Warrior General Games

I tried a little experiment myself between my two CBs. I don't remember the exact numbers, but until the second half of this season one of my CBs had the traditional high man/high coverage (60s), had pretty crappy deflecting and int (never a point in int, like 20 def?) and then had 40-45 sprint/quick.

My other CB I focused his points from coverage/man into int so he had like 40 man/coverage, but then had 70 INT, 35-40 sprint/quickness, 30s vert, and around 30-40 deflecting.

Last season, my CB1 (Coverage/Man) had a 54% recalw rate in league games, 5 PDs, 47 tackles, 0 INTs.
My CB2 (INT/def/vert) had a 63% recalw rate, 1 PD, 2 INTs, 53 tackles.

So the coverage/man guy did a better job of preventing receptions, and had more PDs despite the fact CB2 had almost twice his deflecting and 50+ his INT. One interesting thing is that CB1 was also targeted less (he gave up 52 receptions) but he was able to immediately take down the person receiving the ball more often. For a comparison, CB2 was targeted more (he gave up 65 receptions) and he had a couple more plays in the season where he gave up the reception and the guy was so open that another CB/safety had to run over to make the tackle for him.


Season 3 I started trying to even them out a bit as the season went. CB1 I started adding def and vert to, and CB2 I started to add a sprint/quick and also bump up man/coverage to see if having that increased with higher INT/Def would do anything noticeable.

So far with one game left this year

CB1 60 Man, 65 Coverage, 50 Def, 55 Sprint, 50 Quick, 40 Vert, 40 Balance, 40 Footwork, 30 consistency
Gives up 56% recalw (127 targeted), 9 PDs, 1 INT (57 tackles with 71 catches allowed)

CB2 70 Man, 65 Coverage, 45 def, 70 INT, 30 consistency, 45 sprint, 40 quickness, 35 vert, 30 balance, 30 footwork
Gives up 60% recalw (75 targeted), 5 PDs, 2 ints (41 tackles with 49 catches allowed)

CB2 does have less target, but if you artificially bump up his numbers to 127~ targeted like CB1, then he would have rounded 8 PD, 3 INT.


So basically, I've come to the conclusion that upping deflecting and vert seems to have a SMALL impact on the number of PDs they've gotten, but having 70 INT seems to be useless as we have other players on our team without a single point in INT having 1 each. And whether you focus on having them with high int/def, high man/coverage, or high sprinting/quickness, they're going to give up the same general range of recalw. I think the more important factor is getting pressure on the QB, because it seems like no matter how the Wr and CBs are built the game just flips a coin to decide if they catch or not.

Originally posted by ahnonamis

Lots of stuff.


One thing about INT is that it might rely heavily upon other skills to really be effective. Once you build up quickness enough, perhaps your player can get into position for interceptions more often? By itself, it's not as useful because you're never in the right spot often enough to leverage it fully. Same thing with pass deflection.

It's sorta like a rookie QB. Yeah pass accuracy is great, but until your receivers can catch and you can see them open before getting sacked, throwing the ball accurately is pointless.

Have to be in position to make interceptions in order to make interceptions. It isn't like you just take INT to 100 and say alright magically snag 40 int's this season. The difference between CB1 and CB2 is that when finally in position to make an INT, CB2 has the better chance to do so rather than just whiffing or swatting the ball away.

I know, I don't expect him to have 30 INTs a season. And I'm not complaining about his performance. But earlier people were wondering if it would be better having high int/def instead of man/coverage. I was just pointing out I tried high int/def first and high man/coverage first, and man/coverage did slightly better. But there's been no real difference between the two.

Physical wise, CB1 is definitely a lot better with sprinting/quickness. But the recalw isn't hugely different (even with higher deflect). Which means either he's also not getting in position to make plays to defend, or more likely the game just hates CBs and it's more up to the QB+WR determining if the catch is made than what stats the CB has.

I think I have an idea on how to put CB's in better position for INT's in the early stages of the game but it will have to wait till next season when we start up a new team.

I've enjoyed reading the discussion. Definitely some interesting data being shared. As others have already said - the whole thing is so incredibly complicated - positioning - looking the right direction (I assume) - hurries - QB morale and conditioning which affect pass quality (but even on a terrible pass, the CB likely gets credit for the defense) - etc etc.


I think the targets / rec allowed stat is just about completely useless because the data set...even on a whole season...can be statistically insignificant (too small of a sample size).


But overall - I do agree with others here who say the currently generally accepted path for cornerback the building process is not really a very good one.

Originally posted by TxSteve
I've enjoyed reading the discussion. Definitely some interesting data being shared. As others have already said - the whole thing is so incredibly complicated - positioning - looking the right direction (I assume) - hurries - QB morale and conditioning which affect pass quality (but even on a terrible pass, the CB likely gets credit for the defense) - etc etc.


I think the targets / rec allowed stat is just about completely useless because the data set...even on a whole season...can be statistically insignificant (too small of a sample size).


But overall - I do agree with others here who say the currently generally accepted path for cornerback the building process is not really a very good one.


It's certainly insignificant. All 5 of my CBs on Rhode Island are built identically. They've got wildly different success rates when measured by targets/rec allowed.

And, frankly, HOF leading QBs are averaging like 55%-60% completions. That's not a ridiculous number. They put up 70% or better stats against awful teams, and good defenses can hold them to closer to 50%.

If we're talking NFL standards here, it's not like passing teams are just having absurd success against this apparently terrible pass coverage. Even if you factor in a 10% increase in completions for a season as drops decrease and missed throws decrease approaching veteran, that's still only 65-70% completions for the best of the best QBs. That's about in the ballpark of what I'd expect to see honestly.

CB owners are wanting to see Darelle Revis type lock-down. You need to build a S* CB if you're wanting to get a guy to shut-down their targets like that. Otherwise, stop believing you're garbage if you can't stop 60% of your targets. If you're stopping 50%, you're doing a fantastic job. 40% Would still be pretty good. 30% would be when you're getting torn up regularly.

65-70% was generally what my test server QB's were producing regardless of opponent. Every once in a couple games Corndog or Daggers were able to hold me to around 50% or so but it seemed wildly random. Granted a lot has changed about coverage and what not since that time.

Originally posted by Galithor
And, frankly, HOF leading QBs are averaging like 55%-60% completions. That's not a ridiculous number. They put up 70% or better stats against awful teams, and good defenses can hold them to closer to 50%.

If we're talking NFL standards here, it's not like passing teams are just having absurd success against this apparently terrible pass coverage. Even if you factor in a 10% increase in completions for a season as drops decrease and missed throws decrease approaching veteran, that's still only 65-70% completions for the best of the best QBs. That's about in the ballpark of what I'd expect to see honestly.

CB owners are wanting to see Darelle Revis type lock-down. You need to build a S* CB if you're wanting to get a guy to shut-down their targets like that. Otherwise, stop believing you're garbage if you can't stop 60% of your targets. If you're stopping 50%, you're doing a fantastic job. 40% Would still be pretty good. 30% would be when you're getting torn up regularly.

that is true, but it seems the percentage of completions downfield greater than 10 yards seems to be a bit high.

Originally posted by hansmacher
that is true, but it seems the percentage of completions downfield greater than 10 yards seems to be a bit high.

Eh, it probably only feels that way because you remember the deep catches more. None of the HOF leading QBs at any tier has a YPA in the 8+ territory. The best QBs are 6.5-7.5 or so. Peyton Manning had 8.3 YPA last season in the NFL.

Yeah, it's annoying to watch those deep passes where the CB doesn't turn around, but there's NFL receivers that make a living doing those back shoulder turn around catches. It's just painful to watch in GLB2 because it seems like it's in slow motion with nearly every QB at sub 30 passing power.

You can certainly curtail the deep passes considerably more by running a Cover 2 Shell. Some teams simply refuse to stop letting receivers run deep in single coverage though, and they get their blitzes torched.

Originally posted by Galithor
Eh, it probably only feels that way because you remember the deep catches more. None of the HOF leading QBs at any tier has a YPA in the 8+ territory. The best QBs are 6.5-7.5 or so. Peyton Manning had 8.3 YPA last season in the NFL.


That is because you would get sacked like a mofo right now if all you were doing was chuckin it deep. Have to pick your spots. If people just ran coverage all day though you would certainly see some high deep ball rates imo.

Originally posted by bhall43
That is because you would get sacked like a mofo right now if all you were doing was chuckin it deep. Have to pick your spots. If people just ran coverage all day though you would certainly see some high deep ball rates imo.

What were the YPA's from test server on your QBs?

Originally posted by Galithor
What were the YPA's from test server on your QBs?

I don't remember really but having a Barry Allen and an oline who can take on blitz's sure as hell makes a difference.

And it's really tough for me to say if one can even replicate the kind of success dc universe had on the test server. I never played any level prior to veteran so I have no idea what all the changes that have been made or are being made do to vet level play.