Argument is getting pretty lame.
Forum > Team Press Releases > Shane Falco. - Revolutionizing GLB
Malachorn
offline
offline
Originally posted by Malachorn
Yeah, the sim doesn't work like that, tbh.
Okay, I'm sure that some people will misinterpret what I was suggesting here.
Just making sure that it's known that I know.
Yeah, the sim doesn't work like that, tbh.
Okay, I'm sure that some people will misinterpret what I was suggesting here.
Just making sure that it's known that I know.
Malachorn
offline
offline
Originally posted by dpride59
These Aholes just throw shit against the wall and hope it sticks. W/e falls to the floor tea baggins comes by and licks it up.
Yeah, this really does look like a far too accurate assessment, tbh.
These Aholes just throw shit against the wall and hope it sticks. W/e falls to the floor tea baggins comes by and licks it up.
Yeah, this really does look like a far too accurate assessment, tbh.
Domer
offline
offline
Originally posted by Malachorn
Originally posted by Domer
In any game let's say the QB runs 12 times and the HB 22 times. The HB scores more TD.s has a higher YPC and far more yards. The QB however has a few runs throughout the game the sustained drives, against a defense that was vulnerable to the QB runs. Those drive lead to more carries for the HB and more TDs.
In this game there are defensive plays and alignments that can be effective vs a HB running the ball but are not so effective with a QB running the ball for the QB position. This is due to the angles in the play perhaps or the timing involved in the runs. (HB's have to receive a hand off and thus there is a small, yet significant delay. HB's receiver the ball from a different position on the field, setting up different pursuit angles.
If you just run the HB all the time, then you are not taking advantage of a weakness in the defense.
In the above example, because the QB ran the ball and the right times to sustain the drive, the HB was able to do his job more effectively and put up better #'s. Which is better? The answer is neither. They both relied on each other to accomplish the goal.
Domer
Yeah, the sim doesn't work like that, tbh.
You could try to make an argument that the QB has a lower YPC because he is a specialist at short yardage situations - I find that notion laughable, tbh.
So... are you suggesting that the QB is your short yardage specialist?
What?? Where did I suggest, even HINT he was a short yardage specialist....
And the SIM DOES work like that.....It works exactly like that...
Think about goal line defense... it's pretty effective at stopping certain runs, but it's vulnerable to others...
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
Domer
Originally posted by Domer
In any game let's say the QB runs 12 times and the HB 22 times. The HB scores more TD.s has a higher YPC and far more yards. The QB however has a few runs throughout the game the sustained drives, against a defense that was vulnerable to the QB runs. Those drive lead to more carries for the HB and more TDs.
In this game there are defensive plays and alignments that can be effective vs a HB running the ball but are not so effective with a QB running the ball for the QB position. This is due to the angles in the play perhaps or the timing involved in the runs. (HB's have to receive a hand off and thus there is a small, yet significant delay. HB's receiver the ball from a different position on the field, setting up different pursuit angles.
If you just run the HB all the time, then you are not taking advantage of a weakness in the defense.
In the above example, because the QB ran the ball and the right times to sustain the drive, the HB was able to do his job more effectively and put up better #'s. Which is better? The answer is neither. They both relied on each other to accomplish the goal.
Domer
Yeah, the sim doesn't work like that, tbh.
You could try to make an argument that the QB has a lower YPC because he is a specialist at short yardage situations - I find that notion laughable, tbh.
So... are you suggesting that the QB is your short yardage specialist?
What?? Where did I suggest, even HINT he was a short yardage specialist....
And the SIM DOES work like that.....It works exactly like that...
Think about goal line defense... it's pretty effective at stopping certain runs, but it's vulnerable to others...
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
Domer
Malachorn
offline
offline
Originally posted by Domer
What?? Where did I suggest, even HINT he was a short yardage specialist....
And the SIM DOES work like that.....It works exactly like that...
Think about goal line defense... it's pretty effective at stopping certain runs, but it's vulnerable to others...
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
Domer
No, I didn't really say that you suggested that he was your short yardage specialist.
I only mean that your argument that he "sustains drives" and THAT Is why his YPC should suffer should only have any kinda validity if you were, in fact, suggesting that he was some kinda short yardage specialist.
As he almost certainly is not, then it should stand to reason that the RBs YPC should be that that suffers, tbh.
What?? Where did I suggest, even HINT he was a short yardage specialist....
And the SIM DOES work like that.....It works exactly like that...
Think about goal line defense... it's pretty effective at stopping certain runs, but it's vulnerable to others...
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
Domer
No, I didn't really say that you suggested that he was your short yardage specialist.
I only mean that your argument that he "sustains drives" and THAT Is why his YPC should suffer should only have any kinda validity if you were, in fact, suggesting that he was some kinda short yardage specialist.
As he almost certainly is not, then it should stand to reason that the RBs YPC should be that that suffers, tbh.
Malachorn
offline
offline
Originally posted by Domer
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
...and what I'm saying is that this suggests that the QB should maybe even have better days than the RBs, if they're facing the "right defenses," or something.
I've yet to ever see ANY evidence to suggest that the QB is a more effective runner than the RBs and your games certainly don't help to suggest otherwise, tbh.
Same thing.. some defense are good and controlling and stopping HB runs, while being vulnerable to QB runs... cut out the QB runs and go with just HB runs, and you lose that advantage.
...and what I'm saying is that this suggests that the QB should maybe even have better days than the RBs, if they're facing the "right defenses," or something.
I've yet to ever see ANY evidence to suggest that the QB is a more effective runner than the RBs and your games certainly don't help to suggest otherwise, tbh.
Last edited Feb 28, 2009 22:21:12
Malachorn
offline
offline
Sorry, I've actually thought of one other valid argument that you could try to make (that you've failed to):
The RB is dynamic enough in his ability to help run block that it allows running with the QB to become a good option.
I actually would have respected such a point and thought that THAT would suggest it's even worth looking into...
The RB is dynamic enough in his ability to help run block that it allows running with the QB to become a good option.
I actually would have respected such a point and thought that THAT would suggest it's even worth looking into...
Bukowski
offline
offline
Originally posted by sirallan
I'm going to make a blocking HB and rushing QB tomorrow.
Call me crazy, but I'm actually going to make a rushing HB tomorrow.
He's going to be a pioneer, tbh.
I'm going to make a blocking HB and rushing QB tomorrow.
Call me crazy, but I'm actually going to make a rushing HB tomorrow.
He's going to be a pioneer, tbh.
Malachorn
offline
offline
Originally posted by Nuge20
Level 36 compared to Level 49...no comparison tbh
That isn't even very significant when you realise that he has one broken tackle and it's not really even that his running skills are what we should be talking about here, tbh.
Seriously, if you want to talk about the validity of running QBs in this game then can we at least agree that the success of a "running QB" isn't so much about the ability of the QB to actually run (I think you pretty much have to concede that RBs are made to be better natural runners), but only about the way the plays in the game might make them run and how they might benefit from that?
Seriously, the QB would be about the least significant piece of the puzzle here, tbh.
Level 36 compared to Level 49...no comparison tbh
That isn't even very significant when you realise that he has one broken tackle and it's not really even that his running skills are what we should be talking about here, tbh.
Seriously, if you want to talk about the validity of running QBs in this game then can we at least agree that the success of a "running QB" isn't so much about the ability of the QB to actually run (I think you pretty much have to concede that RBs are made to be better natural runners), but only about the way the plays in the game might make them run and how they might benefit from that?
Seriously, the QB would be about the least significant piece of the puzzle here, tbh.
Nuge20
offline
offline
Originally posted by Malachorn
Originally posted by Nuge20
Level 36 compared to Level 49...no comparison tbh
That isn't even very significant when you realise that he has one broken tackle and it's not really even that his running skills are what we should be talking about here, tbh.
Seriously, if you want to talk about the validity of running QBs in this game then can we at least agree that the success of a "running QB" isn't so much about the ability of the QB to actually run (I think you pretty much have to concede that RBs are made to be better natural runners), but only about the way the plays in the game might make them run and how they might benefit from that?
Seriously, the QB would be about the least significant piece of the puzzle here, tbh.
...Falco is built extremely well, most rushing QBs are not as fast/agile as Falco and he can run as well as many HBs. That being said HBs do make better runners OVERALL but a well built rushing QB can be a great rusher in almost any system. COBRA KAI IS REVOLUTIONIZING THE GAME
Originally posted by Nuge20
Level 36 compared to Level 49...no comparison tbh
That isn't even very significant when you realise that he has one broken tackle and it's not really even that his running skills are what we should be talking about here, tbh.
Seriously, if you want to talk about the validity of running QBs in this game then can we at least agree that the success of a "running QB" isn't so much about the ability of the QB to actually run (I think you pretty much have to concede that RBs are made to be better natural runners), but only about the way the plays in the game might make them run and how they might benefit from that?
Seriously, the QB would be about the least significant piece of the puzzle here, tbh.
...Falco is built extremely well, most rushing QBs are not as fast/agile as Falco and he can run as well as many HBs. That being said HBs do make better runners OVERALL but a well built rushing QB can be a great rusher in almost any system. COBRA KAI IS REVOLUTIONIZING THE GAME
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
