Season 3 Week 17 Results

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

Well vertical passing plays

Vertical passing PLAY... Singular

matthew8

ibmax wrote: »

A psychologist would have a field day with this sentence... Perhaps you should look closer to home???

You seem to have been sacked an awful lot given how few human games you play. I guess everyone is running nano blitzes???

Scratch that... It must be nano blitzing... It couldn't have anything to do with only running 1 streaks play repeatedly and holding onto the ball for an ages. Eventually you'll get one away and it'll be a td... The rest of the time it'll be sacks... From nano blitzes of course... It's a good job the CPU doesn't nano blitz... Otherwise you'd be....

... Oh you were sacked by the CPU too...

Dirty cheating CPU!!!

I didn't call you a cheater, I said you ran (and I just called them within the rules) nanos. I have been sacked a fair bit this year yes, but that was because in one on one situations players like Julius Peppers beat my linemen. Today I was getting the ball away by the time Hill had completed his drop back nearly all the time, but I was still getting relentlessly hit.

Addilynn Clumsy Strawberry wrote: »

Like u did with the giants in the plate last year?
You said yourself you don't care what your linemens awarness is you paid the price for it today

Well I didn't move anyone around for the Giants last year. I called the sugar blitz. When everyone blocked successfully you had time and got a good play.

SantryRed

matthew8 wrote: »

Well I didn't move anyone around for the Giants last year. I called the sugar blitz. When everyone blocked successfully you had time and got a good play.

You could do that too by leaving the running back in to block the side Hali was coming from.

The_Gatsby

ibmax wrote: »

There was no nano blitzing.
Your big problem is you've amassed an oline of incredibly strong sloths.

In fairness, I got 7 sacks against you. I don't think it's nano blitzing, just a combination of weak o-line and the fact you go deep down the field every time.

matthew8

SantryRed wrote: »

You could do that too by leaving the running back in to block the side Hali was coming from.

The problem with that is the game wouldn't let me send him in motion, as I mentioned in my first post on this thread.

And Chargers, you got 10 sacks against me without any hint of a nano, just defensive power and an occasional corner blitz.

The_Gatsby

matthew8 wrote: »

just defensive power

Yeah we're pretty cool like that :cool:

SantryRed

matthew8 wrote: »

The problem with that is the game wouldn't let me send him in motion, as I mentioned in my first post on this thread.

And Chargers, you got 10 sacks against me without any hint of a nano, just defensive power and an occasional corner blitz.

You don't need to send him in motion. You tell him to block left or block right, if Hali was the first man to break past and you had the HB blocking that side, he would slow him down.

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

I didn't call you a cheater,

I never said you did

Let's say I was "nano blitzing" and sacking/hitting you after 1 second; perhaps you would have run a different play??? Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

As for Peppers beating your linemen, could it not be thr case that Hali beat your linemen??? Or is it beyond the realms of possibility that a 99 overall LE could beat one of your sloths when you constantly leave him overmatched 1 v 1 and insist on throwing only 60yard passed?

Oh and FYI - if you run a base 4-3, running over or under will line players up differently. Thus is one instance of many different allignments from a single firmation. When the defensive allignment isn't as you would have hoped and you get sacked, is this a nano blitz???

matthew8

SantryRed wrote: »

You don't need to send him in motion. You tell him to block left or block right, if Hali was the first man to break past and you had the HB blocking that side, he would slow him down.

Every play, first thing I do is RB block right, it does nothing because he is on the left and Hali is on my right.

ibmax

Lukebray wrote: »

ibmax wrote: »

There was no nano blitzing.
Your big problem is you've amassed an oline of incredibly strong sloths.

In fairness, I got 7 sacks against you. I don't think it's nano blitzing, just a combination of weak o-line and the fact you go deep down the field every time.

That's what I said

The_Gatsby

matthew8 wrote: »

Every play, first thing I do is RB block right, it does nothing because he is on the left and Hali is on my right.

Could you just flip the play?

matthew8

ibmax wrote: »

I never said you did

Let's say I was "nano blitzing" and sacking/hitting you after 1 second; perhaps you would have run a different play??? Insanity is defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

As for Peppers beating your linemen, could it not be thr case that Hali beat your linemen??? Or is it beyond the realms of possibility that a 99 overall LE could beat one of your sloths when you constantly leave him overmatched 1 v 1 and insist on throwing only 60yard passed?

Oh and FYI - if you run a base 4-3, running over or under will line players up differently. Thus is one instance of many different allignments from a single firmation. When the defensive allignment isn't as you would have hoped and you get sacked, is this a nano blitz???

I was watching every play. Fletcher blocked the guy across from him, and that wasn't Tamba Hali.

helimachoptor

Flip the play

matthew8

Lukebray wrote: »

Could you just flip the play?

I don't know what it is but I hate running plays on the left. Apart from when running I just can't do it. It feels like when I try to play tennis with my (weak) right hand.

helimachoptor

Doesn't matter if you hate it, do it to stop getting sacked!

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

I was watching every play. Fletcher blocked the guy across from him, and that wasn't Tamba Hali.

Which brings me back to where this all originated from nicely...

... Hali was the only of my defensive starters to play. the rest were mid 50's to mid 70's scrubs. That's why Hali got through and the others got blocked...

... Just to question the previous logic; chargers get 10 sacks and it's "defensive power". Bucs get 3 sacks from the only starting player on the pitch and it's "nano blitzing"???

Discuss???

matthew8

I am going by what I saw. Your 2 defensive tackles took up my RG and RT. Hali ghosted past.

helimachoptor

I'm sure if you look at the stats when I had hali he was decent at sacks too..

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

I am going by what I saw. Your 2 defensive tackles took up my RG and RT. Hali ghosted past.

Out of a 3-4 with Hali as an olb!!! Ryan kerrigan pn the other side... Hsli is better than kerrigan... Hali got around the edge. Smarts!!! I spotted a weakness... You persisted with 7 yard drops and 60 yard passes... Mike Martz would be proud

Not a nano blitz of course

etloveslsd

matthew8 wrote: »

I don't know what it is but I hate running plays on the left. Apart from when running I just can't do it. It feels like when I try to play tennis with my (weak) right hand.

The stop crying nano. Flip the play or take the sack. Maybe have one of the other receivers on a slant as a dump off.

matthew8

helimachoptor wrote: »

I'm sure if you look at the stats when I had hali he was decent at sacks too..

Actually in his first 2 seasons he only had 5 sacks. And this year after week 6 he was on one sack. So clearly he just got infinitely better at his bull rush and swim move. Which is how he got 26 sacks in his last 10 games.

ibmax

helimachoptor wrote: »

I'm sure if you look at the stats when I had hali he was decent at sacks too..

It was nano blitzing heli!!! How could someone with nearly 30 sacks this year possibly beat one of the raiders Oslothmen!!!

helimachoptor

I tended not to blitz too much as I had Willis for that, hali is exceptionally quick but he forces few fumbles

SantryRed

I do think it's way too easy with some D line men to get passed an O Line man with a flick of the right stick. So I get the ball away early when I play the players who can do this.

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

helimachoptor wrote: »

I'm sure if you look at the stats when I had hali he was decent at sacks too..

Actually in his first 2 seasons he only had 5 sacks. And this year after week 6 he was on one sack. So clearly he just got infinitely better at his bull rush and swim move. which is how he got 26 sacks in his last 10 games.

And all the sacks Suh got??? Could it be having Suh and Hali on the same side of the line is pretty dominant... You know the all about dominant don't you

And he had few before week 6 cause I was on holidays and the CPU played him as an olb. 2 and a bit sacks per game I would guess is par for the course of a 99 overall LE playing beside Suh!!!

matthew8

And the Buccs comment about constantly waiting until they're 60 yards down the field is false, most of my throws were despairing flings of the ball before the players had been running their route for even 3 seconds. Now a couple of them were deep, but they covered most of the ground while the ball was in the air.

matthew8

ibmax wrote: »

And all the sacks Suh got??? Could it be having Suh and Hali on the same side of the line is pretty dominant... You know the all about dominant don't you

And he had few before week 6 cause I was on holidays and the CPU played him as an olb. 2 and a bit sacks per game I would guess is par for the course of a 99 overall LE playing beside Suh!!!

Suh got 14 sacks this year, hardly unheard of.

ibmax

matthew8 wrote: »

And the Buccs comment about constantly waiting until they're 60 yards down the field is false, most of my throws were despairing flings of the ball before the players had been running their route for even 3 seconds. Now a couple of them were deep, but they covered most of the ground while the ball was in the air.

No no... My comment is deadly accurate. Each passing play was a streak from a 2-1-2 set, Olsen starting on the right of the line, running 15 yards downfield before heading left for the post with hill looking to hit him as he got behind the LB. option 2 is hit Knox deep right. Both deep routes which require 4 seconds to develope... Both from the same formation... Very easy to stop:

Note: bucs 2nd/3rd stringers hold "top qb" statistically to 3 completions, one of which was a freak catch which should have been an INT. does this not suggest you are your own worst enemy?

You had the check down to bell all day die to the nature of the deep routes occupying the coverage but never once chose it. Here is your thought process in each pass:

1) snap ball
2) drop back
3) wait for Olsen to get open (30+yards downfield)
4) force ball to Olsen
5) If Olsen is double covered heave ball to knox
6) hope for the best

That's why you're always under pressure and why you only completed 3 passes!!!

etloveslsd

Did you try shifting your line too? If he was getting the matchup that he wanted, why not try disrupt it?

matthew8

I only ever throw the ball to a receiver if they're open. For Knox this means a yard of separation, for Olsen it means 2 yards. The one double coverage pass I threw was a panic pass. If they're all covered try not to lose too much on the sack or run into a hole. You don't seriously think that tactic could be milked to a 16-2 TD:INT ratio against other users, do you?

And by the way Bell was not there for the check down, he was blocking.