4/14/2013 4:03 PM
Building on Johnnylus comments, I think the biggest areas of improvement in passing are 1) higher completion percentage, 2) yards per completion, and 3) more passing TDs.  I took a look at the top 25 QB's in D3 (after week 8) in Bava and compared results to the top 25 in D3 in real-life.  Here is how the two compare:

QB Completion Rate:  Bava 55.1% vs. Real Life D3 62.2%
Yards per Attempt:  Bava 4.9 yds vs. Real Life D3 7.3
Yards per Completion:  Bava 8.9 yds vs. Real Life D3 11.7
% TDs (vs Attempts):  Bava 2.0% vs. Real LIfe D3 6.2%
% INTs (vs Attempts):  Bava 3.0% vs. Real Life D3 2.9%
4/14/2013 11:37 PM
Is this including data from previous to the change? B/c that wouldn't exactly work. Also notable that some things may be skewed by gameplanning decisions of users as well. 
4/15/2013 6:51 PM

Noah, this is definitely not an apples to apples comparison as the results are season to date (which includes several games before the change).   It's just intended to be a benchmark. 

I think we're probably going to need to see 1-2 more seasons before we'll know how the update is working.  I know my Sr QB is pretty sorry, and I expect I'll see much better passing results once I get a couple of seasons of experience for my redshirt FR.  My guess is that many others may still be playing with subpar QBs they inherited and haven't been able to develop their own.  I also agree that lower yds per completion could be due to more conservative passing settings, as coaches are less apt to be more aggressive with below avg QBs.

4/15/2013 9:23 PM
Posted by slid64er on 4/12/2013 12:21:00 AM (view original):
After some preliminary testing, this is what I've found.  There appears to be little to no advantage in calling the play correctly or incorrectly (i.e. pass coverage vs pass play, run coverage vs pass play).  There also appears to be little to no advantage to calling depth correctly or incorrectly (i.e. short coverage vs deep pass, medium coverage vs medium pass).  There also appears to be little to no formation advantage or disadvantage  (i.e. shotgun vs 4-3, wishbone vs nickel).

Maybe these change when YAC is fixed, but it's tough to know without it.
Any time table on when you will look into this?
4/16/2013 10:54 AM
As I'm prone to do, I ran some testing on rushing results, comparing inside to outside, and comparing facing a balanced defense vs an all rush defense. The test parameters were as follows:

- 50 games run against myself (so 100 game test size)
- Offense is set to I-formation about 60%, trips 40%
- 90% run mix except for 3rd/4th and long, which is 0% run
- Defense is set for 5-2 75%, nickel 25%
- Run/pass is roughly balanced in first scenario
- In all rush defense, run D% is set to 100% except for 3rd/4th down
- In first two scenarios, blitz % was 12-20%, increasing with each down
- In all blitz scenario, blitz is set for 100% for all downs/distances
- Stats below are for RBs only - all QB rushes / sacks are excluded


I'll try posting a results chart below, not sure it will work, but here's my concern - outside runs are still significantly more successful, and against an all - rush defense and an all-rush blitz defense, the gap is even wider - outside runs are barely impacted by all rush D, while inside is shut down. As you'll see from the chart below:

1) against a balanced defense, an all outside attack averages almost 8 YPC, with almost half the games resulting in YPC > 8
2) against a balanced defense, an all inside attack averages just over 6 YPC, with only 1/4 of the games resulting in YPC > 7 (vs. 3/4 of games for all outside)

1) against an all rush defense, an all outside attack averages around 6.4 YPC, with 54% of the games resulting in > 6 YPC, and 2% below 4 YPC
2) against an all rush defense, an all inside attack averages under 4 YPC, with only 2% of games resulting in > 6 YPC, and 60% below 4 YPC

1) against an all rush, all blitz defense, an all outside attack averages over 6.5 YPC, with 62% of games resulting in > 6 YPC and 8% below 4 YPC
2) against an all rush, all blitz defense, an all inside attack averages right at 4 YPC, with 4% of games resulting in 6> YPC and 54% below 4 YPC

It seems that the rush focus of the defense shuts down inside attack much better than outside, which only exaggerates the already existing gap between outside rushing and inside rushing.

vs 5-2 / nickel, balanced defense, 10-20% blitz
Formation rbrush rb yds rb avg % < 100 yds % 101-200 yds % 201-300 yds % 301-400 yds % > 401 yds % < 3 YPC % 3-4 YPC % 4-5 YPC % 5-6 YPC % 6-7 YPC % 7-8 YPC % > 8 YPC
I/Trips 50/50 in-out 3532 24372     6.90 2% 22% 54% 10% 2% 2% 2% 14% 18% 20% 16% 28%
I/Trips All outside 4588 36422     7.94 0% 20% 22% 40% 36% 0% 0% 2% 8% 16% 26% 48%
I/Trips All Inside 4338 26704     6.16 0% 16% 56% 20% 8% 0% 6% 24% 26% 16% 12% 16%
vs 5-2 / nickel, all rush defense, 10-20% blitz
Formation rbrush rb yds rb avg % < 100 yds % 101-200 yds % 201-300 yds % 301-400 yds % > 401 yds % < 3 YPC % 3-4 YPC % 4-5 YPC % 5-6 YPC % 6-7 YPC % 7-8 YPC % > 8 YPC
I/Trips 50/50 in-out 3288 17574     5.34 10% 58% 28% 4% 0% 2% 20% 22% 30% 8% 8% 10%
I/Trips All outside 4246 27126     6.39 0% 16% 54% 24% 6% 0% 2% 14% 30% 24% 16% 14%
I/Trips All Inside 3980 15090     3.79 16% 62% 22% 0% 0% 24% 36% 28% 10% 2% 0% 0%
vs 5-2 / nickel, all rush defense, 100% blitz
Formation rbrush rb yds rb avg % < 100 yds % 101-200 yds % 201-300 yds % 301-400 yds % > 401 yds % < 3 YPC % 3-4 YPC % 4-5 YPC % 5-6 YPC % 6-7 YPC % 7-8 YPC % > 8 YPC
I/Trips 50/50 in-out 3346 16896     5.05 16% 54% 26% 4% 0% 8% 28% 18% 18% 12% 10% 6%
I/Trips All outside 4264 28008     6.57 0% 12% 46% 36% 6% 0% 8% 8% 22% 22% 24% 16%
I/Trips All Inside 4020 16186     4.03 14% 60% 26% 0% 0% 18% 36% 24% 18% 2% 2% 0%
of 2

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.