Search found 1201 matches
- Thu Mar 14, 2024 5:13 pm
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
- Replies: 13
- Views: 499
Re: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
Seeing the ratings and stats are interesting... The CBs definitely had much lower ACT and POT ratings. That would help increase QBRs. A few things I takeaway from these numbers: - Changing our QB ratings alone will not drastically impact QB performance - The increased CB SP, AC and AG ACT ratings li...
- Wed Mar 13, 2024 5:06 pm
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
- Replies: 13
- Views: 499
Re: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
No aST over 94? Maybe we are placing too much emphasis on 95 or 96 ST. IN clearly doesn't matter that much like I have been saying. Young, Elway and Bledsoe with those high INs still had low QBRs? Maybe EN mattered more? or AG? or even HA? @Steve One thing to keep in mind is the ratings CBs, partic...
- Wed Mar 13, 2024 5:04 pm
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
- Replies: 13
- Views: 499
Re: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
No aST over 94? Maybe we are placing too much emphasis on 95 or 96 ST. IN clearly doesn't matter that much like I have been saying. Young, Elway and Bledsoe with those high INs still had low QBRs? Maybe EN mattered more? or AG? or even HA? Or coaching @Justin It's never the coaches fault. Ha!
- Wed Mar 13, 2024 1:58 pm
- Forum: General
- Topic: Fake Proposal Vote
- Replies: 9
- Views: 456
Re: Fake Proposal Vote
Shawn-Giants wrote:I vote No because you can already Fake using stop and waits, no need to utilize the fake logic, WR's with Max AG already leave DB's holding their tools by nature, no real need to utilize logic that will allow low AG WR's to Fake.
#DONTBEATOOL
- Wed Mar 13, 2024 10:45 am
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
- Replies: 13
- Views: 499
Re: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
Disagree. We did extensive testing to get INT's in line without overly hurting % percentage. No reason to revisit since we did the deep study in my opinion. People never consider the second order of effects. Lets also stop trying to change rules when some need to just learn to win in the construct ...
- Wed Mar 13, 2024 4:30 am
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: PNFL Ratings - We agree on
- Replies: 13
- Views: 499
PNFL Ratings - We agree on
For those not on the group chat, yesterday we were discussing the pass short/pass medium issue. Dean made a great point saying we need to go back to the original PNFL ratings when QBs had a MAX of 99 IN and 90 DI. I agree, we should consider going back to the original PNFL ratings scale in 1998. Her...
- Tue Mar 12, 2024 3:12 pm
- Forum: General
- Topic: Rule Opinion re:Pass Short/Medium
- Replies: 23
- Views: 670
Re: Rule Opinion re:Pass Short/Medium
10 to 20... Too many current PM plays have YPC under 10 yards with 60%+ comp%. That's a short pass... Spend some time in play editor and you will see this doesn't work. Completion percentages on PM plays will be rubbish. How does the play editor have anything to do with plays gaining less than 10 y...
- Tue Mar 12, 2024 11:17 am
- Forum: General
- Topic: Rule Opinion re:Throw a Fake
- Replies: 10
- Views: 431
Re: Rule Opinion re:Throw a Fake
I'll abstain...
However, everyone who votes for the "in-season" test is cool with it... until they see their team give up a TD because the defense froze during the play.
However, everyone who votes for the "in-season" test is cool with it... until they see their team give up a TD because the defense froze during the play.
- Tue Mar 12, 2024 11:13 am
- Forum: General
- Topic: Rule Opinion re:Pass Short/Medium
- Replies: 23
- Views: 670
Re: Rule Opinion re:Pass Short/Medium
10 to 20...
Too many current PM plays have YPC under 10 yards with 60%+ comp%. That's a short pass...
Too many current PM plays have YPC under 10 yards with 60%+ comp%. That's a short pass...
- Sun Mar 10, 2024 12:01 pm
- Forum: Trash Talk
- Topic: Top 5 Players by Position
- Replies: 5
- Views: 337
Re: Top 5 Players by Position
To add on to that, here is a list of the teams and the # of 99% players on each team for 2044. Regardless of age/position, ignoring how many high quality depth you may have. Just tells you which teams have the most high level players. Chicago 36 (Playoffs) Houston 27 (Playoffs) Washington 26 (Playo...