This will have the (unintended?) effect of increasing passing ratings. No?

It's always a game of cat and mouse especially with the passing game - more throwaways will result in a lower yards per attempt value and a lower completion rate, which would decrease the passing ratings in theory but reduce the number of sacks. So I will have to look at other aspects to figure out how to improve that, such as increasing the OL pass protection to reduce the number of throwaways, or looking at the DB coverage and WR skills. The passing game is and probably will always be the part of the game with the greatest pendulum swinging as it gets tweaked, just because there are so many pieces to it.

I don't envy your task. I suppose tweaking the game engine will almost always be in order, particularly as MFN is supposed to be physics based..

However, while everyone clamors for RL stats, one question (as it relates to stats) is whether MFN teams run offensive/defensive plays at the same frequency as RL NFL teams. For example, maybe sacks are high because MFN teams throw (long/medium) passes more frequently than NFL teams or MFN teams play pass defense packages more frequently than NFL teams. Do you have the capability to compile stats on how often and when MFN teams throw long/medium and correlate that with how often NFL teams do? If MFN teams throw deep more often than NFL teams, then it stands to reason that sacks would be higher than in RL (although it might not account for the whole reason).

IRL teams audible also. If a QB sees a blitz coming his OL can't protect him from, he'll call a different play. That doesn't happen here.

Actually it does to a limited extent, the QB will hot read against a blitz if he is familiar enough with the defensive play. But your point is valid that it's not as much as it would happen in real life.

I like to think the plays played are post audible. There is no tells for any player or play. No one is cheating up to mask any defensive coverage. On the other hand there are no offensive tells either. Except the limits of the playbook. Still I like to think all the audibles have been called and the end result is the plays called for that specific down. Still, that pre movement would be cool. Like a player with poor man cover skills might get beat deep cause he cheated up too much.

Kind of an interesting match up that confuses me and maybe sheds light on the O-line/D-line interaction. The team I was playing had a player with a #32 who got 3 sacks against my team. Given the player's number I figured he was a converted DB of some kind so I checked him out after the game and was rather befuddled as to how he could have had any kind of success whatsoever.

Here is the "DE" http://mfn48.myfootballnow.com/player/3250
He is a 44/62 at his position which doesn't mean much maybe. But then consider his size which he is 6'1" and playing at 222 lbs. I figure that HAD to be a mismatch but let me get more data on the board before we get to that. Other stats that may play into things:
100 Strength (which is nice but he's a little tike)
37 Speed (I thought for sure this guy was going to be super speed demon)
16 Acceleration (again - I assumed he would be super quick but he's not)
25/45 Pass rush skill (he should kinda **** if this matters at all)

Then here is the linemen on my team who was beaten by the above wizard http://mfn48.myfootballnow.com/player/3220
This guy is a 76/85 player who comes in at 6'6" and 319 lbs. So he's a big dude and should easily be able to curb stomp a mini monkey like the guy he was facing. But to be fair here are the rest of the stats that I think would factor into pass protection:
90 Strength (if size does not matter and strength stands on its own, he does give up a little)
27 Speed (slightly slower but again maybe size?)
37 Acceleration (better than the little guy)
63/69 pass blocking (above average and mucho gooder than 25/45)

So just thinking through this...the D-line/O-line are in relatively tight quarters in that even if the little guy had a lot of space to work to get passed my lineman, if my guy gets hands on him it should be game over. Given the size difference, I would even think the constant banging against much bigger players would result in increased injury for the little dude and he would struggle mightily to do anything. So how does it make any sense that he can score 3 sacks along with a number of pass pressures in a single game? I got nothing...

No idea.

I've pretty much come to the conclusion that the ratings don't mean anything when it comes to in-game performance (other than speed, along with maybe run blocking and pass catching). The other ratings don't seem to make a difference if they are 100 or 60.

It's all a random "dice roll".

It does look odd, but there are some additional questions/factors to consider.

1. Endurance - Did the OT play every play (more or less)? Did the DE play every play (more or less)? In other words, was the DE relatively fresh when compared to the OT?

2. Play call - Did the defense call pass defense on the plays where the DE got the sacks? If so, the DE was on a straight pass rush.

3. Length of pass - Did the offense call long/medium pass on the plays where the DE got the sacks? If so, the plays might have taken some time to develop, giving the DE more time to elude the OT.

4. Defensive scheme - Did the defensive backs cover the (intended) receivers tightly enough that the sacks were essentially coverage sacks?

As for the speed and acceleration factors you mentioned:

1. The DE is not only faster, but at a lighter weight might be considerably faster than the difference between their respective speeds of 37 and 27. Remember, a lineman with a top speed of 100 is not as fast as a WR with a top speed of 100, primarily due to their size differences.

2. As with speed, due to their size difference, the DE (at 222 lbs) might accelerate faster than the OT (at 319 lbs) even though the DE has a lower raw number (16 vs 37).

Anyway, because the game is physics based (size determines actual speed, acceleration and strength), the game will appear to be mysterious at times due, in part, that it is difficult to equate players' ratings with real world results. For example, a 200 lb WR with a 100 speed and acceleration rating might run a 40 yd dash in 4.2 seconds. On the other hand, a 300 lb lineman with the same ratings might run a 40 yd dash in 5 or more seconds. Factor in ratings for blocking, tackling, route running, etc., which are hard to gauge and even more mysterious in terms of how they impact a player's performance, and the mysteries grow even more puzzling.

Then again, maybe the DE simply rolled snake eyes three times.

Happy New Year!

Looks like I forgot to link the game http://mfn48.myfootballnow.com/box/199

The DE has 15 sacks in 8 games so he's on pace for 30 sacks this season if I did the sports math correctly. I guess in my head a 44 rated converted DB playing at DE should be no where near those numbers especially given his skills are subpar at best (apart from strength which should suffer since he is giving up 100 lbs to the linemen he is facing). I don't think play call or stamina should mean that much when facing superior linemen - sure he might get lucky but he dominated my lineman with 3 sacks, 3 more pressures, and a tackle for loss (7 impact plays total - all against a lineman who is roughly rated twice of his own skill).

But yeah - I guess maybe I am missing out on something. If play calls are a problem then I would suspect the pressures/sacks would have been more spread out to other players on his D-line but only this DE did. Same thing if coverage was that great - you would expect the sacks to come from random linemen. Also note that my QB is the same size as the DE but is much faster (87) and has way better acceleration (99) so if its a foot race, my QB should blow the doors off of the DE and neither player has a size advantage.

If its all about stamina then I'd say there is a serious game flaw that does not rotate in a fresh lineman that would make a solid lineman (76/85) play so horribly against a DE who is lucky to have a job (44/62 with awful pass rush skills). I'm ok with losing the game and I don't think the sacks were the reason I lost. Just in my mind this is a clear example of something jacked up on the line not working and could be helpful in diagnosing the alarming number of sacks and why good o-linemen are not getting it done in pass protection.