|
|
Rank: Commissioner
Groups: Commissioner
Joined: 6/15/2008
Posts: 2,082
Location: Clayton, CA
|
Do we want to try and open up the running game more by allowing any run play to be called on any down.
Note: Teams would still be restricted to the QB running rule.
Super Bowl XXI - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIX - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIV - 2nd Place
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 6/10/2008
Posts: 1,629
Location: Gilbert, AZ
|
Are we restricted in any way right now?
Super Bowl Champions--Buffalo Bills--SBXXII, SB XXI, SB XX, SB XVIII, SB XVII
Super Bowl Champions--Atlanta Falcons--SB XI, SB X, SB IX, SB VIII, SB VII, SB VI, SB V
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
I think this would only allow run right plays on 1st down and 2nd and short at any time and some Rl on 1st down. We also have RM plays similar to the RR plays already and we let R&S passes to be called all the time now. The RR's are mostly R&R formation plays, so it makes sense to run out of the same formation you are passing from. It would be interesting to see the impact since runnning has suffered lately. This could tip things too much toward the offense that already has an advantage with the passing game though. I can see testing it for a season to see the results. I'd like to tweak the open teams PPP's if this is approved. We should also put in a minimum number of total runs called. This could be open to running 4 plays only with the current rules. Or we set all RR, RL, and RM plays to RM and mandate a minimum of like RM plays 16 in the PPP.
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
Rank: Commissioner
Groups: Commissioner
Joined: 6/15/2008
Posts: 2,082
Location: Clayton, CA
|
I was trying to keep it simple. that is, on any down you could have any run play in your game plan. For example, on first down you could have a combination of RM, RL, and RR plays. No big deal to me! The 49ers have led the League in running yards for the past three seasons, and plan to do it again, changes or not  BTW, the Offense will always have the edge in this game. The last 19-seasons have shown that no matter what we do with the Defense.
Super Bowl XXI - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIX - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIV - 2nd Place
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
Agree about the advantage. Just don't want a team to do the minimum for each run type in the plan and then only call say RR plays in the profile. He would only be using 4 plays the whole game. I have no problem opening the running up, just want to keep the play calling from plans varied.
BTW: The 49ers won't run the ball on the Lions this season. You will be shut down!
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 7/4/2008
Posts: 445
Location: CA
|
I agree with Jerry on the amount of plays needed. 4 RR would not be enough if we relaxed the rule.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
I think the real issue is 1st down mainly since we allow a plan to have just 4 RR and 4 RL that can be called on 2nd and 3rd downs. We just need to make sure no one can call the same 4 RR or RL plays the whole game to keep the current variety and somewhat realism as well as not throwing the already out of balance Offense-Defense balance out even worse.
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
Rank: Administration
Groups: Administration
Joined: 6/10/2008
Posts: 1,629
Location: Gilbert, AZ
|
On the whole off/def balance thing, the one thing I still feel is a problem is the speed of the QBs.....we have too many QBs who are as fast as some slower HBs and with potential as high as a HB.....there is no way all these QBs should be at 75-80 speed. They should be at 68-73 speed with the rare guy the upper levels. I wonder if defenses would be better off if this change was made. More sacks, less mobile QBs to roll out of problems. Just a thought.
Super Bowl Champions--Buffalo Bills--SBXXII, SB XXI, SB XX, SB XVIII, SB XVII
Super Bowl Champions--Atlanta Falcons--SB XI, SB X, SB IX, SB VIII, SB VII, SB VI, SB V
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
Can't disagree with QB speed. It probably is high. Problem is we all took our current players based on the current rules that allow a team with a QB over 75 in SP and AC to run additional QB runs. Thus, it may be difficult to fix that with current players unless we all agree to some sort of percentage change in QB SP and AC. I can tweak it down in the 2018 draft files and we can lower it for all future drafts as well. I would support a percentage change if everyone else does
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
Rank: Commissioner
Groups: Commissioner
Joined: 6/15/2008
Posts: 2,082
Location: Clayton, CA
|
We could just lower all QB AC and SP, both ACTs and POTs across the board for all QBs, that way everyone is equal.
Super Bowl XXI - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIX - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIV - 2nd Place
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/27/2010
Posts: 77
Location: Vassar, MI
|
I agree with the cut of speed on QBs. The first thing I noticed when I played this league was the lack of speed in RBs, and how quick the QBs were. It seems like every QB is a scrambler. Personally I'd prefer a pocket passer (if I had an OL, but...). Come on, we all know Jim Kelly and Joe Montana are better than John Elway and Randall Cunningham. If you go back and look at the records, the record for rushed yards is 13 seasons ago, and the closest is under a 1000 and that was 3 years ago. We should have at least five 1000 yard rushers a season. IMO
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/27/2010
Posts: 77
Location: Vassar, MI
|
Another idea I had is to add a +5 to ST to the OL, or AG.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/27/2010
Posts: 77
Location: Vassar, MI
|
I had another idea is that we could drop ST in OL, which would give the DL a fighting chance, and boost AG and AC in RB. Maybe an increase in IN for the OL to compensate (brain before brawn). Just throwing it out there.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
I think we have some consensus on the QB ratings. No one seems against dropping them and knocking them down by 2 SP and 2 AC is a fair compromise to ensure we do not tip the balance too much. On the opening the RB play calling their are some risks. I think I'll create a few new RM plays for the Lions and Broncos that are spread and R&S type formations with RB1 in them that are coded as RM. See how that goes this season.
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
Rank: Commissioner
Groups: Commissioner
Joined: 6/15/2008
Posts: 2,082
Location: Clayton, CA
|
The "Running" game is alive and well in the  camp!
Super Bowl XXI - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIX - 2nd Place
Super Bowl XIV - 2nd Place
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 6/14/2008
Posts: 968
Location: Sumter, SC
|
It was today. Rather impressive against the Bills, but the Lions D awaits. I'm still having trouble running. I had my PPP set to 50 50 before gameplanning this week and I had to lower the % to get the offense moving.
2013 PNFL SB XVI Champions
|
|
|
Guest |
