This could just be me, but I'm curious about the difference between HB Flare (short pass) and HB Flare (medium pass). They don't seem to work the same way. For example, I'm averaging over 5 yards per catch on HB Flare (medium pass), but under 2 yards per catch for HB Flare (short pass). In other leagues, it's reversed.
They eat up mistakes, more so HB Flare (Medium). Higher risk/reward. Get clipped for sacks more but also hit off the long TDs.
Get the bars pinned and become invincible is the goal. It's tricky and one has to vary to throw off the completely dialed in GMs by running a lot from the set, too....
One given is if met with zone at the commencement of a game it'll nerf the 113 passing until the end of the game v. zone defense.
Get the red bars at 95-100% and jack up the non-zone and the non-dialed in GMs + get more non zone with the elite GMs with 113 running.....
This could just be me, but I'm curious about the difference between HB Flare (short pass) and HB Flare (medium pass). They don't seem to work the same way. For example, I'm averaging over 5 yards per catch on HB Flare (medium pass), but under 2 yards per catch for HB Flare (short pass). In other leagues, it's reversed.
The only difference between the 2 HB Flares is WR1 goes 10 yards in short & 15 yards in medium.
The RB is the primary target and he drags to the right behind the WR1 route of 10 or 15 yards which creates a slightly different spacing on defense.
Of course, it all comes down to luck and what defense is called on each play plus strength of opponent. In the XFL, I average 3.4 (Short) & 4.9 (Medium) but it does flip flop across leagues. In some leagues, it doesn't work well for either so I dropped it completely
Thanks for the replies. Seems like it comes down to type of defense. XFL defenses tend to go more man and I must be encountering more zone in other leagues.
From my updated parser grabbing data on 341,159 valid plays, the aggregate average of all passing plays completion % is 53.4 rounded up and the average per play is 2.57 yards rounded up. I'm not posting this to say 4.6 sucks, but just that I wish there were more viable passing plays to call so we could have something resembling chess matches more.
This is from each completed full season starting from the XFL season 2041 and from the USFL season 1997 regular and postseason data only, and using excel's average function on the columns of completion percentage and average per play. The average per play does include the negative yardage from sacks. Almost every long pass has a negative yards per average because of this, but they didn't have great averages before that anyways.
Also for fun, I'll give a 4th round pick to whoever can guess out of the 148 plays I have data on, how many that have the first "target" be a WR where the play averages over 50% completion rate and averages over or equals 4 yards
I will bet that none of the playbooks have all of the “insert answer” handful of viable wr calls in them. I will guess there’s maybe 4, but 1 or 2 of them are only in certain offenses.
I will bet that none of the playbooks have all of the “insert answer” handful of viable wr calls in them. I will guess there’s maybe 4, but 1 or 2 of them are only in certain offenses.
Too low still.
Most playbooks seem to have >75% of the plays with only two seeming to have almost all of them. I didn't look at their representation in the playbooks until I read your comment because only 4 ranked in the top 10% for average play calls for all plays
