The RUN LEFT defense category

[Steve-San Diego]

Its play design rule makes it sound like a pseudo Pass Short play. The main difference is Pass Short allows 2-DL and 7 DBs while Run Left can't have more than 6 DBs and can't be a 2-DL play. Run Left requires at least 5 Players to execute RUN FOCUSED defense while Pass Short requires at least 5 Players to execute PASS FOCUSED defense. You can literally create a 3DL play with 6 DBs that has 5 players executing RUN FOCUSED defense and 6 players executing PASS FOCUSED defense and you could save it as either PASS SHORT OR RUN LEFT.

What do you consider this category to be? How do you use it?

I'm not stirring up the pot here or trying to get a rule change of any kind. I'm just curious what you guys think about Run Left.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

RL Defense min standards:

Under 5 yards per carry
and
Under 6 yards per completion

[Dean-Atlanta]

The requirement of using 3 defensive categories has likely caused all of us to re-examine which play cateogries to use in which situations to minimize using plays that can be a liability in certain situations. Even if you are using a 10-1-1 play call situation, emphasizing the 10 (such as PM on 3rd and 6-10) you still see the 1 categories get called in games.

From scouting other teams, I see a LOT of RL defense being used on 1st and 2nd down situations. It is very commonly used I think as balanced defense on downs where the offense can be expected to run the ball or throw a pass.

An equally interesting question could be asked about how teams use RM defense. Or even RR.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I view the run left and run middle as more of a base defense category. Where pass short, medium and long are closer to sub packages like a nickel, dime, etc that are more pass focused, and Run Right/Razzle Dazzle Run as all out blitzes run stuffing focused plays.

[Jerry-Redskins]

The PNFL is more pass heavy. The RL category has plays that do a great job while containing the run. Makes it a balanced D to call. The best PM plays can struggle against inside runs. RL is better there.

[Steve-San Diego]

I think similarly to Matt and Jerry about RL because I see them as PASS BALANCED - particularly because they at least try to defend the run compared to PM. But I still see PS as basically a RL play that can have 2-DL formations.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I think similarly to Matt and Jerry about RL because I see them as PASS BALANCED - particularly because they at least try to defend the run compared to PM. But I still see PS as basically a RL play that can have 2-DL formations.

Maybe more PS plays can be designed with this in mind, balanced coverage of passing but also adequate run coverage using safeties and/or LBs. This would be useful considering the new rule allowing 50 percent use of 2-DL plays in PS and PM. Similarly designed PM defenses would work this way to some extent too but I think PM requires six in pass coverage or pass-focused defense.

[Jerry-Redskins]

In reality PS should focus on 3rd 3-5 in my opinion. That is the situation it was meant to be designed to cover. RL was always meant to be more balanced in the PNFL.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

In reality PS should focus on 3rd 3-5 in my opinion. That is the situation it was meant to be designed to cover. RL was always meant to be more balanced in the PNFL.

Based on original VPNFL guidelines, the biggest differemce between the 2 play types is personell. That was the whole point of the play categories. It was to simulate the game in a way that the offensive personell and defensive personell matched up properly on each play since no audibles are allowed. Thats also why there were hard play type restrictions for specific situations.

[Steve-San Diego]

In reality PS should focus on 3rd 3-5 in my opinion. That is the situation it was meant to be designed to cover. RL was always meant to be more balanced in the PNFL.

Agreed. We can't simply take existing RL plays and make 2DL versions of them in PS. As Mitch said, RL plays can typically average around 5 yards. This immediately disqualifies many of them from being converted into PS for 3rd 3-5 situations. But I think with all the data we have all collected, I'm sure we can find some of the best RL plays (and maybe even RM plays) that can be converted into 2DL versions. We'd basically convert a DL into an LB because PS 2DL requires 3 LBs. Will the play be as effective - maybe, maybe not?