screens. It was bhall's job to find a way to beat you, he did. bhall may have apologized, but if he feels bad, it must be about how the game made you feel, not about the process of making it happen. He shouldn't have to apologize for winning a competition.

Originally posted by jdbolick

Which is why I'd like the RPP to kick in earlier on screens and affect how often defenders recognize it. The idea of any team in "real football" being able to run the same screen ten times in a game, much less 24, is laughable. Fix that, the catch location, and some of the defender reactions (them being hard-coded to stand back and wait for blockers to engage is idiotic).

Yeah no doubt it is retarded and any real defense would definitely adjust to it.

However, it's the game we play, so might as well play it to win.

Originally posted by Ratphlegm
It's not "impossible" to stop for a loss, some WR's actually stay behind the LoS to make the catch, but that is rare and this is pretty spot-on. Still, if this play is so overpowered, why is okay for anybody to use it ever? How many times can you use it in a game before it is unfair? How many playoff teams used it in their games today? How many teams used it enough to go over the imaginary unfair mark? Isn't making it a taboo play unfair to tackle-breaking receivers? Should those agents that spent $75+ making their WL tackle-breaking receivers starting 2 years ago have known better?

It's rhetoric. We all knew how the play was working this season, if you talked to Bort & Catch about it, jd, and they didn't change it (yet), then that's that. You could have done more to slow it down, you may have won if you had, or you may have lost to plays that took advantage of you selling out to defend the screen. You still may have lost if they didn't run that many screens. It was bhall's job to find a way to beat you, he did. bhall may have apologized, but if he feels bad, it must be about how the game made you feel, not about the process of making it happen. He shouldn't have to apologize for winning a competition.

Originally posted by jdros13
Everyone could run this play and I don't personally think there is an ethical issue with running it or anything close to that. But anyone arguing that this play is not broken (even if you are really awesome at stopping it) is kidding themselves.

I need to stop defending the bolick now.

I need to take my advice about stopping now so I'll say goodnight at the end of this - BDC as an example was terrible at running this play on offense though and we were never stopped for a loss in 30 attempts this season including our scrimmages.

Alpine looks like they were really good at defending it, with only 60 gains on 81 attempts against. They actually stopped the completed play for a loss only twice though and one other time for no gain. Also had a sack. Gave up an average of 5.12 yards per attempt even with a pretty high frequency of incomplete passes and very good contain.

BDC had it run against them 80 times and gave up 61 gains. Averaged 7.72 yards per attempt against us, which isn't surprising since we typically play for the sack and leave the CBs exposed, especially early in the season and in scrimmages (we are the type of team that should be hurt by this play when we are selling out for the sack). We never got a TFL but we had basically the same completion % against as Alpine....and we were used as an example of a team that did a "good" job stopping it today.

The route should not be run for positive yardage - it should work like the WR2 screen out of the Weak I where you can defend it with the CB in man coverage and some support over the top and it is up to the WR to make a play with a broken tackle or a fake - the route itself should not beat the defender which is what happens too often when the play is run...the pass is simply too easy to complete for this to be the case.

I have to catch a plane in a few hours....so good night and good luck to all in the playoffs!

Originally posted by tautology
Really?

You gave up 5 yards per carry, after adjusting for sacks and a QB kneel.

If you take away the the 13 WR screens and 3 FB screens from the second half of the game, Lincoln loses 103 yards of offense. That still leaves them with a sizable edge.


You got dominated. The screens were incidental, imo.



Men of Integrity ™ do NOT like your logics.

Originally posted by ddingo
Men of Integrity ™ do NOT like your logics.

how do i become a Man of Integrity ™

Originally posted by whatje
how do i become a Man of Integrity ™

When a play works, don't run it too much.

Originally posted by whatje
how do i become a Man of Integrity ™

Send flex and we will discuss.

Originally posted by ddingo
Send flex and we will discuss.

i'm pressing send and nothing.

i think i'm catching the spirit!

LOL at players looking to jump ship while their team is still in the playoffs.....................................................................