Quest for the Holy Grail

[Morgado]

Hey guys,

I think right now i'm pretty happy with the West Coast Offense and the kind of balance it produces, but I don't think it's the holy grail of FOF. I mean, there should be other ways to be successful and we've seen the Air Coryell Shotgun/Single/Split offenses posted by other people and the extreme 2nd and short bombs away tendeny shift success.

The more I look at what i'm trying to do philosophically with the way I set up my offenses and defenses, the more i'm convinced that it's rewarding to be realistic. In other words, I think Jim did a fairly good job making the statistical models reflect the real world of NFL football.

My question is this - at this point in studying the game, what do we have and what do we lack? I would guess that Quik and the Gang are the resident experts on player personnel (free agency and drafting), we have some semblance of a WCO, we have some semblance of a Run and Shoot offense, but we lack:

1. A true power rushing offense. The WCO model i've made is really a breakaway running offense like the Minnesota offense with Robert Smith.

2. Anything like a triple option style offense. We don't yet have anything set up where the team focuses on multiple rushers. I think this can be accomplished by getting multiple awesome backs and putting one at starting FB. In some test trials, i've gotten 20-30 yard runs from my "FB" regularly.

3. Any kind of defensive schemes. Most of the defensive work so far has been done on maximizing an individual sack, tackle, or INT statistic. We really don't yet know how team defense works and what is really important except a few generalities (MLB gets most tackles).

And i'm sure there are others. What i'm wondering is what people are interested in developing gameplan wise and what other people are testing out. After spending a month on the WCO project (I think my first post was in the middle of December on it), i'm thinking of working on an old school Big Ten power game or maybe refining defense.

[henry296]

I have tried a little bit to emulate the Blitzburgh Steelers 3-4 philoosophy.

1. Play 3/4 100%.
2. Both OLB should have excellent pass rush skills
3. Blitz tendency was 70
4. Blitz mulitple probably 70.
5. Your DEs should be good run stoppers and average pass rushers.
6. Probably weight your pass coverage towards zone.
7. I would put most of your blitz percentage in the OLB and wieght the CBs higher than ILB.

One season with similar tactics, Jason Gildon had 11 sacks.

Todd

[QuikSand]

I'm very intrigued by the notion of the multiple-back offense.

On my latest Squirrels team, I have just acquired a breakout RB, who now joins a 4th year RB who was a first round pick, plus a 3rd year FB who was my first round pick last season. So, along with my quality OL, I might have some pieces in place to test out something.

Or, if you're talking more experiemntal, I'm still interested in listening-- my Squirrels are not really a petri dish career, I'm playing them seriously.

[Morgado]

Some new stuff to chew on. All these weeks i've been going on and on about how CBs aren't the interceptors and the Safeties are really the guys who turn up the big plays. Well, here's something interesting to look at - not definitive mind you, but interesting nonetheless. This is data from the Hartford Knights' 10-6 2005 Season:



Notice that both starting cornerbacks CB Poole and CB Gordon started all 16 games and the Nickelback CB Sprout played in all 16 games. In fact, Gordon and Poole played the most passing downs of any player on the team. Fears started at Free Safety the entire season while Shaw and Bogan split time at SS because Bogan got injured early of the 2-3 month variety. Anyways, notice that Sprout and Bogan played less than 2/3 the passing plays that 2nd CB Poole played. And yes, Poole has a 100 in Interceptions and Gordon has something like an 90.

So CB1, CB2, CB3, and FS all started and played the entirety of the 16 game season while SS was split evenly between two players. Shaw played 40 more passing plays than Bogan because of downs played while the backup Safety in 4 games. I thought this was a really good season to look at because the Secondary stayed relatively intact the whole year. Now the puzzlers.

CB Gordon and CB Poole played roughly 25 more passing downs than FS Fears and yet Fears ended up with 9 INTs while both starting CBs combined for just 7. Fears has about half the Interceptions rating that either one of the two starting corners has. The extreme shocker is that the Nickelback Sprout played 200 fewer passing plays than either starting corner and yet picked off 6 passes - more than the "top" CB Gordon!

The system they are playing in is a modified version of the Blitzburgh 3-4 that Todd posted up. I reallocated 6 points of positional blitz from the inside backers to each outside backer (22-10-10-22) and 6 points off the FS divided evenly +3 to each cornerback. The blitz percentage is 75 while blitz multiple is at 55. The Nickel percentage is up to 80 I believe and 34/43 balance is 100 on 34. Both man coverages are at 18 with the balance divided among the various zone coverages. So the defense plays mainly zone with heavy single blitzing and heavy Nickel. Other than that, no settings were touched (like run expectations and gambles).

I'm drawing some more specialized beliefs from this:

1. The FS is *the* Interceptor of the team. I believe this is so because the double coverage is with the FS. My guess is that even if double coverage isn't called on defense, the FS is still the primary over the top assistance to the corners. So the FS is your roaming centerfielder, not the SS.

2. Starting Cornerbacks are cover guys. Period.

3. The Nickelback in a heavy Nickel system will be the secondary Interceptor. This guys should definitely have high Interception ratings like the FS.

4. FOF's defense engine is fairly accurate and the SS should be really a run support guy. A John Lynch/Ronnie Lott/Steve Atwater type enforcer being ideal.

So in a 9 man secondary, you want:

2 Coverage CBs who have high Man and Zone.
1 Pickoff CB who has high INTs to play Nickelback.
1 Generic CB who will be your stopgap guy in case someone is injured.
1 Kick Returner CB
1 FS Interceptor who can play centerfield.
1 SS Enforcer who hits like a linebacker.
2 Generic S replacements who can fill in for injured starters.

Maybe this takes the "role-player" method of roster building to extremes, but it seemed like a fun exercise. Validation for the Safety First principle... heh.

[This message has been edited by Morgado (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Morgado]

Incidentally, for the guys who still come over into Strategies and reads this stuff... in light of EAs announcement, I think what we work on with FOF2001 still has value even if FOF2001 is a dead end product with zero support.

Judging by the screenshots of TCY on Solecismic's site, the engine driving TCY will be roughly the same as the FOF engine. ANd since FOF2001 is the latest incarnation of the engine, it is about as close as we can get to proxying for whatever final version is in TCY - especially since TCY has no playcalling, figuring out how to gameplan and depth chart manage has great relevance.

Thinking about the whole porting issue of TCY files into FOF2/FOF2001, i've found that it doesn't really matter to me. I mean, I barely have time enough to play FOF2001. I doubt i'd have time for both, so FOF2001 at the moment really is a stopgap measure until TCY.. So I guess i'm looking at this as practicing for TCY...

Which, come to think of it, is probably why I don't work more on drafting, contract negotiating, and free agency. *shurg*

[Subby]

As I have said in the past - this stuff is great. I am going to do some testing on a "read and react" defense and post my findings here, too.

Don't worry too much about the problems with FOF2K1 - I still think they are going to come out with a FOF2K2 version - so all of this information will continue to be relevant. And while I am looking forward to TCY, I have always enjoyed the pro game more - so I will laways be a FOF devotee.

If TCY does port to FOF2, that will solve a lot of the draft inequity issues that currently plague that release, I would think...

[Morgado]

Originally posted by QuikSand:
I'm very intrigued by the notion of the multiple-back offense.

Ask and ye shall receive.

-----

Okay, the two-back experiment was on for the 2009 Hartford Knights' battle to get back to the Super Bowl. Beaten in 2008 by the defending champion Philadelphia Eagles, the Knights drafted two fairly studly running backs in the first and second rounds of the draft. Adding this ground power to a backfield that was All-Pro first team (QB, TE, RB, FB all made 1st team) seemed strange. What to do with all these offensive backs?

RB Phil Reynolds, the 2008 Starter, was sent to another team for a pick and a CB.
RB Tony Wagner 1(33) was set to be the starting FB (Time 7) and backup RB.
RB Rich Berry 2(33) was set to be the starting RB (Time 4).
RB Quentin Hickman, the 2008 backup RB, was set to be the third RB.
FB Antonio Leverson, the 2008 Starter, was set to be the third TE.
FB Thurman Farias was set as the second string FB.
TE Jeff Abrams, a trade acquisition, was set to be the TE starter (Time 4)
TE Heath Pritchett, the 2008 Starter, was set to be the backup TE.

So the offense looked like:

RB: Berry 4, Wagner, Hickman
FB: Wagner 7, Farias
TE: Abrams 4, Pritchett, Leverson

Berry got the RB slot because he has a good breakaway rating (75).
Hickman went to FB due to the better short yardage (24/67), endurance, and carrying.
The system was set up as follows:

"Big" 75 Offense (Small has Single Back instead of the other Neutral I)
Percentages 20-30-25-25-0-0 for Run situations (No this is not a mistake)
Percentages 30-20-25-25-0-0 for Pass situations
Throw Distances: 10-40-40-5-5
Run Directions mainly G-C-G running but with about 12 at the edges.
FB as primary carrier: 99
0 WR: 99
1 WR: 99
2 WR: 99
3 WR: 25
4 WR: 10
5 WR: 0

Commentary:

The offense is designed to get roughly equal carries for the FB and RB, much like a Dayne/Barber or Dunn/Alstott setup. Neither back is a true fullback, so the defense will have to guess who comes out of the backfield with the ball. Both runners can take it to any hole and have true running ability (FB is not just a blocker or pass catcher). Using a FB 99 setting is probably correct since no real team uses their FB as the main ballcarrier. This has to be taken to an extreme to get significant FB carries. By putting the higher energy Wagner as the backup RB, he also gets some carries at RB to further balance the carries.

Okay, what's with the full house personnel tendency? The bottom line is this: I have 2 All-Pro type TE, an All-Pro pass catching FB, and only one true go-to WR. So it stands to reason that if I jack all the big personnel multi-TE sets to maximum, the team will be in a "big and beefy" mode and further make running easier. The side benefit is that my All-Pro TEs will also be on the field much more together (think the Coates-Sharpe plans the Ravens had at the beginning of the year and maybe the Pollard/Dilger situation in Indianapolis). So the TEs are in on more downs and hence targeted by more throws. Again, the 75 offense is a run first philosophy, so using full houses only helps.

Granted, the QB Woodard is a stud QB with a career 92+ rating over 8 seasons in the 75 Offense, so I don't know how much of the success can be attributed to dominant quarterbacking. However, this is really an experiment in the flexibility of the 75 Offense concept. I believe this is verification that you can adjust the 75 to your personnel and be successful with it.

2008 Result was 17-2 and lost as AFC Representative in the Super Bowl under a standard 75.
2009 Result was 14-5 and won as the AFC Representative in the Super Bowl under two-back 75.

The defense was kept the same and most of those losses can be attributed to the loss of my NT Evans who usually plugs the run. He was injured early of the 2-3 month variety and did not play in most losses. The defense is an extreme modification of Todd's Blitzburgh 3-4 (see above) with the Nickel up to 99 and going primarily zone coverages. The blitz rotation is coming "From the left outside, from the right inside" (LOLB, RILB at 22 each). I try to put my two best passrushers there and try to keep the run defense abilities of the DEs and LBs who aren't blitzers fairly balanced across the front so the run defense doesn't suffer when we blitz.

Anyway, some numbers on the Two-Back Big 75 Offense. Keep in mind the offensive line lost a 7 year starting All-Pro C, a starting G, and a starting T from the year before. The replacements were not quite as good in my opinion.

Inside the Numbers:

Rushing:
560 Carries for 2628 Yards with 164.2 YPG (1st in the NFL) and 4.6 YPC (also 1st in NFL).
RB Wagner - 209 Carries for 1006 Yards (4.8 Avg) and 9 TD. 9th in NFL in Rushing.
RB Berry - 185 Carries for 971 Yards (5.2 Avg) and 6 TD. 12th in NFL in Rushing.
RB Hickman - 33 Carries for 189 Yards (5.7 Avg) and 1 TD.
FB Farias - 71 Carries for 183 Yards (2.5 Avg) and 1 TD.
Fumbles - Berry 3, Hickman 2, Wagner 1, Farias 0

Remember, Berry had low (29) Carrying while Wagner had high (89) Carrying.

Passing:
270-452-10 for 3798 Yards (237.3 YPG) and 8.4 YPA.
452 Attempts is 34th in NFL. Dead Last.
270 Completions is 27th in NFL.
10 INTs is 3rd fewest in NFL.
3798 Passing Yards/237.3 YPG is 10th in NFL.
8.4 Yards Per Attempt is 1st in NFL.
QB Woodard - 258-426-8 for 3654 Yards and 23 TD. Rating 98.4
TE Abrams - 73 Catches for 992 Yards, 3 TD and 7 Drops. (363 Pass Plays in 16 Games)
WR Davison - 63 Catches for 940 Yards, 4 TD and 4 Drops. (324 Pass Plays in 15 Games)
WR Heinlein - 48 Catches for 789 Yards, 7 TD and 9 Drops. (316 pass Plays in 12 Games)

Commentary on Numbers:
QB Woodard made 2nd Team All-Pro and NFL MVP (WTF?) while TE Abrams made 1st Team All-Pro. LT Carlyle and LG Ambra both made 1st Team despite both being solid but nowhere near stud monkey redbar status. The extremely weird part about the offense has got to be the passing production. I watched many of the games on the scoreboard and can verify that yes we often ran multiple tight end sets. You can't tell who's getting the carry (FB or RB) so I didn't know how often Wagner was handling the ball as a RB or FB since all formations called for a FB.

I have a hunch that by stacking in a full house setup almost every down and going with the heavy run percentages of a 75 Offense, the defending CPU coach is almost forced to call run defenses every time. Because of this, we face very few Nickel or Dime packages and the wideouts almost always get single coverage. Because of the outstanding TEs, we get massive mismatches over the middle and have a great second option when throwing away from the double coverage. The ultra efficiency of the passing game can be summed up in that 8.4 yard per attempt number. We blew away all competition there - Most teams with more yardage had YPA values like 6.6 or 7.1. So we didn't throw often, but we made the most of it (2nd fewest INTs also). Consider the fact that 90% of our primary routes are 15 yards or less and that's pretty interesting.

I'm not sure if the two-back system is better than one using a dedicated blocking and pass catching FB. You get better chances of breaking big gains on FB carries, but i'm sure the RB carries suffer because the RB converted to FB is not nearly as good a lead blocker. One thing that really disappointed me was that my second TE didn't get thrown at more. Heck, we're running 2TE and 3TE at 99... he's on the field!

Something similar to this looks like the way to go if you want to try and replicate the Colts or Cowboys "triplets" style offense. Especially the Colts with their great TEs, I think this is in the right direction. I had tons of passes aimed at the TE and got good production out of the running game and the passing game - mostly to one stud WR (Harrison) and the TE (Dilger). I have a feeling if you run this thing as a single ballcarrier with blocking back standard 75, you'd get one back with Faulk-like numbers.


[This message has been edited by Morgado (edited 01-16-2001).]