I am absolutely sick of seeing this kind of thing. When a receiver catches the ball behind the defense, ridiculousness most often ensues. What happens is either a coin flip, regardless of the speeds of any players involved, or worse, the "better" team, or the team that is ahead in the game gets screwed.

Here is my 89 speed receiver (94 ball carrying) getting run down by a 57 speed FS after catching the ball behind the defense.

https://mfn23.myfootballnow.com/watch/9137#1617591

And here is my opponents 83 speed receiver (99 ball carrying) outrunning three of my guys behind him with 91,94, and 96 speed. They don't even close on him at all! This is insanity and I am sick of it! This guy should never have gotten behind my defense in the first place, which is an entirely different issue.

https://lol.myfootballnow.com/watch/2043#359462

JDB is more likely to see this in the MFN-1 forums.

As for an explanation to counter the argument the first play the safety had the angle. On top of that he was a reserve that could have been a bit fresher with 87 acceleration.

The second play had the faster guys catching up. But not fast enough..... still an all out blitz vs a slant has this code favoring the slant. And to say he should not have gotten behind him is an overstatement. Way better receiving skills compared to the coverage skills with a good offensive call to counter that defense call even by real football standards.

To agree with you a bit that CB bit pretty bad on the second play . DBs have to fail and when they do it’s bad . A great safety with deep help vs that play would end with a similar result too often cause DBs jump route bad at times.

IRL A poor skilled cb would play that deeper and run him down after a 20+ yard gain... a 3 deep simulates that here some but every coverage guy uses a trail technique no matter the call.

Same with that first play errors might be in the fatigue rates and how they are calculated. But defense has to be overpowered to make up for the lack in other areas. Offensive guys don’t juke enough and the lack of momentum or agility has everything wacky. Example guys running lateral on punt returns .

No hop step or cut backs just point A and point B and where guys will possibly meet. Almost everyone takes the same pursuit angles no matter the run defense skill. On reason speed rules in the first place. Same applies to the run game and the effectiveness of blitzing in the first place as blitzers just B line it to the ball carrier. If the offense is not fast enough he’s done.

The speed scale and other ratings have been pushed so much to make up for the speed penalties cause by the weight of a player that an 80 and 96 are pretty close. As long as the weight is close . Especially when you add in all the other slight modifiers. As little as they are the importance will climb as the true speed scales are tighter and more in line with the nfl.

Absolutely false. Take another look, work out the geometry. From the point of the catch to first contact the DB had to run further than the WR. This is the far more egregious of the two, given the GIGANTIC speed difference between the two.

I could measure but it looks like the safety was beat so he didn’t have the angle until he dove to make the tackle. At the :16 mark the safety had a 5 yard head start ...was it enough?

Without measuring too much and geometry (tempting as it is) the wr was near the 40 at that same mark right after the catch. He ran a sub 5 second 40 time if you timed him to the :11 mark. Within the speed ranges of version 4.5. ....at a 4.8 sec,4.9 sec 40 yard dash

The safety changed is attack angle twice in that time once when your wr starting running completely straight and once again to dive and make the tackle....or trip him up enough for another tackle.

57 is slow but his acceleration would play some role here. Most sub 60 speed small guys will run between 5.2 sec and 5.4 sec in thier 40 yard dashes but this wasn’t a straight line that why I mentioned the acceleration.

Again without math I think that safety had like 38.5 yards to cover in the same time frame and with the dive at the end it was just enough to make up for the .2 seconds in thier respective 40 yard dashes.

When stuff is this close fatigue has to have a play in but who knows ......still I have posted even larger speed anomaly’s in beta over the years. Recently I have commented on how users might not like seeing thier guys getting run down by slower guys as 4.6 comes with similar speed measurements.

Really speed used to be displayed on the players card in ranges from zero to one hundred for every one . Some years back it got changed to represent a number with the players weight added in.

In that same time the value of zero speed was raised but the calculation on the card is the same. Its not far off but true speed is calculations of speed and acceleration moderated by weight and fatigue.

Currently an 86 speed 243 pounder is around the same speed as a 73 speed 198 pounder in the 40 yard range. Good or bad an update could be needed to reflect true speed but I would rather have a combine you could run guys through .