Originally posted by PP
In reality, I don't completely disagree with this at all, but here's the rub. GLB isn't reality. I'm all for making things as realistic as practical, so long as it doesn't destroy the fun, but we're dealing with SPs here.
1st, why would a QB invest a bunch of points into something that only works against zone coverage? Sure, you can counter that by saying DBs have to choose SAs based on man or zone coverage, but their DC can easily put a man CB in man all game long and a zone CB in zone.
Next, it's no more realistic for a zone CB to be PFed than a man CB. Either way, it only occurs when the CB is actively covering the WR. In GLB, and to a great extent in real FB, when a WR is traveling through a zone defender's "zone" that defender is covering in man like any man CB does, up until he releases the WR. He's not looking in the backfield any more or less than a CB playing pure man, while he's in his coverage zone. It's only when he's not actively covering a WR that his eyes are focused on the QBs more. So, why should one CB that's actively engaging in man coverage bite any more or less than the other?
Lastly, the way we're currently heading, the new version of PF would only work against zone and the new Look Off would only work against zone, just just the Catch Fake would work against man. In order to balance that out, you'd either have to over power Catch Fake and under power PF and Look Off or just kill zones and be done with it.
Originally posted by taz20075
There are a slew of situational VAs that only work in certain, limited, situations. Some SAs only work vs pass plays, some only work against run plays. Even the new proposed Elusive SA only works when there is only 1 defender within 10 yds. We're asked to make choices like this all the time.
that is where new offensive plays come into play. the OC should be able to call plays that exploit man coverages, forcing the Defense in to zones where his QB can excel