#3 up Logic is flawed

The logic for taking #3 up and over is flawed in both Cover 3 Match and Cover 4 Quarters and Palms.

Cover 3 Match

With formations that are 3 strong to one side, the Weak hook defender should have #3 up when both the weak seam and weak deep 3rd are occupied. However this does not happen in the game. What happens is that instead of staying with #3 on the deep over for example, the hook defender will drop off after a certain depth. That is incorrect. The reason being that the deep middle third does match on to that route and therefore it is that hook defender’s responsibility to take the over to the sideline, if the seam defender and weak side 3rd are occupied.

To mitigate: if the weak seam is not occupied in the flat, then he drop into the seam area to look for any deep crossover if the hook defender is going to drop off, if not then hook defender is solely responsible.

Cover 4 Quarters

In Cover 4, the 3rec will take #3 up and over to an extent and drop off, however the  weak side safety will not properly position themselves to effectively take the route. 

To mitigate: Either the 3rec will take route completely when #3 goes over, while the safety is zoned out or effectively code the weak side safety to have proper leverage to take the exchange.

Cover 4 Palms

Same issue as Quarters against Trips for the weak side safety when #3 goes up and over, but for the strong side safety, in this case. The strong side safety is coded poorly on deep overs and same side corner routes when the exchange between the 3rec happens. Also, there is poor coding for the 3rec and safety against over routes that start under the 3rec but end up being deeper across the field.

To mitigate: improve the leverage logic of the strong side safety and 3rec. If the route starts under the 3rec then it’s the 3rec responsibility, if the route initially goes over it’s the safety’s.