Situational RBs.

[MRL17]

So I've been thinking lately about the RB depth chart. Starting and backup RBs are pretty self explanatory, but getting the back on the field that I want in the other 3 situations seems to be harder than it looks.

So my question is: How do you define 3rd and short, passing down, and obvious passing down?

I'm thinking it's something like this:

3rd and short: 3rd down and 3 or less yards to go

Passing down: 2nd, 3rd, or 4th down and 8+ to go

Obvious Passing Down: Any down and 11+ to go.

But, like I said, I'm having trouble getting the backs I want on the field, so I must be wrong on these somewhere.

[Mike D]

Hazarding a guess, those situationals in the GP are still just guidelines. Remember that there are endurance splits and playing time that will be factored in as well. I don't think FOF has a single instance (outside of the QB) where you can actually guarantee a player is on the field for any particular situation.

[MRL17]

Right, but let's just say for the sake of argument that we're dealing with high endurance backs and 100% play time.

[Mike D]

Originally Posted by MRL17

Right, but let's just say for the sake of argument that we're dealing with high endurance backs and 100% play time.

I get what you are saying, but you are asking for absolutes that I don't believe exist.

If you have a GP that generates/averages 30 rushes and your RB1 only gets 20 of those, it will seem as if setting your playing time to 100% only gets RB1 20 carries (or 66%...not 100%). Lower him to 75% and you just dropped him to 15 carries (50%!). Obviously, it's easy to look at that and ask, "How does 75%=50%?"

100% playing time probably means something closer to "100% of the playing opportunities FOF and your GP are going to afford this dude" rather than "100% of all running plays".

[MRL17]

The problem here is not "I can't get guy X enough carries."

My problem is that "it's third and 2 and the wrong back is in" or "it's second and forever, why isn't my passing down back in there?"

[Mike D]

I just threw that out there since it's easier to explain once that's established. Now, if it's 3rd and 2 and the wrong back is ALWAYS in or it's second and forever and your passing back is NEVER in, then yeah, that would indicate a problem.

[MRL17]

I guess it might be easier to talk about by giving the actual situation that I'm seeing...

I have a great starting RB who in almost all situations I want him to be in and his playing time is set for 100%. But I also have a guy who is high elusiveness, high third downs, good receiving skills who I have set to start in all 3 situational roles. The thing that I'm seeing is, Mr. Situational is getting most of his carries on 1st and 2nd down, and My every-down guy is getting most of the carries that I would expect the situational guy to be getting.

So, I wondered if these role slots mean something different than I think they do, or if it's just impossible to micromanage at that level.

[aston217]

Mike, my understanding of "near certain pass" is when the gameplan specifies ___ % running or less. I honestly cannot remember where I got that idea.

In the OSFL, my depth chart for PRE1 was as follows for the only three active RBs:

RB1: Giang
RB2: Washington
3rd and short: Green
Passing: Green
Near Certain Pass: Washington

Green's runs are the ones to look at, as he doesn't appear on the 2-deep:
3-2
3-5
3-8
3-1
3-9
3-9

I don't think I had any exceptionally near-certain pass situations this game. I'm not sure what it takes to hit that %. I assume you're at least in a 10-29% run situation, although it's possible you have to be in a 0-9% run situation for that to happen.

[Jughead Spock]

Originally Posted by aston217

Mike, my understanding of "near certain pass" is when the gameplan specifies ___ % running or less. I honestly cannot remember where I got that idea.

Is it not the percentages listed in the formation use screens?

Passing situation - run percentage from 10-29%
Extreme passing situation - run percentage from 0-9%

So I would assume 'near certain pass' = extreme passing situation.

To the original question, I don't know where the cutoff is, but I would assume 3rd & short is 1, 2 or 3 yards, based on the layout of the play selection chart.

Passing down & obvious passing down would be determined by your gameplan, adjusted for situation and field position.

[QuikSand]

I think if you really want to micromanage RB roles, you have to get deep into managing formations (and have the QB to pull it off).

[TheFoosballWizard]

I'm running specialty backs in a league this year. My third and short guy doesn't seem to get any carries unless it's 1 or 2 yards to go. Haven't had any complaints about when my "passing down guy" is put in, either.

3rd and Short: Ronnie Schanding
Passing Down: D. Torres
Obvious Passing: D. Torres

Must be the way I have my formations/tendencies set up.

theFOFL.com : Team Summary

[Kozure]

Just a guess here, but maybe the more you run the ball, the likelihood increases that a running back reaches his "touches" threshold. When that happens, the AI reacts unexpectedly not always picking the running back next on the depth chart.

I haven't put much thought into this. But this could explain why a running back that isn't on my depth chart sometimes gets touches. And I'm sure that if this happens the substitute running back is, just by chance, the backup in the depth chart (instead of someone off the depth chart), so no one pays much attention.

[MRL17]

Before this gets too convoluted, what I'm essentially asking here is: What does the game consider a passing down?

Is it when your game plan is using percentages that fall in the "passing" range OR is it based on down and distance?

Third and short is pretty self-explanatory, so I'm really interested in passing downs so I know when to expect my passing down back to be on the field

[aston217]

My OSFL gameplan for our 2nd preseason game had H.Woods as "3rd & short", and nowhere else. His two runs came on 3rd & 1 on the OPP01, and 1st & 2 from the OPP02.

Worth noting that we had two 3rd & 3 runs on our first drive, both by RB1 on the depth chart (N.Washington). He was also in for a carry on a 2nd & 2. Our #2 RB saw a carry on 2nd & 1.

From this I'm surmising that 3rd and short refers to 3rd & 1, 3rd & 2, and "Goal-Line" situations. Probably also 4th & 1-2. "__" & 3 seems to be a cutoff there.

Sorry, nothing here about what's a passing down, although from the results in Game 1 I'd say it starts at least at 3rd & 5, if not earlier. For what it's worth, also, from Game 1 there was a 2nd & 15 carry that was taken by my RB1. Which seems to rule out 2nd & 15 as a "passing down."

Have to say it seems, small sample and everything, to be fairly straightforward.