It's not so much a question of diluting the pass rush. As far as we're aware DTs/NTs don't really contribute there at all during that (just against the run, where the lack of DT/NT is noticeable). So you may be rightfully asking why we bother putting 2 players there...

The answer is that it's a matter of not diluting the people in the backfield making the tackle. The way the calculations work mean two guys in that 'zone' of the field will be randomly picked to attempt to tackle the receiver if the receiver catches the ball. Subsequently, if you put 3 Grade A LB/CB/SFs there, two of them will be chosen randomly each time (this varies, as sometimes not all three positions are in the right 'zone', so you may be picking from just CB/SF and so on). If you put 2 Grade A CB/SF in that zone and 1 Grade B SF (so three players still, but not all of top tier quality), there's a good chance that the Grade B guy is called up to be one of the two guys to make the tackle. If you can avoid sticking the Grade B guy on the pitch at all (by perhaps putting an extra DT in to make numbers), then you'll only have the two Grade A guys there and they will be the ones that are always picked to make the play.

It's a tiny bit more complicated than that given you have to play LBs (who may be picked for some zones but aren't always as good at covering) and builds are always different between players. Also we've found that truly stacking defences to one side against a darkwing does have an effect (but you basically have to put 5 men on the one guy) but this is the general reasoning behind the use of the 4-3 vs 3-4 (or 3-3-5)

All set and ready to go. Hopefully we can stifle Poland's firepower like we did in the first Brazil game (not so much the second one...).

Good luck - will be interesting watching this and Manly vs Souths at the same time!

1934lions wrote: Happy to see Marco Watters had a decent game today. Good result against a good team.

He's one of the slightly faster WRs we have (though all our specialist WRs are pretty good). Honestly, I would usually play Gibson as his skills are higher and he's been productive, but I was getting a bit sick of his stamina issues. Watters is similar to another WR we have in Schneider (perhaps with Schneider a little better in a number of secondary attributes), but I was keen to see how your pretty unique high vision build went. Felt it was worth a gamble given the same speed/catching/agility (aka primaries). Most importantly however, Watters kept on going and even scored a big one in the 4th quarter. He dropped a whole star in rating by the end of the game (and so did most other players), so I hate to think what the highly talented but no cardio Gibson would have done.

Our offence on the whole was pretty good. 63+% completion rate. We got sacked 5 times, which is big, but 4 of those sacks came when the game was already pretty much over. The whole team seemed to take a big hit if you compare start of match rating to end of match rating, so maybe that played a factor. We still didn't get much pressure on the QB ourselves, but with the 2-3-6 old school project style defence, we turned it over and ensured they had a very lousy day offensively.

The table hasn't updated yet since Croatia and Brazil are yet to play, but we've qualified for the main event again which is good. Pity it's likely not to be top seed, given my earlier stuff ups, but we can compete against strong teams like we're showing. Remember our group of death in the main event last season (something like 7 trophies between three of them)? We got through that, and we just beat out another former world champion in Poland in qualifying. Mind you, if Croatia do somehow beat Brazil, we'll move up to first since our points difference will be superior, but unlikely.Last edited on 2013-09-27 at 14:33

Daudy wrote: 1934lions wrote: Happy to see Marco Watters had a decent game today. Good result against a good team. He's one of the slightly faster WRs we have (though all our specialist WRs are pretty good). Honestly, I would usually play Gibson as his skills are higher and he's been productive, but I was getting a bit sick of his stamina issues. Watters is similar to another WR we have in Schneider (perhaps with Schneider a little better in a number of secondary attributes), but I was keen to see how your pretty unique high vision build went. Felt it was worth a gamble given the same speed/catching/agility (aka primaries). Most importantly however, Watters kept on going and even scored a big one in the 4th quarter. He dropped a whole star in rating by the end of the game (and so did most other players), so I hate to think what the highly talented but no cardio Gibson would have done. Our offence on the whole was pretty good. 63+% completion rate. We got sacked 5 times, which is big, but 4 of those sacks came when the game was already pretty much over. The whole team seemed to take a big hit if you compare start of match rating to end of match rating, so maybe that played a factor. We still didn't get much pressure on the QB ourselves, but with the 2-3-6 old school project style defence, we turned it over and ensured they had a very lousy day offensively. The table hasn't updated yet since Croatia and Brazil are yet to play, but we've qualified for the main event again which is good. Pity it's likely not to be top seed, given my earlier stuff ups, but we can compete against strong teams like we're showing. Remember our group of death in the main event last season (something like 7 trophies between three of them)? We got through that, and we just beat out another former world champion in Poland in qualifying. Mind you, if Croatia do somehow beat Brazil, we'll move up to first since our points difference will be superior, but unlikely.

I'm hoping the vision thing makes a difference, but if not then the wages are kept in check. Stamina is being built up now so shouldn't see as much of a drop off shortly. Good luck in the WC proper.