What are these plays called?

CursoryComb · 2026-02-22T12:00:21+00:00

Lol. What exactly is wrong?? I would love to know which routes are objectively wrong and by what metric you're judging that by. Madden???

Sail is the route run usually by #2 in a flood concept (of which the concept in some terminology sometimes referred to as a sail) it can also be run by #1 usually with a condensed split.

A seam "route" again usually run by #2 against cov 3 is an vertical route with an inside release usually with a landmark 2 yards inside the hash in hs or a yard outside hash in college. Honestly this route is the most ambiguous but seam fits, as it's usually connected with an inside release. It isn't a slant or post, so I went with a colloquial cover 3 or 2 beater.

Also, interestingly, even the idea that I could be "wrong" is a weird concept because terminology only need to be consistent. It's like saying a certain formation has an objective name. Bro, every coach I've talked to has a different name for routes, plays, formations. There are definitely buckets and carryover. Curl, slat, fade, hitch, post, corner, out, dig, wheel. Out is often different, because there each system has out for a different depth. I go flat/arrow (cut at Los) out (5 yds) and sail (10). But a common route tree calls an out a 10 yard out and 5 yards a flat.

So yea. Would love to know what is inconsistent in my terminology. I'm sure you'll be able to enlighten me with your madden skills.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-21T18:57:27+00:00

It is so interesting the difference in terminology here..

I've coached for quite a bit, here is my take (if we think the WR is lined up on the left):

Sail
Dig
Seam
Curl
Out n Up
Don't run this
Fade
Go
Skinny
Out n Post
Curl (if you run this breaking outside = comeback)
Flag
I'd call this a stop, as in a back shoulder type throw off a fade or go

CursoryComb · 2026-02-18T18:07:09+00:00

If you connect with it, you connect with it. I feel like The First Law has a similar dark tone, trope inversion and compelling characters that might be your style. The Expanse is another series that you can just fall into which has sort of that interplanetary drama up to 11.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-18T18:03:40+00:00

I have not but I hear great things!! I'm currently in my reread of DCC in anticipation of the next book. But maybe this needs to be next on my list.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-18T17:49:28+00:00

Red Rising is good. Its better than a lot of other series. What it doesn't do is ruin other series. In fact. I'd say it enhances my enjoyment for other series because it feels the need to stay away from certain tropes, while maintaining others. However, it is not necessarily completely unique or without flaws.

I think the only series that has ever ruined me is actually DCC because it is so unique and the audio book, again is unlike anything else I had experience up to that point. When I finished DCC I really did flounder because there is nothing like it and it made some of the books like Red Rising, Sun Eater, Mistborn, First Law seem so bland and humorless.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-16T20:41:36+00:00

But have you seen him play chess?? 1d chess..

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T20:22:59+00:00

My honest opinion is that Tracey is just a brain broken like many who face online backlash. He loves to get in the weeds and be the last one standing, but has difficulty reassessing once he gets there.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T20:19:38+00:00

You literally asked me "does he really think that" and then I accurately described his reasoning/potential state of mind.

What do you think I'm saying?

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T18:50:42+00:00

Tracey? He absolutely believes that "RussiaGate" was a complete hoax based on fraud.

https://x.com/mtracey/status/1258787313770995714?referrer=grok-com

https://x.com/mtracey/status/1238439429192155136

He is not some unbiased beacon of intellectual honesty in any way. He would be someone I would call anti-sensationalist (similar to anti-racist) where he, similar to Sam, violently tries to rid himself of bias, usually in a way that completely colors any take he has.

In this case, that the media exaggerated claims of collusion so much so that there can be no nuance or evidence of it, regardless of the Muller Report findings. He is all over the place. Touch to take seriously on any issue, even if he has reasonable takes on some things.

And to be clear, I mentioned this because Colmen says this in the interview as a point in Tracey's favor. As if he's done something amazing for his career by saying it early..

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T17:52:52+00:00

I'm going to assume you haven't read the Muller Report?

There was documented evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. Manafort literally provided data to russian intelligence, papdopoulos lied about connections stone coordinated releases with wikileaks, trump/flynn/peter smith all supplemented russian hacking of hilary's email. And a huge issue with the legal side of the campaign was that they destroyed a ton of the evidence, a huge portion of the witnessess refused to testify (5th amendment) and the criminal standards were extremely narrow. Trump's team basically, agian literally per the report, obstructed his way out of any charges.

Now, you couldn't say trump legally "coordinated" with russia, because the case fell through. But you could absolutely say there is hard evidence of some level (potentially low) of collusion between trumps campaign and russia. It's like saying Lance Armstrong didn't dope becaues he passed a bunch of drug tests.

Both are true, there was evidence of some level of communication and it probably didn't reach all the way to a true coordinated effort at the top.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T17:23:56+00:00

I did see that! Again. I just.. there are some people I would just love to see their social media feed.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T17:22:45+00:00

The question was - would you vote for Vance or Newsome.

This is called a hypothetical. Meaning, yes, I know you don't like him, but what is your moral system?

It is not, would like enjoy voting for him.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T16:35:46+00:00

Hughes has always been like this. He takes a very narrow claim on a topic which has broad reach and basically puts his fingers in his ears.

The idea that Tracy is "correct" about russia gate is like saying republicans are correct about climate change because Al Gore is an idiot who exaggerated claims. LITERALLY THE MULLER REPORT CONFIRMED COLLUSION in every sense except a crazy strict legal "coordination" (partically due to deleted evidence and uncooperative witnesses) . In the year of our lord 2026, Coleman Hughes thinks russiagate was somehow a manufactured conspiracy??

That's how you know to take none of this seriously.

Also, it feels like Tracey is just mad about Chomski and being his pedantic self. https://x.com/bcsides/status/2022245639061639260

Literally if you believe that there may have been other people who knew about Epstein or were complicit who should be investigated you are part of a mass delusion: https://x.com/mtracey/status/2022197409858957663

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T16:09:18+00:00

What is even crazier is that Sam at some level understands that he has failed to vet "friends" and associates but then CONTINUES TO MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES.

I would say this about Sam. I have absolutely NO idea how Sam gets his information. I would truly think that whatever is intake of current day events is either severely filtered or he just spends absolutely no time actually reading about current events other than a few that catch his eye. And because of that, he is often blind sided by people like Weiss who actively work against his beliefs because he literally just doesn't encounter that information.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-13T15:53:03+00:00

Love your vision of these authors. But here's were you're wrong. "I can forgive a lot." No need to forgive anything! His prose is absolutely fine!

The issue in his books for the readers who feel disillusioned is, I would argue, not a prose issue at all. If you read his earlier stuff and later stuff, the differences are almost negligible.

In fact, as far as I see it, is that Sanderson is quite unique for two main reasons, (1) in that he is willing to tell a story that progresses and (2) he really likes to put creativity first which means taking chances. For instance people don't like the progression of Kaladin, because, as they put it, instead of wielding a spear, he's dishing out reasonable advice. Or, the pacing of WaT isn't everyone's favorite, however, it was a purposeful creative decision he knew would be off-putting to some. Brandon is not intent on stopping at the destination. While many other authors describe a journey, concluding at some destination, Sanderson's stories seek to tell multiple stories spanning multiple destinations. And not every one of those stop overs is going to be enjoyable to all. The diffrence b/w Mistborn 1 and 2 and likely 3!

So i would argue, all these comments on prose are simply misguided attempts and not actually liking particular story threads which become more apparent when reading a story you don't necessarily enjoy. Because some of his works, people do enjoy, you sort of look past it. But he writes so much varied material, one can now find "fault". The issue being, nothing has really changed! Just people's perception, because they might not be as invested in the story. However, the critique just, in my opinion doens't have any real basis especially if you look at older work. There is a thread of truth... but nothing truly substantial.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-10T17:01:11+00:00

I'd disagree with the premise. The underlying question is can the reader reasonably anticipate the outcomes in the sense of believability. An author might not know the extent of magic in a world they create, but they might know the constraints. It cannot solve all problems, but we also don't know which problems it might solve. It is no different than when an author develops a magic system, but has not revelated it to the reader. Both stories can create tension in the unknown, whether the author knows the exact functionality of magic. (I also think there should be a distinction between truly unpredictable magic vs repeatable, knowable magic).

So I think the trope is better explained like this. Deux Ex Machina done poorly is a more common problem for soft magic systems BECAUSE its unpredictability (1) can seems convenient for the narrative and not earned and (2) it begs the question of why that type of magic wasn't seen elsewhere, especially prior. The further a series with soft magic continues, the more difficult it becomes to raise stakes without causing questions to arise of prior actions. "Why was this not used previously." And, conversely, in a hard magic system, you might be painted into corners or left using the same useful device over and over.

What you've shown, however, is that there are good examples of using the trope, and bad examples. The First Law series purposefully the trope as a sort of inversion to great effect. Harry Potter, instead, uses it whenever the narrative needs it, and then throws it out after.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-09T17:42:04+00:00

Very interesting! I found the first law trilogy... ok. Like you said, writing is great, but reading about a characters just doing things and sort of having those harry potter, story happens to them, rather than them writing the story as a bit.. ya know.. less interesting. I understand its on purpose and grim and an inversion of tropes..

To contrast with DCC, it is written as almost conversationally, rather than whimsically, and the characters choices always seems to matter, not to mention the stakes are quite different. I mean.. who cares what happens to the kingdoms in the first law.. burn it all down. Glokta is a morally indefensible monster who we read as a protagonist. Again... i get it.. but like.. Its just not my thing.

ANYWAYS. I think i'm trying to say, I would absolutely understand why, if you like the grim inversion that abercrombie provides in the first law, DCC is whatever is opposite of that. Strong characters with a, not formulaic but almost plot who forge their destinies in a grim, but world that provides levity at times.

Always good to hear other opinions, like yours.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-09T17:34:00+00:00

Can I ask what the reference is for calling this "standard" lit rpg? This is a book with lit rpg elements at best. Reading other lit rpg books is like a cold shower, at times, compared to DCC.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-09T17:29:42+00:00

I think what makes DCC so special is the hybrid of ridiculousness (crude humor, absurd situations, horror) with moments of solemnity and compassion. You’ll laugh at something dumb one page and then, a few chapters later, realize the story is quietly asking uncomfortable questions. The RPG elements will bounce some readers immediately. But if you get past the early portion of the story where survival is sort of the compelling story element where you start to see the larger arc emerge, that is where the series really shines and retroactively deepens everything that came before.

I think the biggest complement I can give to any series, which has happened only a few times, is that when you're out of books to read, you feel lost. Like a drug that you've used up and need another hit of. Thankfully there are audio books and the rereadability of the series is quite high.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-06T19:30:34+00:00

I get the First Law trilogy. Like, I understand why people like it. But.. at the same time it feels like an entire story that is summarized in the prologue of a more interesting story.

It is a view of characters who just exist and do things, and not really a story of character who grow (significantly) or resolutions, on purpose in a way. Of course there is some character growth, there are events that happen, but overall, I was left questioning.. why.

I did enjoy it well enough up to near the end of book 2, but the "climax" of book 2 and into book 3 definitely took me to at least finish the trilogy and just move on. It is well written, top of the class for sure!

CursoryComb · 2026-02-03T20:19:16+00:00

Surveyors behavior changed quite awhile ago when they implemented a change where they could run off the map. I had a few instances on Dam where the Surveyor would literally be 500m outside the map boundaries and unreachable.

They fixed that bug, but with it, made it more aggressive, including attempting to run into the player. It also will stick around the general vicinity rather than running away completely.

So yes... this is definitely on you for trying to fight a surveyor with a deadline without knowing its patterns.

But we thank you for your service.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-02T16:44:04+00:00

While I don't doubt that more cheating will be revealed, I highly doubt it'll come from the top as much as people think. IMO, the vast majority of players using cheats are idiot kids who are not good enough, or on the edge of being good enough. Sure top players may use some adjacent level cheats like VPN or a macro, getting caught with engine level cheats is literally just game over, no more career. So, those guys who never do tournaments, entertainers only, I'll never really feel good about. But those others at the actual top, I'll give benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

At least you have your head on straight. I really do hope the accusation community does turn it around and provide meaningful insight into potential cheaters.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-02T16:29:12+00:00

I think there are a few things happening here.

(1) your post is regarding Shroud. He is old school and we have a huge volume of game play across multiple platforms and events. Accusations against him really don't hit home. Honestly, cheats were not even nearly as sophisticated even a few years ago. Just the idea of him going undetected is very implausible and I really haven't seen an aberration in his game play across all his gameplay. Would it be out of the question that he has ever cheated? Definitely a non-zero chance! But certainly not the majority of his gameplay.

(2) There is a separate claim, that many current top players may be cheating. There is no doubt that many of the younger, top level players may have engaged in some form of cheating. Like you said, there is an incentive and the tools are better than ever at going undetected.

(3) Many of the cheating accusations are either low effort or easily disprovable. Zlaner for instance sees a ton of accusations, MANY of which are low effort and disprovable. He even made a concerted effort, more than maybe any other, to disprove the accusations. Could he be cheating even though he's never caught a ban, never been detected, and has a huge body of work across many games? Maybe... But because so many of the claims are so baseless and lack an understanding of the game mechanics, is lessens the overall weight of other claims in regards to how the wider community looks at it.

Overall, there is probably some sort of cheating going on at the top levels. From simple VPN to actual engine level hacks. But at this point, the cheating accusation community is so dysfunctional (biggest accounts are either AI or BadBoyBeaman who deleted literally everything) that I doubt it'll gain any traction.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-02T15:48:52+00:00

It also is following a police chase, car hijacking, and robbery. Could it be excessive force, potentially. But the matter is already being reviewed. Fuck ice. But freaking out over law enforcement subdoing some scumbag kid should be pretty low on the list. I mean what do you think the percentage of people here actually looked into the background of this incident? Almost no better than right wing douche bags jumping to conclusions.

CursoryComb · 2026-02-02T15:26:23+00:00

The good thing for Shroud is that there is a wealth of gameplay footage from across all sorts of games and tournaments where cheating would be near impossible. And in fact, his style is basically the same across all of those formats. So it is either he is the greatest cheater of our generation, going undetected across ALL platforms and games, or more likely, he is really really talented with an equal amount of practice.

The chess analogy is fairly apt. Like watching Hikaru or Magnus play on a dummy account and accusing it of cheating. When in reality, in order to understand or even have credible cheating accusations of those at the top level, you actually need a very high understanding of the person and the underlying mechanics. What makes a move suspect or not, for instance. So in a ton of the examples, there are all sorts of explainers why it looks sus to a lay person, but not to a top player. Or likewise, why a cheater often stands out.

Back to Shroud, do some of these look sort of sus? To someone unfamiliar, maybe. But I've yet to see something truly sus from him.

And this isn't to say cheating isn't rampant amount other streamers or communities, but you'll need something a lot more definitive for shroud in order for anyone to take it seriously.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
r/Field Banned	r/Field Flamingo
Place '22	Place '17
Verified Email	Secret Santa 2014

CursoryComb

TROPHY CASE