Warrior General Games

congrats on getting a couple of fumbles for TDs. that is hard to do these days. but are those outliers or the norm? even doing it my way, we'll generate a couple of fumbles per season, altho we dont get the TDs very often. but i do know that most of our punts will net 40+ yards while we'll generally only let them net 25-30. same on KO, our offense will take over around the 30, while opponents will mostly be around the 20. it's just a matter of philosophy. both will work depending on the risk/reward people are looking for. but i can apply my philosophy to any team, whereas you have to have specific player builds. i usually only get 1 sometimes 2 "stops" so i'd rather have a blocker than coverage. my dream would have been to have 10 rawss "stops"...lol


this is another reason i prefer closing speed http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2829655&pbp_id=819830. i really really hate giving up up st tds...

Appreciate all the feedback guys.

Guppy. Inc I really didn't think about the coming from behind to stop a return aspect,Thanks.

My original thinking here was that I would get there quicker and the boost in speed might help in forcing some fumbles especially used with head hunter ?

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
congrats on getting a couple of fumbles for TDs. that is hard to do these days. but are those outliers or the norm? even doing it my way, we'll generate a couple of fumbles per season, altho we dont get the TDs very often. but i do know that most of our punts will net 40+ yards while we'll generally only let them net 25-30. same on KO, our offense will take over around the 30, while opponents will mostly be around the 20. it's just a matter of philosophy. both will work depending on the risk/reward people are looking for. but i can apply my philosophy to any team, whereas you have to have specific player builds. i usually only get 1 sometimes 2 "stops" so i'd rather have a blocker than coverage. my dream would have been to have 10 rawss "stops"...lol


this is another reason i prefer closing speed http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2829655&pbp_id=819830. i really really hate giving up up st tds...

The Gurupie teams have done pretty well with forcing fumbles. Indy got about a dozen in WL last year, and I think we got 8 so far this year. I will readily agree with you that your philosophy is easier to apply on any team. I like to have 3 dedicated STOPs...more than that, and you take too much away from O and D.

Originally posted by onemiln09
My original thinking here was that I would get there quicker and the boost in speed might help in forcing some fumbles especially used with head hunter ?

For head hunter to work, the player just has to be travelling at or near full speed. Full speed is not the same for all dots, as it changes based on the build, including whether or not you have closing speed.

Originally posted by Dave Mr Majors
For head hunter to work, the player just has to be travelling at or near full speed. Full speed is not the same for all dots, as it changes based on the build, including whether or not you have closing speed.

closing speed shuts down once you are 5 yards from the ball carrier, so it wont help at all. i remember many years ago, someone tried to use closing speed as a sub for speed. the player wasnt dead slow, but not as fast as most wr/rb. so every time he had to chase someone down, there would be this jerky motion once he got close as he sped up then slow down, then speed back up but unable to close those last 5 yards

Hmm. I'd be very interested to see how that would work if a dot also had very high jumping and 10+ diving tackle SA....

Originally posted by Sly
Hmm. I'd be very interested to see how that would work if a dot also had very high jumping and 10+ diving tackle SA....

Have Catch try in on the test server. Oh wait............ Oops................... never mind.

To Dave and Guppy... both of you are right about vision on ST's. Crazy huh? Seriously though if you don't have ENOUGH vision, then your dots either run into blockers they should avoid or take very poor angles to the returner in order to make the tackle (or better). BUT, you can go OVERBOARD on it (I did for many seasons of ST coaching) and have TOO much emphasis on it also. For FF style STOPS, I like at least 50 so they can make that head on collision happen more often (and therefore cause more fumbles). For regular 'blocking' STOPS, 40-ish is enough to engage the closest blocker which is usually good enough. I found having 70+ vision made no difference in the play of the ST's... but having less than 40 sometimes causes issues on some dots. Just what I've learned.

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
To Dave and Guppy... both of you are right about vision on ST's. Crazy huh? Seriously though if you don't have ENOUGH vision, then your dots either run into blockers they should avoid or take very poor angles to the returner in order to make the tackle (or better). BUT, you can go OVERBOARD on it (I did for many seasons of ST coaching) and have TOO much emphasis on it also. For FF style STOPS, I like at least 50 so they can make that head on collision happen more often (and therefore cause more fumbles). For regular 'blocking' STOPS, 40-ish is enough to engage the closest blocker which is usually good enough. I found having 70+ vision made no difference in the play of the ST's... but having less than 40 sometimes causes issues on some dots. Just what I've learned.

ye, i tll people to stop vision at 40 and either let the algs take it from there or dont train it again until they have nothing else to train that would make a difference. i want them zeroed in on that returner. and i havent seen any increase in the number of missed tackles since switching strategic way back when.

You should never train any skill to 40 unless we are talking at the very end of the build with no time to complete a full cycle in anything else.