2 DL Defenses ???

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I have always been in the favor of allowing 2-DL in more categories and Jerry breaks it down very well. It really comes down how do we want to represent these hybrid lb/DE. I think we need to becareful just thinking of them as smaller DE. LT would have been one and a lot of the outside LBs in the 3-4 defenses were this guy for years before the smaller DEs started to go to a 2 point stance. My personal preference on this issue has always been more focus on number of people attack the LOS and number of people in pass coverage determining what category a play was in. Jerry mentions nickel a lot but nickel is becoming more of the base defense in current NFL. That is in part to Safeties drifting up to support the run and Nickel backs being more a CB/S hybrid.

I think we should remove the DL restrictions and instead put defending the line and players in Pass coverage restrictions/requirements on plays. I think this would be more realistic. I don't think we should ever have 9 players in coverage. For what I have seen 9 players in coverage isn't realistic.

Barry Odom's defenses, at least when he was at Arkansas, used a lot of drop 8 and rush 3. I think that is very realistic and I think we can go to that and remove all limitations for these plays on 3rd and 4th down as a start. While we see how that goes, we can discuss how we want to handle representing "EDGE" type defenders.

I don't think we need to limit ourselves to just removing the limitations on what position can be considered covering the LOS, but I do think whatever we decide has to be easy for Charlie to look at when reviewing a play. Maybe we get our "experts" together and they propose some ratings to present to Charlie and Rich and we can look at adding a few to the next draft. Maybe 2-3 DE, LB, and S to start. Get these guys into the league and see how it works out. So for this year, I say we start small.

Three DE's with run focus
Remove limitations on 3rd and 4th downs

Next offseason we can
add those recruits to the draft pool
Remove the DE restriction and just say three run focused defenders with one being a DL.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

I disagree with changing the 4 DBs to 5 DBs for the running categories. That's what the passing categories are for. You can basically call any category at any time and are required to call 3 categories when 5 min or over. If you want to use 5DBs, you already can.

I think it's important we try to live up to the VPNFL vision as much as we can. If we update our current rules to what I suggested, those revisions ensure we truly align to the original VPNFL vision for the categories. They also move us past the 'defend the LOS' concern in an effective and easy to check way.

I'm also in favor of eliminating the 33%/50% 2DL restriction. We lost Rob Boysen as a coach permanently because of this restriction. He emphasized a full 2DL defense that took him to the Super Bowl (lost to Jerry). It's also what he used in E.A. Galat's league before he ever joined the XFBS and PNFL.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

I'd like to see us move from 33% to 50% this season.

If everything is fixed, I don't see a need to stop at 50% just remove the limitations entirely. If we need limitations maybe limit to 3rd and 4th down.

The only way we would be able to limit their use to 3rd and 4th down is if we disallow the use of PS and PM on 1st and 2nd. I don't think anyone would be open to that. I prefer to eliminate the % requirement entirely without any restriction on category usage beyond what we already have.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Just for the record to clarify what I mean by attacking the LOS. I believe a "2 DL" play in PS/PM/PL should have 3 people attacking the LOS. By that, I mean for other than a DL player either run defense or blitz is called inside the numbers, which is essentially the equivalent of DL pass rush and run rush. I do not believe "2 DL" plays should have 9 players in read or pass defense except for pass raz where a true 2 DL play should be allowed in full.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

IF the league wishes to do so, we could make the R&S defenses all 2 DL and anything that is truly a 3 man rush is moved to the normal categories. Then adjust the rules to where R&S categories are only allowed for Pass Razzle Dazzle situations.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

Just for the record to clarify what I mean by attacking the LOS. I believe a "2 DL" play in PS/PM/PL should have 3 people attacking the LOS. By that, I mean for other than a DL player either run defense or blitz is called inside the numbers, which is essentially the equivalent of DL pass rush and run rush. I do not believe "2 DL" plays should have 9 players in read or pass defense except for pass raz where a true 2 DL play should be allowed in full.

You and Charlie seem to be really stuck on the 3 defenders attacking the LOS requirement for 2DL defenses.

I've amended my proposed VPNFL-aligned rule changes to accommodate:

Definition of "defending/attacking the LOS"
Any logic that initially focuses the player on defending the LOS instead of defending a receiver or any part of the field beyond 5 yards from the LOS; examples of defending the LOS include:
- any reads within 5 yards of the LOS,
- any 'stop and wait' logic between the LOS and 5 yards from the LOS that is not followed by M2M pass defense logic,
- any 'move to' logic that moves the defender in position to defend the zone between the LOS and 5 yards from the LOS,
- any 'move to' or zone logic that moves the defender across the LOS,
- any run rush logic
- key on QB
- any M2M player defending the backfield if he is between the LOS and 5 yards from the LOS,
- blitz and pass rush (note: doesn't count on GLR, RRD, RR, RM)

VPNFL-aligned defensive play design rules:
GLR = 8 or more players must defend the LOS (no more than two can be outside the field numbers); no defender deeper than 10 yards from LOS
RR = 8 or more players must defend the LOS (blitz and pass rush does not count); no more than 4 DBs allowed
RM = exactly 7 players (no more no less) must defend the LOS (blitz and pass rush does not count); no more than 4 DBs allowed
RL = no more than 6 players can defend the LOS; no more than 4 DBs allowed
RRD = similar to RR plays except only 3 DBs allowed; 4 LBs required
GLP = 3 or more players must defend the LOS (no more than two LOS defenders can be outside the field numbers); no defender deeper than 10 yards from LOS
PS = no more than 5 players can defend the LOS, but at least 3 must defend the LOS; 5 or more DBs required
PM = no more than 4 players can defend the LOS, but at least 3 must defend the LOS; 5 or more DBs required
PL = no more than 4 players can defend the LOS, but at least 3 must defend the LOS; 6 or more DBs required
PRD = no more than 3 players can defend the LOS, but at least 2 must defend the LOS; 6 or more DBs required

By continuing to require 3 defenders to attack the LOS for all 2DL plays, we still will have the problem of needing to fix or recategorize 99% of the existing 2DL plays in PS, PM, and PL if we implement these rules. Problem still not solved.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Not stuck, but it is 100% actual NFL play and just laughing how every little "rule" discussion grows exponentially every time.

I have enough to sort out since I do not sim like crazy and we just changed a 100 or so plays right before the 1st week and nothing is actually broken in the league other than old PPP's now. Need to get into the play editor this weekend and figure out what I can do about it.

[Steve-Buffalo Bills]

So true. Such a mess now. At this stage I'm mainly just going to see how it goes and monitor what works during the season. If any of the original plays I resaved to new categories pop up as effective in 2046, I'll probably use them in their new category. Considering we must have 3 categories, does it really matter if I call a play that used to be RM and now is RL?

[Charlie-49ers]

OK, OK, OK! Regardless of any complaints, we are NOT going back and universally changing any more groups of plays. Whatever is there in the pool is grandfathered. This includes all 2-DL defenses, whether two or three guys covering the LOS. If we truly identify an anomalous play, we will fix it. I will make an extra effort to ensure compliance with existing rules for new Custom plays.

Second, I am convinced that 2-DL defenses are commonly used in the NFL. Our current rules allow for no more than 33% 2-DL defenses in PS and PM, and no more than 50% 2-DL defenses in PL and PRD. If the NFL allows so many 2-DL defenses, should we up the 33% for PS and PM to 50%, or are we good with the current rule?

[Jerry-Redskins]

Mitch wants 50%.

I'm fine with where it is, but do not care either way. I see no reason to up it. Just didn't think they should be gone.