PNFL

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:29 pm**

Mitch-Chiefs wrote:During the upcoming off-season, we only make these changes:

- Delete unused plays from the play pool just as we did a few seasons ago

- Move the PPP deadline to Friday at mid-night EST

The last mindless purge was an epic disaster and I suggest we do NOT repeat that mess again.

We deleted many plays that should have been kept and we kept way way too many that should have been deleted. We had many plays that had to be saved from the purge.

The problems woith mindlessly deleting plays that were not called in games are these:

Plays added to game plans are very often not called in games. If a plays is USED in a game plan because it was good enough to make a game plan, it should not be purged.

Many plays that were used 1-2 times, performed very poorly, and never used again were kept simply because they were used once.

This is another example of a solution seeking a problem that doesn't exist. We are no where near reaching the limits on the number of plays in each folder. We instead should have a smart and targeted approach to delete the plays that are clearly poorly performing plays that no one wants.

Let's stop this practice of trying to fix that which is not broken.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:44 pm**

Dean-Atlanta wrote:MORE radical (but sensible) idea:

DELETE 2 unnecessary rules every time we add a new one. We have too many rules.

Identify (specify) an unnecessary rule!

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 12:49 pm**

Dean-Atlanta wrote:
Mitch-Chiefs wrote:During the upcoming off-season, we only make these changes:

- Delete unused plays from the play pool just as we did a few seasons ago

- Move the PPP deadline to Friday at mid-night EST

Not sure how mindless the purge was, but I looked at the PNFL Scout records for three seasons. If a play was not called for three seasons it was on the delete list. I am not sure how you determined that a 'good' play was deleted if it had not been called in three seasons!

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 1:40 pm**

Charlie-49ers wrote:
Dean-Atlanta wrote:MORE radical (but sensible) idea:

DELETE 2 unnecessary rules every time we add a new one. We have too many rules.

Identify (specify) an unnecessary rule!

I have stated in the past, at times, "this rule is not needed." But if yiou would like, I can go through all the rules and makes a list of the ones we could use to eliminate because they are not needed.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 1:43 pm**

Charlie-49ers wrote:
Dean-Atlanta wrote:
Mitch-Chiefs wrote:During the upcoming off-season, we only make these changes:

- Delete unused plays from the play pool just as we did a few seasons ago

- Move the PPP deadline to Friday at mid-night EST

Not sure how mindless the purge was, but I looked at the PNFL Scout records for three seasons. If a play was not called for three seasons it was on the delete list. I am not sure how you determined that a 'good' play was deleted if it had not been called in three seasons!

Again, used ansd called are not the same thing. RR defense got needlessly purged the worst. EVERY team loads 6 RR plays every week ands then CALLS them infrequently in theor profiles. As a results, RR plays that got USED but not called were purged.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:04 pm**

Dean, you make a reasonable point about run right defenses.
Historically, not a very actively called category.
So play purges would hit them hardest.
But, why don't teams use them?
What is it about that play type that make them less effective than RL-RM?

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:06 pm**

Btw, I don't know about Charlie, I am not feeling the need to purge this off season.
But, if we did, maybe we look at the largest quantities of the most used categories.
It might make more sense to be more precise.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:14 pm**

Rich-League Officer wrote:Dean, you make a reasonable point about run right defenses.
Historically, not a very actively called category.
So play purges would hit them hardest.
But, why don't teams use them?
What is it about that play type that make them less effective than RL-RM?

The requirement that 7 defenders have run-focused defense means covering only 4 receivers which creates deadly mis-matches and blown coverages against all the cobra and spider type plays where the QB checks 5 receivers. So teams call them close to the legal minimum in ther profiles. But RR defense has it's purse and is only further weakened by purging them, which leads to even less usage of them.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:16 pm**

Rich-League Officer wrote:Btw, I don't know about Charlie, I am not feeling the need to purge this off season.
But, if we did, maybe we look at the largest quantities of the most used categories.
It might make more sense to be more precise.

I think a targeted "purge" in those categories on offense and defense, where under-used and unused plays with poor stats are deleted, would make more sense.

Posted: **Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:56 pm**

RR defenses CAN be used, but at a cost and a gamble. You have to know when to call them or you can have a game like I did against the Jets lol.

PNFL

Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea

Re: Radical Idea