This really isn't a tutorial, but I'm working through some things, and my therapist says I should write more. All of the evidence presented here is qualitative at best, and the math was on scratch paper. That is, to say, it's just my opinion on a small sample size (not some data-mining effort), and I might be overlooking key factors. I did not include 2037 as it was largely an adjustment year.

Why Are There So Many Ints?

Dating back to 2038 and though the first 7 games of this season, the top scoring QBs have a 3:2 TD:INT ratio. The bottom QBs throw more like 1:3 on average (That's no winning recipe). All of this begs the question: are we really throwing more INTs or just less TDs? I can recall one season with peak John Spartan that I flirted with a 4:1 TD:INT ratio; most of the time it was about 2:1.

I looked at Top TDs and INTs thrown from 2035 and 2036 (build 0.4.5) and found that on average the Top TD chunkers averaged 20 INTs across those seasons. The Top INT throwers averaged 23.5 INTs. That's not a large discrepancy; it's just the "good" teams were getting passing TDs at a much higher rate.

If we look at the past two seasons ('38 and '39), the average top scoring QBs average 13 INTs while the bottom average 21.5 INTs--a much larger discrepancy. In essence, this build (0.4.6) exposes bad QB game-planning, while limiting the good game-planning to short and medium throws (NOTE: If you are still using long passing plays, are you comfortable giving up 7-10 sacks a game? Please, address this for the benefit of the league. You will be more competitive, throw less INTs, and be sacked less).

I digress. I am now convinced that in spite of less overall passing attempts, the teams who are playing it smart and have adapted are actually less likely to turn the ball over. Take for instance, the following:

2035 Top 5 QBs
AVG INT : AVG ATT
22.2 : 673
1 INT per 30 attempts

2036 Top 5 QBs
AVG INT : AVG ATT
26 : 726
1 INT per 28 attempts

ADJUSTMENT YEAR - 2037

2038 Top 5 QBs
AVG INT : AVG ATT
15.8 : 564
1 INT per 36 ATT

2039 Top 5 QBs
AVG INT : AVG ATT
14.8 : 543
1 INT per 37 ATT

You can rest assured that the bottom QBs throw more INTs per attempt.

From Draft to Championship
Coaching
The most successful coaches in this league have been West Coast or Generally Balanced. Do with that what you will. These playbooks have guaranteed spread out receiving options that get less double coverage on your WRs, slants, etc., that get receivers open to catch.

QB Search
Invest QBs who have as close as possible to a future potential of 100 in:
Accuracy -this is a nonstarter; it's absolutely necessary; the one outlier is Preston Jones of LDN, and I'm assuming it's largely on game scheme (more on that, later).
Intelligence -this matters a lot on how a QB reads progressions and throws the ball away rather than into the defender's arms.
Field of Vision - Helps QBs make the best reads
Passing Release - Errant passes go to the wrong folks. It's not weighted as strong but it matters
Look Off Defender - Buys time to get WRs in the right position

Ball Catchers
RB/FB/WR/TE Speed matters...but not as much as it used to. Slower receivers also can be used to strategically open the distance between other receivers in the route tree, giving others more open space between defenders. Catching and Route Running are just as important to me now.

O-line
Strength > Pass Block > Acceleration (Nothing else is extremely relevant in passing situations, but if you can get those traits all super high, they're a pretty great pass blocker UNLESS THE QB IS HOLDING ON TO THE BALL IN A LONG PASS).

Game Planning

You MUST scout each opponent. Your offense must be balanced and have enough plays. If you get tagged for overuse, you throw more INTs. I run a steady 40 plays through the preseason and experiment. When the season starts in earnest, I eliminate plays that aren't getting the results. I whittle it down to 30-35 through the regular season, and by post-season, I keep my best 32 plays active.

QBs with amazeball stats in bad schemes are still bad QBs.

Because you won't be throwing deep (SERIOUSLY, don't use long passes), there are several plays that dump off to RB/FB that are extremely useful. Look at plays that the receiver can get separation like slants and five-and-ten-yard out or hook routes. Experiment. See what works.

Lastly, find out who is the first option on the route tree (you'll have to do some digging) and plug your ace WR / TE in that hole. If you play a player out of position, like a TE as WR, there is a small penalty, but it's been mostly negligible from my experience. For instance, most people know that if you run the FL Hitch, the QB drops back and hits WR2 most of the time (75%, maybe), and it's an automatic first down (it used be what got everyone all the TDs in 0.4.5, and I hated it), so if your fastest, bested catcher is a 243 lbs FB, override the WR2 for your FB in the I-Formation Normal package.

I try to control time of possession with those high completion percentage short-mid throws and have a strong run game. No one play (through these 7 games this season) have been called more than 5 times per game. My top 4 plays are all run plays, and out of my top 15 plays, 9 are runs. I know it's John Madden-esque to say that the object of the game is for me to score points and keep you from scoring points, but time of possession is the way to do it. It forces opposing offenses to throw more, and my defense wants you to throw.

Maybe this will help someone offensively to start thinking about how their team is constructed and what to aim for as we continue.

Ermagahd, already, how do I get Interceptions?

Coaching / GM
Create rules based on how each team plays out of a formation (run/pass, blitz/man). This takes time to learn, but once it's set it's you just need to adjust a box or two each game. Takes me 5-10 minutes to scout and change my rules every other day.

Roster Construction for Pass Coverage
Invest in fast, quick man coverage LBs and Secondary players.
Invest in fast pass rushers to get to the opposing QBs to force mistakes.

Game Planning
Play man defense and focus on plays that are close to the line of scrimmage. There's absolutely no need to play 4 deep nowadays (or ever really, unless you have a rule set up for a 3rd and 15+ situation).

If you're not invested in Man OLB Flat Zone, you're missing the boat, but it's only as effective as your roster. With the right players, it's the new OP Defensive play. Prior to this build, it was the primary defense against the FL Hitch. In fact, I still primarily use this formation against the 212 offense (covers the umbrella of plays including FL Hitch) and it's generated 11 / 20 INTs this season. It limits gains to 2.3 yards per call (3 plays @ 2.3 yards means punts), yet it only makes up half of my total defensive play calls (Opponents average 52 plays against me, OLB Flat Zone is called about 24 times a game). Since it's a rule set for 212, what it tells me is that most of my opponents run out of the 212 offense, and my defense plugs up all the holes and forces QBs to make mistakes.

However, my team has collected 9 other INTS from the dime, nickel, and goal line defenses against other formations, so I attribute it as having the right people in the right roles--focusing once again on quickness, speed, and man coverage--pass-rushing with the d-line, and controlling time of possession.

You're a golden rooster

Let's turn this into a general league help laboratory if you don't mind - lord knows I can use the help.

Offensive linemen:

I've seen far more successful owners than me in other leagues signing the 32 year olds with 68 strength but 100 run and pass blocking techniques instead of the 26 year olds with 90 strength but blocking skills in the low 70s. Is blocking technique actually the most important thing and brute strength is just gravy? Thoughts?

Just my two cents, but I would say the difference is the veterans' play knowledge.

That's an interesting idea - makes sense. I'm thinking of the two dominant owners in the XFL league who go for these 100 blocking vets with only so-so strength. I'll have to look at the player's overall intelligence to see if there's a correlation. Maybe the young guy with the 99 strength is just a meat head and the old guys know how to hold their blocks longer even if they're not the strongest. It does seem that some of the Moguls o line draftees underperform. Even the 25 year olds with 90+ strength and 90+ current blocking ratings still give up more sacks or tackles than their ratings suggest they should - may go back to kurse's point about poor play calling.

More questions to come...from me at least.

I’m here for it.

Secondly, I’ve done a lot of exploration to see what matters, and I’ll agree that strength is not the one true stat from yesteryear. However, it’s a primary stat. Your lineman will never get stronger than what they’re drafted with; whereas, speed and acc are based on weight.

I still think strength matters considerably because it’s raw power and contributes to the time they can hold the block, but in my weights blocking and acceleration have closed the gap on that weighting. (Also, going back to my original post, your QB should not be holding on to the ball long).

Example new weighting:
Str - 100
Acc - 40
Blocking - 80
Int / Disc - 20

Old weighting
Str - 100
Acc - 33
Blocking - 66
Int / Disc - 20

The Hall of Champions proves you know what you're doing, so I'm going to keep picking your brains as long as you keep your skull cracked open.

I haven't done much weight tweaking since I started playing MFN - found a set by seththerick what was probably for version 4.5 and have done only some minor changes when I know which skills are most important for each position. I'm curious if anyone has any idea why unnamed this lottery pick o linemen seems to be mediocre (at least to me)

RT 87/91(+21/+1 since creation) 23 years old 2470 trade value (unimportant for gauging a player's true quality)
speed 74 acceleration 57
strength 99 intelligence 100
discipline 92
run blocking 81/100 pass blocking 83/87

given up 16 career sacks (12 so far in 2040 alone) and 31 tackles in a season and a half

Is the reason he's struggling because his blocking ratings are only in the 80s even with 99 strength? If I traded for this player I would consider making him a guard with the higher future run blocking. Does anyone think him giving up sacks is because of play calling as opposed to his physical skills? I'm guessing if he had 90+ blocking skills and 90+ strength he'd be really good, which seems to validate the thought that blocking talent is more tied to ability rather than just brute strength - a tackle with100 strength and blocking in the 40s would be worthless.

Those stats are solid.

I could argue if he’s an everydown tackle, he might be getting tired and the defense is pushing around him.

I would do a quick scan of the game logs (ctrl + F his name) and scan which plays he’s given up the sacks. If it’s on a long pass (or a medium where defense coverage is tight), then you have your answer.

I will add that sacks are going to happen. No matter how good. Last season I did a deep dive on my own and tried to look up the best o-line players and everyone gives up sacks.

I had no idea that you could do that ctrl f thing on game logs - I'll definitely need to check it out. I figured most of the sacks were on too many medium or long passes, but being on pace to give up 24 sacks in 16 games still seems pretty terrible.

Next question will be on gameplan rules when I figure out how to ask it clearly and succinctly.

That’s just a prompt to Find (ctrl+F) a text strand on any page. It’s not in MFN exclusively. I use Chrome but I assume it’s built in to every browser.

Without Finding certain key words, it’s just too much to read in the game logs. I want to cut down how much I have to do. I am real efficient like that.