Bump & Run Revisited [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

Daimyo

05-31-2006, 04:42 PM

There are several people who's FOF opinions I value quite highly who run bump and run 100% of the time in online leagues. I always pick one of the coverages based on my player's ratings and run that 100% of the time and I haven't ever suffered noticably for doing so. As far as I'm concerned the coverages are completely interchangable

cthomer5000

06-01-2006, 08:38 AM

It is the bomb.

Samdari

06-01-2006, 03:56 PM

I always pick one of the coverages based on my player's ratings and run that 100% of the time and I haven't ever suffered noticably for doing so.

How would you know if you had suffered noticeably?

Not trying to single you out, but these multiple anecdotal declarations frankly tell us nothing.

Corey has had great success in IHOF using BnR. But, he has had great players on both sides of the ball for the entirety of that run. Does that make BnR the bomb? Or might he have won more titles by going after players with other skills and playing them? We'll simply never know.

Vinatieri for Prez

06-02-2006, 12:17 AM

Um, I was asking about bump & run, not this BnR stuff. What is that anyway, a railroad?

Daimyo

06-02-2006, 10:56 AM

How would you know if you had suffered noticeably?

Not trying to single you out, but these multiple anecdotal declarations frankly tell us nothing.
I'm pretty sure that's why I said "suffered noticeably" and not just "suffered" or "experienced a significantly negative result." I think by definition "suffered noticeably" means "I have not suffered in such a way to be noticeable" and not "I'm 100% sure, with supporting evidence available, that I have not suffered."

Besides, its not like I would share the results anyway if I did run the trials required to determine how it worked....

Subby

06-02-2006, 11:01 AM

There are other reasons why bump and run is the best pass defense to run in MP, but I'm not sharing it with you yahoos. Maybe that do-gooder quiksand will wander in and contribute.

:)

QuikSand

06-02-2006, 11:17 AM

Very unlikely. He's a prick.

Celeval

06-02-2006, 11:21 AM

There are other reasons why bump and run is the best pass defense to run in MP, but I'm not sharing it with you yahoos. Maybe that do-gooder quiksand will wander in and contribute.

:)

The two interesting things about BnR that are different than Man and Zone - aside from any actual play results, given players with the same quality - is around linebackers and potential. Specifically, LBs seem to be generally better at BnR almost across the board than any other coverage type; therefore, it's easier to find quality underneath coverage. Secondly, generally BnR coverage is highly developed in young players. So a just-drafted CB rated 36/75 in zone, 38/84 in man may end up being 79/79 in BnR - so he can step in right away in that type of role.

With that in mind, it's easier to find quality fillins for a pure BnR scheme. ;)

albionmoonlight

06-02-2006, 02:28 PM

wade moore

06-05-2006, 02:27 PM

I have had a lot of success running a high blitz, high BnR scheme in the past.

This year in IHOF, however, my defense is the suckiest suck that ever sucked. So there is more to it than simply picking the right coverage. You also need to pick the right players (and not trade them all for wide receivers).

Also worth considering that the highly talented Williamsburg defense is 100% bump and run, and you guys have seen first hand just how awesome it is...

MIJB#19

06-05-2006, 04:15 PM

Bump and run. That's so pre-2006... :P

Kodos

06-06-2006, 06:58 PM

We run bump and run, and our pass defense is last in the league. Of course, our corners are the suck.

http://www.fof-ihof.com/season/teamleaders.php?type=B&cat=2&year=2011&stat=10

QuikSand

06-06-2006, 07:14 PM

We run bump and run, and our pass defense is last in the league. Of course, our corners are the suck.

http://www.fof-ihof.com/season/teamleaders.php?type=B&cat=2&year=2011&stat=10

Gross stats are pretty weak measures of anything. Teams throw more times against you than nearly anyone.

In PD% (the stat that combines most of the things that a team does in pass coverage) Rochester rates mid-pack.

http://www.fof-ihof.com/season/teamleaders.php?type=B&cat=2&year=2011&stat=21

Even in yards per attempt, you're allowing a pretty average 7.33 yards, ranking you 19th. You're hardly the worst pass defense in the league. (That would be Anaheim, I reckon)

wade moore

06-06-2006, 07:15 PM

You just wanted to point out who is #1 in that stat.

wade moore

06-06-2006, 07:17 PM

And actually, I'm not a huge fan of the PDPct. I like the "Catches Allowed %" better, but VPI doesn't have that for teams.

QuikSand

06-06-2006, 07:23 PM

You just wanted to point out who is #1 in that stat.

This season, we don't have much to cling to.

Though, admittedly, out 19-17 loss to Conyers is looking better and better in retrospect.

QuikSand

06-06-2006, 07:24 PM

I like the "Catches Allowed %" better, but VPI doesn't have that for teams.

I'm at a loss... what stat are you talking about here? Opposing team's completion percentage? Rochester is slightly better than average there, too.

And Chesapeake is again #1.

wade moore

06-06-2006, 08:35 PM

I'm at a loss... what stat are you talking about here? Opposing team's completion percentage? Rochester is slightly better than average there, too.

And Chesapeake is again #1.

I guess that is what it is... It's a stat I'm accustomed to looking at for players more-so than teams.

QuikSand

06-06-2006, 08:41 PM

FOF tracks the number of catches allowed by each player... but I don't see any meaningful way to turn that into a team stat that means very much (other than completion %). *shurg*

Kodos

06-06-2006, 08:57 PM

I actually like B'n'R. My corners are all rated in the 30s, if that. But last year, with a similarly crappy-rated secondary, our pass defense was much improved over the days where we were zone and had very good corners. I think our woes this year are mostly because of our crappy corners, and some injury problems with our better-rated safeties.

Samdari

06-07-2006, 07:08 AM

I guess that is what it is... It's a stat I'm accustomed to looking at for players more-so than teams.

How do you even do that. Don't we only know how many passes caught each defender allowed, not how many were intended for his reciever?

Celeval

06-07-2006, 01:01 PM

How do you even do that. Don't we only know how many passes caught each defender allowed, not how many were intended for his reciever?

Depends if you're willing to make the jump that the only effect a defender has are passes defensed and interceptions - you can make a percentage from that.

Although he may be talking about VPI's Pass Defensed Rate stat on the website (not in-game) - which is essentially Passes Defended / Pass Plays.

I'd prefer something like (Passes Defended + Interceptions) / (Passes Defended + Interceptions + Catches Allowed) as a measured percentage, though.

Samdari

06-07-2006, 01:28 PM

Depends if you're willing to make the jump that the only effect a defender has are passes defensed and interceptions - you can make a percentage from that.

Although he may be talking about VPI's Pass Defensed Rate stat on the website (not in-game) - which is essentially Passes Defended / Pass Plays.

I'd prefer something like (Passes Defended + Interceptions) / (Passes Defended + Interceptions + Catches Allowed) as a measured percentage, though.

See, I was thinking that the best measure of a DB would be the one that had the fewest passes even thrown their way - i.e. their guy never got open, a great cover corner. That would be a good way to evaluate NFL QBs. Does the same thing hold in FOF? How would you compare CBs to LBs to FSs to SSs?

I would think that a defender's coverage skills in the chosen coverage compared to a reciever's skills has to have some effect on who the QB decides to throw to, even if my above definition is a poor measure of DB skill. I am not only unwilling to condede tha the only effect a defender has is INTs and PD, I would argue strongly against the idea.

QuikSand

06-07-2006, 01:31 PM

I'd prefer something like (Passes Defended + Interceptions) / (Passes Defended + Interceptions + Catches Allowed) as a measured percentage, though.

That sounds like it would be a useful stat. Probably not the whole picture, but pretty useful.

QuikSand

06-07-2006, 01:32 PM

By the way, even though this started out a a joke, this BNR thread is much better than the earlier one. Odd, that.

QuikSand

06-07-2006, 01:32 PM

By the way, even though this started out as a joke, this BNR thread is much better than the earlier one. Odd, that.

QuikSand

06-07-2006, 01:33 PM

whoa

QuikSand

06-07-2006, 01:34 PM

I've discovered the Fountain of JeeberD!

Vinatieri for Prez

06-07-2006, 08:33 PM

I started a joke, that started the whole word laughing . . . but what I didn't see . . . .

jamesUMD

06-07-2006, 11:40 PM

I am starting to think that Bump and Run is only good in moderation. In the Wigfl this year I started the year running about 50% Bump and Run and 50% zone (no man coverage at all). In the weeks preceding my Bye my defense gave up 3, 20, 23, 24, 38, 24, 39, and 55 points respectively.

Obviously I saw a reason to re-tool my defense after my 55-45 loss so I reduced my Bump and Run for Week 10 and raised my zone coverage. It took a couple weeks of tweaking but after the Bye with the reduced Bump and Run I gave up 17, 30, 27, 10, 10, 14, 17, 16, 15 (Divisional playoffs), 16 (Conference championship), and 30 (Super Bowl, which I won 31-30).

This was my fist MP championship, and I absolutely saw a difference in the yardage and points my defense gave up. I know that it's a microcosm and I didn't do any lengthy studies.

Kodos

06-08-2006, 09:06 AM

One game, I upped my man (or perhaps it was my bump and run or zone) coverage a bit, and we won, 27-13, rather than the usuual 27-14. This means something.

MIJB#19

06-08-2006, 10:48 AM

One game, I upped my man (or perhaps it was my bump and run or zone) coverage a bit, and we won, 27-13, rather than the usuual 27-14. This means something.Yeah, you go ahead and try that in Futility Bowl VIII. :rolleyes:

jamesUMD

06-08-2006, 10:51 AM

One game, I upped my man (or perhaps it was my bump and run or zone) coverage a bit, and we won, 27-13, rather than the usuual 27-14. This means something.

I'm assuming that was a dig at my post. Sorry it bothered you like that.

I personally thought that it was significant, given that the 8 games preceding my Bye, my team gave up an average of 28.25 points per game. After the Bye I made changes reducing my Bump and Run from about 50% down to about 10%, my points per game went down to 18.36. I thought 10 points a game was a fairly large swing.