User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Bugs > WR Screens
TyDavis315
offline
Link
 
The CB pathing on WR screens doesn’t make sense, especially for man marking.

https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/927115/2369623

CBs read and react to screens as if they’re in zone. With 100 awareness and 80 technique, it doesn’t make sense for CBs to run parallel so far away from their man. On reverse slants, we see the CB move closer to the receiver, not away from.

They clearly read the play as pass since cover expert fires more often than not, but the pathing is head scratching. Even if it’s a run awareness check first, the tactics on DBs are set to conservative so that angle would still be counter-intuitive.

Speed & elusive running are broken for reasons like this. Power running was nerfed into quality rushing, but not overwhelmingly unrealistic. The phantom suck blocks, lack of usefulness on coverage tech, high awareness still failing multiple checks, and pursuit are some of the issues that should be addressed going forward.

Defending the outside has gotten so clunky the last few seasons. I know contain expert is becoming a favorite, but it’s worth taking a look at some of the mechanics (or deeper player tactics!!!!)
 
TyDavis315
offline
Link
 
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/927115/2369604

Better example of both. CB4 presses his man, the others wait. The man defending the screen takes an angle that doesn’t make sense when in man coverage, especially since his movement comes at the height of the route.

It’s an odd angle for several reasons. I could get if they thought it was a drag, but it would be better read as a reverse slant since that’s the general motion no?
 
TyDavis315
offline
Link
 
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/927115/2369664

Got to see the full progression thanks to cover expert.

Is this not blitz pathing? He’s clearly going after the QB
 
TyDavis315
offline
Link
 
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/927115/2370461

I’m assuming it’s failed awareness or tech fails then if this it’s how it’s properly supposed to be read. If 100 & isn’t enough then, what combination would cause this behavior consistently?
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.