Pass Simulation

[detroitchild]

I got my new BuzzBall Pass Simulation set in the mail today and I'm anxious to try them out. I'll be doing a little solitaire scrimmaging this weekend to see how they work. I'm going to play incorporating both the TTQB and the sticks to get a feel for it. I just got back into this hobby a month and a half ago and I don't want to rehash the heated debate of one vs. the other. I just want to see how this could work and to provide a newbie's point of view.

Stay tuned!

D

[HOOP]

i am about to do the same thing. tell me what you think.

[Ray F]

Welcome back to the hobby, many changes and improvements occurred while you were in EF retirement. As you become accustom to using the QB and the passing sticks as well, you will note pros and cons to each method of passing. On any given passing play, one method may have more advantages over the risks associated with the other method. For rule sets that allow both methods, when passing lanes seem clogged with defenders, the sticks may have more advantages, when you need a quick score and the only option to turn a receiver down field is with the sticks, that form may have more advantages for that given play. Experimenting will be fun and exciting. If you plan to become competitive I recommend becoming fluent in multiple rule-sets, some allow both methods, some only sticks, some TTQB only. I highly recommend using the sticks during Solitaire League play to maintain impartiality between both teams. Have fun. Ray F.

[detroitchild]

Well, I've trotted out my '89 49ers to scrimmage against my '87 Redskins to try combining the use of the TTQB and Pass Simulation (PS). I played 4 possessions each to somewhat emulate about half a game. I goota say that using PS really opened the game up and made it more fun in my opinion.

I was 3 for 6 passing with the TTQB (not bad...can see some improvement in my passing game) while I was 6 for 10 using PS with 2 interceptions and 2 incomplete. I used the TTQB when I had an open passing lane. I missed an easy short pass while connecting on a deeper out route. I used PS when I needed to pass over a scrum at the line of scrimmage or deeper routes when there was a defender between the QB and receiver.

I have to admit that I still need to keep practicing with the TTQB to have a more effective over all passing game. I'll keep at it. Using PS was not a piece of cake. Things to consider for those of you considering using that form of passing. It seems more realistic when there is an imaginary ball in the air with both the WR and DB converging on it. I used a Tampa 2 defense with two anchored (magnets) safeties in deep coverage. I also mixed up zone and man to man just to try different things. Twice I misjudged the speed of the DB in a race for the ball (hence the 2 interceptions). I have found that FOR ME different types of skills are needed using PS. One, I have to know the direction that my guys run in. Two, I have to quickly determine how good an opponents DBs are. If I did a bad job of misjudging my own teams DBs then I'll have problems against a coach sitting across from me that I'm playing for the first time. Third, I learned that you have to pay attention to the advantages and disadvantages of a board (slow spots, which direction is faster, appears smoother, etc.). I knew for sure that Jerry Rice was going to beat Darryl Green on ball placement (heck he was closer to the darn thing), and Green easily beat Rice to the ball (hhmmmm....could that happen in a real game?). It became real exciting watching players make a play on the ball. WHO WOULD GET THERE FIRST? On one of the completions the WR got to the ball a fraction of a second ahead of the DB hitting him.....hard, knocking him over. I thought about the fumble rule the coaches in the GLEFL use and wondered how would they rule on this play.

Anyway, in my opinion combining the two made it more interesting AND fun. I'm gonna continue playing with it over the next few days and return with more comments.

PEACE OUT!

[Coach_J]

Glad to know that you are trying both methods. From all indications you have done well with both and you enjoyed watching both the offense and defense making a play on the ball. By the way you said you were surprised that Darrell Green beat Jerry Rice to the ball. If my memory is correct for many years Darrell Green was rated as the fastest man in the NFL. So your experience with Darrell Green in MF was in some respects similar to actual football.

Have a good day, thanks again for sharing, and continue having fun.

Coach J

[Shabby J]

Thank you for your willingness to use both. The sticks are fun for playing pick up games or scrimmages with new coaches too. It allows them to play with a passing game and not to have to struggle with the TTQB's learning curve. I took my board to work one day and played using the sticks and guys who never played before really got into it. I like the combination of using both. You are right though, when using the sticks you sure better know how each receiver runs so you can plan accordingly.

[detroitchild]

Originally Posted by Coach_J

Glad to know that you are trying both methods. From all indications you have done well with both and you enjoyed watching both the offense and defense making a play on the ball. By the way you said you were surprised that Darrell Green beat Jerry Rice to the ball. If my memory is correct for many years Darrell Green was rated as the fastest man in the NFL. So your experience with Darrell Green in MF was in some respects similar to actual football.

Have a good day, thanks again for sharing, and continue having fun.

Coach J

Hey Coach J. I believe that you are correct about Darrell Green. He was the NFL's fastest man for many years. In fact, he could probably roll out of bed today and cover most receivers. I guess I gotta get to work on Rice's base.

Will play more today and report back with further observations.

D

[detroitchild]

Originally Posted by Shabby J

Thank you for your willingness to use both. The sticks are fun for playing pick up games or scrimmages with new coaches too. It allows them to play with a passing game and not to have to struggle with the TTQB's learning curve. I took my board to work one day and played using the sticks and guys who never played before really got into it. I like the combination of using both. You are right though, when using the sticks you sure better know how each receiver runs so you can plan accordingly.

Hey Shabby J. Thanks for the comment. I'd like to hear from other coaches that are trying both. I'd like to hear the pros and cons.

D

[detroitchild]

More insight after my second scrimmage using both the TTQB and pass simulation/placement (PS).

The first go round I found that the game was opened up and more realistic incorporating PS into the passing game. This time I've adjusted defensively and it was rough going for my offenses. I sharpened my zone defense and this made it harder for pass placement. I experimented with corner coverage and found that by allowing a bump and run coverage where after initial contact I stop to turn my corners to run with the WR right into my deep safeties while dropping back a linebacker or 2 made it difficult to place the ball for my receivers to run to. In fact, several times I was faced with having to use the TTQB where I didn't have to during the first scrimmage or just take an incomplete. I found myself getting engrossed in the action down field and forgot to pay attention to the pass rush. I'm improving defensively in this area of the game as well and ended up having my QB's sacked 3 times because of not paying attention. This REALLY made it more interesting. I found it funny trying to devise a strategy against myself. My passing percentage also went down because of not being able to hit the long pass with either passing style (sigh...practice, practice, practice!). As many of you know the longer the pass the longer the placement stick. The longest in my set is 15 yards and on every occasion my receivers missed the mark, including my fastest and straightest guys. Gotta work on that.

My findings so far on PS:

Pros - a more exciting game, implore more strategies, great for solitaire play, forces you to learn the strengths and weaknesses of your WRs and DBs (I know you probably need to know this with the TTQB as well but work with me here).

Cons - It slows the game down a bit, especially in solitaire play (I'm sure you know why).

Again, I'm NOT promoting one style over another but combining the 2 seems like more fun in my humble opinion.

Would love to hear the experiences of other coaches about this.

~Peace

[Michigan Joe]

The interesting thing to me about the sticks is that speed is so critical on the outside, just as in real football. With TTQB passing, the bigger reciever with the ability to get past the defense is the key, and yet with the sticks you can have pure speed guys that can simply out run defenders to the ball. The sticks do allow the defense a play on the ball, but like you say its at the cost of the speed of play. I personally think the sticks a great tool to getting a rookie coach interested, and so I am in favor of allowing limited stick rules for rookies. For example, when I play sticks with my brother in law, he can never adjust a reciever to run up the field, only out routes or comeback routes. If the reciever is heading downfield then obviously the stick can be placed straight in front of his current running direction. Maybe its just me, but the more I use the TTQB the more I like it, especially with the strict clock rules as used by several leagues including the DFW. So, if you practice with the TTQB (even in solitaire) make sure to have a 20 second timer!
Joe