A PM to me would be fine, that's how I was alerted to the punt blocks a couple games ago.

Witch hunts ****. I just was upset and needed to vent with the thing bothering me most is it was taking someone's idea and using it 100% to ruin a game; weave it in ....or develop your own move.

Comparing a 2 play defense to the use of the FL Hitch on offense is way off.

At most, the Fl Hitch will be used 10 times in a game as part of a varied offensive scheme with runs thrown in to avoid pass keying along with other passes out of the same formation that have succeeded to a lesser degree.

Its hard to call the FL hitch via a rule unless you only have 1 short passing play out of the 212 formation which means you better have several very successful runs out of the 212 or owners will go 100% pass key when the offense is in 212 formation.

The 46 heavy isn't even a common play being in only 2 defensive playbooks I believe and we have all seen it run 40 times a game without the penalty for overuse. This new defense means 2 plays are called 95% of the time directly dictated by offensive formation with maybe 3 to 4 other plays thrown in for special situations.

You come across a GM or two whom will deploy a limited play strategy on a general scale: Michael77 and abross (he emerged awhile back when he stream-lined) come to mind, offensively and defensively I've come across it from time to time. It's usually the vocal, cocky types (defensively, speaking) who'll do the 'look at me' approach and want you to react to it.

Then there's the tailored, trolling approach. (i.e. Ray in Champions recently, I've had a multitude of examples vs. me but it all blends in after awhile)

Difference here is that it doesn't even play out even in terms of running the play and my offense goes aha ok I'm learning this play....in fact, it's the opposite - the more I pull up the play with my offense, the more lightning power source is power amped into the defense. Zone defense had to be made viable, so this was how it was done. However, it was meant to be used in a fair way; tacked in with other defensive plays.

Not to be mashed and found out post game....scouting wise when you see -75% familiarity.

Bottom line.....this version is way past its expiration date.....16 months??? Or there about.

Now brand new owners just starting MFN are completely up to speed and winning titles out the box with guided tours for what to do.

When I started, I couldn't win consistently and had to experiement and keep trying new plays until I started to lock in then another version came out and it was back to the drawing board again and again.

How anyone feels accomplished or proud doing exactly what someone else tells them to do and has quick success is beyond me.

We need a new version every 6 months in my opinion so that by the time the forums are full of "this is the way" we are starting over once again.

To me, its the trail and error and finding the path yourself that makes this game stimulating and fun.....but too much time in the same version means the extremes are found and exploited.

I'm pretty sure everyone can agree that using 2 defensive plays was never the goal or intention of JDB as a path to success.

Excellent point.

There was a time where you and I had a million matches non-stop. Basically, you take two elite GMs competing for the same spots (Conference Titles, Title Game Positioning, Title Game Wins) under the same parameters for 16th months and put us in a collider crashing at one another at 500 MPH.

You get dented. I get dented. Volley, volley.

Each time we get dented, we stream-line and whittle our strategies to not get dented until you're refined to the tightest, most shaved level with as little vulnerability as possible. Yeah, we need a new version.

I have been preparing a bit for what the tea leaves have shown that new version to be, eventually.

I'm going to say this with the positive intent of constructive criticism: have you consider whether the problem is with your game plan? (This is the same kind of talk that IoT and I have with each other all of the time.)

The reason that I ask is because when I was scouting you for Champions last night, I noticed that you didn't have a strong run-pass balance for each of the offensive sets that you run.

This made it pretty easy to select the plays per down where I thought that I could contain your passing game the best. [For complete transparency for people not in that league, I ran the FZ 10 times -- it was only designed to be called on one down against one set. And I don't have the 46 at all.]

In total, I called 8 different plays, and held your offense to 168 total yards and 100 yards passing. Here's a breakdown of the number of times each was called: 13, 10, 8, 7, 7, 3, 1, 1.

Now, let's be honest, I got lucky. None of your home run hitters were hitting, and I played a control the clock and pray game plan all game. You could have easily won that one by 30 or 40 if the RNG rolls your way a few times.

this game plan wouldn't be allowed if the rule goes through. But the bigger point here was that I only called one of the "exploit" defenses being discussed here, and it wasn't even the one that I called the most because it wasn't the most effective in my scouting.

I think having a better run/pass balance across the sets and not relying so heavily on the homerun plays would have made that game a lot harder to game plan against.

Again, I'm saying all of this from my point of view of someone that has scouted a lot of games. You have obviously had a lot of success in that leagues running that game plan against most of the GMs.

I vary and it was 1 game between us.

My CB #1 was out for the game so that hurt us on that side of the ball. In recent time period I clipped off 4 in a row vs. you and kept my mouth shut. This was 1 game and I look at any game vs. you as an ultimate strategy session - we've strat'd deep on each other and did counters each time for our games; especially in Champions. Chess match.

As for here. I saw what was coming but up to that point my offense was going off and I didn't have the knowledge going in of what a MAN OLB Flat Zone and the 46 Heavy play could do in combo. He didn't get the sacks....I don't recall many at all and some pressures and I had a slew of quick hitters at my disposal. My thought process was based on our offense's performance he'd keep running the same plays and our passes would eventually cut through battering him. Click, click, click.

I know what happened.

Seeing the 2 plays and getting caught in the vortex of passing but then passing from behind just powered him up with each and every pass. I didn't get rhythm or into my runs to off-set it. Game went on and he powered up more and more with those 2 defensive plays and the - (negative) familiarity bolstered with each play call.

Coming out of that game I now see how it works if I see that approach again and I looked into how to deal with it, as well.

My point was I scouted multiple of your previous games to see what your play tendency and most common plays were. I still think balancing your game plan would have masked that better.

In Champions? I came off like 133 points, right, recently? I was hoping to survive against you and I figured we'd be super low scoring in a grind out battle to the end. Typically, I do balance because otherwise it's easy to scout.

But in Champions I was riding off of the 74 passing TDs, keeping the gas pedal floored. Plus, it was an end of season game with positioning decided or pretty locked in...tactically I wasn't going all out to show all my cards because we will more than likely meet in the playoffs. I strat'd my *** off but held back on any curveballs because we'll meet for all the marbles as we always do!!

Dec 3 @ Dallas (133-10)
Dec 10 CINCINNATI (77-35)

Roll the same but I did figure my offense would be on a IOT level vs. you as in not productive.