Offensive Run Plays on Various Downs

[Donovon-Steelers]

Thanks for explaining guys. RM plays were actually what confused me most when I joined the league - they're so varied and can encompass anything that I don't even game plan for them.

Recategorizing all RL to be off-tackle, RM be true middle and RR be sweeps, but then allowing any type @ any time would be so much better to control for my OCD brain instead of the current system which is more restrictive on down/dist and too random imo.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I'm' not in favor of that due to limitations within the game. If you split them up like that, and want a chance to call all three you can't pass on 1st and 10. If we decide to split runs up like that, I would ask that we also allow Run Random to allow us return to the original RM combined call.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

My thoughts on this matter.

I would be in favor of allowing RR/RL/RM on 1st an 10 if and only if:

1) the goal of this change is to a) enable only 100% runs to be called on 1st down [10RM 1PML 1PSL doesn't guarantee only runs will be called, so I see the argument for this] b) enable coaches to choose a category to emphasize a style via the category [RM off tackle vs RR sweep vs RL pitches etc.]
2) the requirement in game plans would need to be at least 5 per category which matches the other required categories [if we require 5 PML & 5 PSL, we must require 5 RR, 5 RM, 5 RL to be consistent]
3) if we reduce the requirement from 10 to 5 (or 6) for RM, then only 1 QB keeper play is allowed [this ensures the rule change doesn't increase the number of QB keepers called in a game]
4) only 1 QB keeper play can be used in RL and RR going forward as well [same reason as #3]

To me, this change makes sense ONLY if the goal is to achieve #1. Although some say there are dupes of run plays across all three categories, this just means it's easy for a coach to use the categories to emphasize style. Saying the categories have the same plays only aids the argument for doing this change.

My counter to all of this is if the goal is to make it so only 100% runs are called on 1st down or emphasize a style of run via category used, what if you want to only call passes 100% or emphasize a style based on pass category? We can't do that right now on 1st and 2nd. If we go this route with the runs, shouldn't we open things up similarly with the pass? One could argue that PML, PMM, and PMR should all be allowed on any down so coaches could go 100% pass or use the categories to emphasize emphasize types of passes used in certain situations. If we ever go this far, all offensive categories must have 5 plays except GP & GR have only 2. Yes, this means I think PRD and PLR should have 5. Maybe one thing at a time though works best here. Pilot doing this change with the runs to see the impact before opening things up for the pass similarly.

The main benefits I see is that this provides more control over what is called and when, it will reduce accidental miscalls caused by profile issues, and it reduces the absurd requirement of 10 RMs which has been too excessive for too long.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

To those saying the coaches who want this are ones who haven't won a title yet, my question to you is, what are you afraid of? Do you think this will give them an edge over you? Do you think this forces you to edit your current dominating system too much and reinvent your approach to the game too much?

As a coach who has won a title, I would personally embrace this as a new challenge that makes things interesting. It would make me want to prove I can win another title with this new flexible approach in place. Coaches like Thomas, Justin and Jerry have mastered this game with the current rules. Aren't you guys getting bored of continuously destroying everyone? I know two of you are basically on automode this season. Wouldn't a change like this make things a little more interesting for you? To me changes like this, if done right, just make the game more interesting and compelling enough to stay longer. I don't see it as a threat to my system and approach, but as a new challenge that makes me a better coach.

[Justin-Chicago]

In theory, this would enhance the running game and emulate the NFL.

I believe a ratings adjustment, rather than a rules adjustment, is a better way to accomplish this. Could start very minor, like adding one point to every RB AG in the coming offseason.

[Dean-Atlanta]

In theory, this would enhance the running game and emulate the NFL.

I believe a ratings adjustment, rather than a rules adjustment, is a better way to accomplish this. Could start very minor, like adding one point to every RB AG in the coming offseason.

We did that with HBs in the PCFL. We added a few points in AC and Ag to make them run better, and a few points HA so they fumble less often. As a result we got these rushing stats... keep in mind this is 12 regular season games playoffs for some of the teams:

https://pcfl.site/s/season.html#I2

[Jerry-Redskins]

Based on the most recent discussions, I again see people trying to migrate rules to the old leagues and try to get more control from commish sim. There is a reason you are here and they are gone. These are all moves away from the founding principles of the PNFL and what makes it a million times harder and better than anything else that has existed in FBPRO. They would also be completely open to needing less and less plays in a given week as well as making them closed. Not a good idea in my opinion. I do not want to play like in old leagues; "Let me call the one play all game 50 times."

[Jerry-Redskins]

BTW. There is no fear. I know for sure I could destroy everyone if we play like the old leagues. I won endlessly before the PNFL. That is boring. Hence why finding the PNFL was so awesome. It is/was always the best and most competitive form of play which more thought in it. It takes nothing to find a way to beat someone with more limited and exclusive plays.

[Dean-Atlanta]

Based on the most recent discussions, I again see people trying to migrate rules to the old leagues and try to get more control from commish sim. There is a reason you are here and they are gone. These are all moves away from the founding principles of the PNFL and what makes it a million times harder and better than anything else that has existed in FBPRO. They would also be completely open to needing less and less plays in a given week as well as making them closed. Not a good idea in my opinion. I do not want to play like in old leagues; "Let me call the one play all game 50 times."

FAKE NEWS. NO ONE in these discussions is calling for the PNFL to be like the old leagues. In the old leagues, home teams ran the games during the regular season. There were hardly any rules on play design. Teams could call any category of plays at any time. No one is calling for any of that to come back in the PNFL. No one.

This argument is the most non sequitur argument I've seen yet in this discussion.Complete untrue argument.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Someone has a new favorite word they enjoy using. Maybe it is just me and my first thought on how someone would use the changes to the most advantage with abuse and the W no matter what. Hence the argument follows exactly. The point is, the more you lower requirements, the more you can on purpose call less plays in more situations. The old commish sim leagues were partially as you noted. They had almost no play calling rules. You only needed limited plays. They were closed play files. The intent of the suggestions may not be intended to go there, but closed play files and call anything any time with few play requirements is exactly what is being advocated for in the threads. No, not completely to that level, but a big step that way.

Lets say we go 6-6-6 and allow any run. That now means a team only needs 6 effective runs in a given week and not 10 plus depending on how they manage RR,RL, and GLR now. Making the run categories any play type versus situational means a team can be totally unrealistic and call 6 sweeps left for two weeks and then switch to just inside or hey only run all week and come back an all pass in another game. I guarantee once the first team abuses the rules and wins, everyone else will as well to get the W.

There is a lot of beauty in what Charlie and his cohorts created in the PNFL. The mandatory rules all took a piece of software (we cannot change) and brought a league into fruition that is the opposite of everything else. It flourished and outlasted everything. I think the proof of concept has been completed at this point. The NFL like situational play calling setup along with more narrow player ratings created a "NFL" like game and statistical experience that 100% did not exist otherwise in the football pro universe. Charlies and now Richs dedication guided it farther than all the other PNFL copy leagues.