Musings on FOFC Leagues/Tourney and Realism...

[wade moore]

I debated a lot about posting this thread. I don't want to point fingers at anyone specifically, although it was triggered by a game I've played with an FOFC'er. So - sorry to that FOFC'er because it will probably be obvious to them that I'm talking about them, but my goal here is not to call anyone out but to have a real conversation about this.

How much do we care about realism in our leagues/tourney? Much of why I want to play with FOFC'ers is to get away with the cheese/unrealistic play that you get when you play with the random shmoes out there. When I play a game with an FOFC'er where they are doing what to me is clearly unrealistic (although not necessarily cheese or absurd like going for it on 4th every time) it is very disappointing. My expectation when I play with an FOFC'er is that it will be relatively close to what you would expect from a real football game.

However, I have had at least one experience that I felt wasn't like that and I wasn't sure how to deal with it. I chose to suck it up and play the game out, but it's certainly not something I would want to encounter on a regular basis.

Is this something that we care to do something about in our leagues? If so, how do we do it? There are many arguments that can be made for what is realistic and what is not and you can start to get to some very subjective positions that can lead to a lot of hard feelings.

Has anyone else had this feeling? Does anyone else have a though on whether it is something we want to do anything about?

[Kodos]

I certainly prefer opponents who play realistically, with a variety of plays, formations, some balance between passing and running, yada yada yada. For the most part, that's what I've gotten. There has been at least one game with an FOFCer where it seemed like they were doing pretty much the same few plays the whole game. There's always going to be a spectrum of play styles, and it's hard to know where the line between sim-style and non-sim falls some times. However, I guess if I had played this person at random, I probably would have chosen the avoid option after the game.

[Logan]

I've played probably 10-12 games with guys here, all of which are in either of the leagues. I would count every single game as very realistically-played. From matching up teams evenly to a good mix of run/pass and play selection, it's really been a lot of fun.

If this league never works out, I'd feel pretty comfortable just randomly playing guys like Mike1409, Kodos, Gramm, Karl, etc...and that's not to mention that I purposely haven't gotten into games with Ironhead and Detox so our Big 12 matchups will be a bit of a surprise.

So, no, I'm not worried.

[wade moore]

Logan - I appreciate the thought that you're "not worried" because you've had good experiences, but I bring this up specifically because I had what I'd called a bad experience.

As Kodos said - if this game I'm speaking of was some random, there's no way I'd play them again.

[cartman]

Same here. I haven't had an issue playing any of the FOFC guys so far. I'm sure they don't either, because I usually lose.

[Kodos]

I know I enjoyed my game against Cartman thoroughly.

[wade moore]

Again guys, I appreciate that you haven't had problems.

But how do we deal with it if you do? That's really what I'm asking you. It sounds like at least two of us (me and Kodos) have had concerns.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by wade moore

Logan - I appreciate the thought that you're "not worried" because you've had good experiences, but I bring this up specifically because I had what I'd called a bad experience.

As Kodos said - if this game I'm speaking of was some random, there's no way I'd play them again.

First of all, I realized my response had absolutely nothing to do with what you asked, so apologies for that.

I don't know...3 strikes (complaints from 3 different people to Detox/EF27) and you're out? Maybe just a PM to the person voicing your concerns, and ask that the person to try to avoid doing whatever it is they're doing? I assume it's possible the person might not even realize that they are doing such a thing. It could help if you described exactly what caused you and Kodos to feel like it was a bad experience, if only for a heads-up that the person will realize that whatever it is is causing others to not enjoy playing them.

I'm pretty sure it's not me that you guys are describing...since I haven't played Wade and Kodos beat me soundly .

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I know I enjoyed my game against Cartman thoroughly.

Me 2. I always laugh because he hits the wrong button at least a few times a game.


I think, to be honest, we may need to call them out (in a respectful, polite way). I'm not sure how else to handle it.

[Sun Tzu]

I think first you should take the complaint/issue to the commish of that respective league. Explain what happened, and then the commish can either take it up with that person via PM's or ICQ/MSN/Yahoo/AIM. If the problem persists and that person doesn't correct the problem, then I imagine suspension first and then eventually termination would be the proper measures.

[Bigsmooth]

Maybe some specifics would help?

[Kodos]

I'll provide some details. The guy in question ran out of the same formation (shotgun, 4 WRs) pretty much 80+ percent of the time (probably closer to 90), and seemed to run maybe 3 to 5 basic plays, which mostly involved dropping back/rolling out until a guy underneath opened up and then hitting them. Again and again. It just seemed like he was really taking advantage of the suspect underneath coverage and poor pass rush to large degree. Runs were infrequent. Different formations or numbers of WRs were infrequent.

I don't know where the line in the sand is for sim versus non-sim, but it seemed like this person was over the line to me. Like I said, if it had been a random person and not a FOFCer, I would have hit avoid player after the game.

[Bigsmooth]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'll provide some details. The guy in question ran out of the same formation (shotgun, 4 WRs) pretty much 80+ percent of the time (probably closer to 90), and seemed to run maybe 3 to 5 basic plays, which mostly involved dropping back/rolling out until a guy underneath opened up and then hitting them. Again and again. It just seemed like he was really taking advantage of the suspect underneath coverage and poor pass rush to large degree. Runs were infrequent. Different formations or numbers of WRs were infrequent.

I don't know where the line in the sand is for sim versus non-sim, but it seemed like this person was over the line to me. Like I said, if it had been a random person and not a FOFCer, I would have hit avoid player after the game.

Pretty much what I assumed. The game is really easy if you roll out like that every play. Every once in awhile, if the pocket should collapse, it's all good. Or on a critical play. There are ways to make him pay though, too. Just blitz off the edge or with your cb's. Even that only works 1 time in 5.

[Kodos]

I don't think the concern is how to beat it (I only lost by a field goal). The issue, at least to me, is that I play FOFCers to avoid that type of player, because I don't find it fun to play against that style of player.

[Sun Tzu]

Oh...yeah nm

[Bigsmooth]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I don't think the concern is how to beat it (I only lost by a field goal). The issue, at least to me, is that I play FOFCers to avoid that type of player, because I don't find it fun to play against that style of player.

Very true.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I'll provide some details. The guy in question ran out of the same formation (shotgun, 4 WRs) pretty much 80+ percent of the time (probably closer to 90), and seemed to run maybe 3 to 5 basic plays, which mostly involved dropping back/rolling out until a guy underneath opened up and then hitting them. Again and again. It just seemed like he was really taking advantage of the suspect underneath coverage and poor pass rush to large degree. Runs were infrequent. Different formations or numbers of WRs were infrequent.

I don't know where the line in the sand is for sim versus non-sim, but it seemed like this person was over the line to me. Like I said, if it had been a random person and not a FOFCer, I would have hit avoid player after the game.

I can understand how this could suck. Just curious, was he actually playing like a Hawai'i or Texas Tech (which is built on the 4 and 5 wide receiver, shotgun spread and airing it like crazy (and they are keen on the hitting the receivers quick and short)-style offense?

[Mike1409]

Originally Posted by Logan

I've played probably 10-12 games with guys here, all of which are in either of the leagues. I would count every single game as very realistically-played. From matching up teams evenly to a good mix of run/pass and play selection, it's really been a lot of fun.

If this league never works out, I'd feel pretty comfortable just randomly playing guys like Mike1409, Kodos, Gramm, Karl, etc...and that's not to mention that I purposely haven't gotten into games with Ironhead and Detox so our Big 12 matchups will be a bit of a surprise.

So, no, I'm not worried.

You only mention me cause you like to kick my ass!!! but your day is coming!!!

But back on point I agree that a PM to the comissioner to make him aware of the issue and if he get several confirmations then a suspension shouldn't be out of the question.

I have played several people here and have had good games all around, mostly because I lose, but I don't want to plaay cheesers either.

[Mike1409]

dola

the other thing is by playing a small group of people even someone who is blurriing the lines we all have tells and learning those is important to stopping it in the future.

I would tell eveyone the things I have learned from them but I don't have the skills to make a difference!!!

[wade moore]

Kodos pretty much summed it up on what was happening (we talked today and we were both talking about the same player).

It's not about "how do you beat it?" as Kodos said. It's about the style of play I'm looking for from this group. Let's say he ran 50 plays (i have no idea how many plays he ran) i'd say around 8 were run plays - and that's with him up 2-3 td's most of the game.

I don't know the team he was playing with that well, but as far as I know they're not a gimmic team in real life.

I will say something to the commish of the league i'm in, but i bring it up now because we're not in league play yet and i wanted the opinions on how to deal with it.

Thanks guys.

[Anthony]

i'm not the guy you're talking about, but i think you're asking for too much. i had someone from here (i forgot who, i think maybe it was kcchief) who was quasi-cheesy and he won the game. whatever, i had fun. all i ask out of FOFC opponents is that they don't go for it on 4th down all the time and don't disconnect from the game if i'm ahead. i think that's all you can really hope for. anything else - it's up to you to stop the other guy. if you were a real life coach and you noticed everytime you had your RB run between the RT and your RG and it'd result in a 20 yard gain - you would do it until the other team figured out a way to stop it. to do anything else is putting yourself at a disadvantage (ie, "i know this play will definitely work, but i'll select anther play just for the sake of changing it up a bit").

besides, if what the player was doing was so obvious, it'd be easy to know what to look for. i have a huge volume of plays that i feel comfortable utilizing so i wouldn't ever be considered a cheesy player cuz i come at you from all different angles, but i understand in a game the other team will do whatever they think will bring them success and its up to me to stop them. if i can't figure out how to do it then who's fault is it?

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Anthony

i'm not the guy you're talking about, but i think you're asking for too much. i had someone from here (i forgot who, i think maybe it was kcchief) who was quasi-cheesy and he won the game.

Ok......

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Anthony

i'm not the guy you're talking about, but i think you're asking for too much. i had someone from here (i forgot who, i think maybe it was kcchief) who was quasi-cheesy and he won the game. whatever, i had fun. all i ask out of FOFC opponents is that they don't go for it on 4th down all the time and don't disconnect from the game if i'm ahead. i think that's all you can really hope for. anything else - it's up to you to stop the other guy. if you were a real life coach and you noticed everytime you had your RB run between the RT and your RG and it'd result in a 20 yard gain - you would do it until the other team figured out a way to stop it. to do anything else is putting yourself at a disadvantage (ie, "i know this play will definitely work, but i'll select anther play just for the sake of changing it up a bit").

besides, if what the player was doing was so obvious, it'd be easy to know what to look for. i have a huge volume of plays that i feel comfortable utilizing so i wouldn't ever be considered a cheesy player cuz i come at you from all different angles, but i understand in a game the other team will do whatever they think will bring them success and its up to me to stop them. if i can't figure out how to do it then who's fault is it?

You seem to be missing the point.

Playing the way this player plays it is somewhere between incredibly difficult and impossible to stop, even when you know what's coming. This game has flaws. If you exploit those flaws well it's virtually impossible to stop you.

And I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that someone deviate from calling the same 3 or 4 plays all game at all.

[Anthony]

i don't really think its the same 3 or 4 plays. if it were you could simply take control of a DB and pick off the passes at will. what it is is simply the same 2 or 3 types of plays (QB rolls out and hits an open WR). if someone were to use the same 3 or 4 plays against me i would welcome it, it'd take the guesswork out of playing defense.

what you're asking the opponent is this: you have great success doing the same thing over and over. rather than me try to stop you, it'd be great if you could deviate from what brings you success, try some plays that you haven't practiced before so that i can then take advantage of you and stop you. it's much easier for you to mix it up just for mixing it up sake than it is for me to get better defensively.

don't you think that's silly? don't get me wrong, i completely know where you're coming from, but i'll just point out again that i think we're expecting too much and that sometimes people's will to win is greater than people's will to win realistically.

wade moore to Shaq circa 1993: "Mr. O'Neill, my team can't seem to defend you because you're so big and strong all your teammates have to do is throw the ball into the paint and you'll just bully your way to the basket and dunk the ball. that's all you do is just dunk. can you simply find some other ways to score points, cuz it's getting kinda cheesy and my favorite team can't figure out a way to stop you."

[Anthony]

i don't want to give the impression that i'm advocating the cheesy FOFC player in question, cuz i run the risk of being guilty by association and i'm positive that anyone who's played against me will have nothing but praise for my playing style (especially since i lose most of the time). it's annoying, i agree.

[wade moore]

Let's compare real life to a video game because it's valid.

Give me a fucking break.

I'm not expecting too much. Not even close. This is a very, very realistic expectation. I have now played 4 or 5 FOFC'ers and only one is even questionable and he's way far off from the others.

[Raiders Army]

If it's blatant, that's a pretty clear cut situation and I'd think most would agree...however, when is it not blatant?

For example, I won last night 15-14 against some guy in a ranked game. He played realistically and so did I. But...I won the game by almost not being realistic. I was driving down the field, he expended one time out and there was about a minute left. He stopped me for 4th and 3 on the 14 yard line. Now if I kick the field goal and go up 15-14 I leave him time on the clock and my return team hadn't done squat to keep him pinned deep. I decide to go for it, run slants out of shotgun, and get the first down. I run out the clock and kick the field goal to win the game with 4 seconds left. Was that unrealistic?

Here's another example. For the most part, the QB sneak is worth a yard or two almost every time (I want to say every time, but I'm sure someone will correct me. I've never seen it stopped and I've never stopped it). Is it cheesing to run the QB sneak if it's 3rd and short every time? Or would it be an example of realism where a team finds a play that works and uses it when they need to? What if it's 4th and short? Does that make a difference?

[Bigsmooth]

Originally Posted by Raiders Army

If it's blatant, that's a pretty clear cut situation and I'd think most would agree...however, when is it not blatant?

For example, I won last night 15-14 against some guy in a ranked game. He played realistically and so did I. But...I won the game by almost not being realistic. I was driving down the field, he expended one time out and there was about a minute left. He stopped me for 4th and 3 on the 14 yard line. Now if I kick the field goal and go up 15-14 I leave him time on the clock and my return team hadn't done squat to keep him pinned deep. I decide to go for it, run slants out of shotgun, and get the first down. I run out the clock and kick the field goal to win the game with 4 seconds left. Was that unrealistic?

Here's another example. For the most part, the QB sneak is worth a yard or two almost every time (I want to say every time, but I'm sure someone will correct me. I've never seen it stopped and I've never stopped it). Is it cheesing to run the QB sneak if it's 3rd and short every time? Or would it be an example of realism where a team finds a play that works and uses it when they need to? What if it's 4th and short? Does that make a difference?

Good point on the QB sneak. Money every time. It's tough, I do feel guilty when I use it, but man, I really want that TD/1st Down. I've actually intentionally not used it out of guilt, choosing to punt from my opponents 45 yl. Shouldn't have to make choices in a video game out of guilt.

That being said, I could have just as easily threw a swing pass in the flat or found a WR open in the middle of the field and gotten the first down. All are similarly money unfortunately. Realistically, on 3rd/4th and inches, how often does a team get a first down? 85-90 % of the time? Cheese?

[Kodos]

I use it every play. Is that a problem?



I do end up punting a lot.

[Mike1409]

Originally Posted by Bigsmooth

Good point on the QB sneak. Money every time. It's tough, I do feel guilty when I use it, but man, I really want that TD/1st Down. I've actually intentionally not used it out of guilt, choosing to punt from my opponents 45 yl. Shouldn't have to make choices in a video game out of guilt.

That being said, I could have just as easily threw a swing pass in the flat or found a WR open in the middle of the field and gotten the first down. All are similarly money unfortunately. Realistically, on 3rd/4th and inches, how often does a team get a first down? 85-90 % of the time? Cheese?

I don't think a QB sneak is cheese on 4th and inches under these conditions.

1st throught 3rd Qtr. On the opponents side of the 50 but outside of field goal range.
4th Qtr and trailing anywhere.

IRL the 4th and inches conversion rate is in the 90's at least.

[Logan]

Posting this here since it's the most "central" thread for all the leagues...

Anybody think we should see if we can get a sub-subforum for each league? With a bunch of threads out there already and all the leagues being at different points in time, I just think it would be easier to have all ECFL stuff in one area, for example. This way it's harder for me to miss a thread related to my league. Just throwing it out there...

[Sun Tzu]

Maybe before every EBFL thread they should put *LOGAN CLICK HERE!!!* too?

[kcchief19]

I'm as passive-aggressive as anyone but here are my two main thoughts:

1) If I'm playing what someone thinks is cheesy, I would like to know. Maybe some people wouldn't take that well but personally I'd like to know. If you're more comfortable talking to the commish, that's your prerogative. But you have to let the person know.

2) You have to better define cheesy. I played a guy who the entire game simply dropped back/rolled out and heaved the ball downfield. Every single play. To me, that's cheesy. Another guy faked a punt or field every time on fourth down. Again, cheesy.

I don't know if I'm the guy HA was talking about or not. I'm pretty sure I'm not the guy Wade or kodos is talking about because I don't think I've played either one of them. But I play with two teams (Colorado, Missouri) who run spread offenses and use short passes extensively with a lot of outs and slants. Those are plays I'm good at and my teams are good at. Those plays can certainly be defended because I've lost plenty of games. I've played with other teams that have different strengths, and if I were playing with them I would use different plays.

I have tried to avoid doing anything I think is cheesy. I do have a concern that people will think I pass the ball too frequently for their taste, but I'm running a spread offense. I think I would have a problem if someone said that I'm playing with Colorado I MUST operate Colorado's offense the way Colorado runs it rather than say the way Texas Tech does.

I also think a little bit along the way of HA in that I don't necessarily see the point of forcing myself to call plays I know will fail just to be realistic. I don't want to play cheesy nor do I want to be play cheesy people -- I just hope our definitions are the same. I haven't played anyone among FOFC I consider particularly cheesy.

Which brings is back to what is cheesy. It's a video game. Personally, I have fewer concerns about whether a guy passes 90% of the time or runs the same play over and over than I do about whether the plays are executed realistically -- i.e., the guy who goes Tecmo Bowl and dances around and throws nothing but bombs the entire game.

Are "trick plays" cheesy? I'll be honest and admit that I felt bad my first game because I called an option pass play that I executed perfectly and threw for a TD and I was afraid that was too chesy. Of course, I've run it since then with much less success so I don't feel as bad.

Is button mashing cheesy? I can't run the football. I suck at it. I'm not good at button mashing but when I play my dynasty I'll spin, juke and hurdle my ass off trying to get an extra yard or break a run. Is that cheesy?

So far the definition we seem to have is rolling out and throwing underneath. Is cheese just like porn -- you know it when you see it?

Bottomline, if you think someone in our leagues is cheesy, I think you should tell them. Be honest.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

I'm as passive-aggressive as anyone but here are my two main thoughts:

1) If I'm playing what someone thinks is cheesy, I would like to know. Maybe some people wouldn't take that well but personally I'd like to know. If you're more comfortable talking to the commish, that's your prerogative. But you have to let the person know.

2) You have to better define cheesy. I played a guy who the entire game simply dropped back/rolled out and heaved the ball downfield. Every single play. To me, that's cheesy. Another guy faked a punt or field every time on fourth down. Again, cheesy.

I don't know if I'm the guy HA was talking about or not. I'm pretty sure I'm not the guy Wade or kodos is talking about because I don't think I've played either one of them. But I play with two teams (Colorado, Missouri) who run spread offenses and use short passes extensively with a lot of outs and slants. Those are plays I'm good at and my teams are good at. Those plays can certainly be defended because I've lost plenty of games. I've played with other teams that have different strengths, and if I were playing with them I would use different plays.

I have tried to avoid doing anything I think is cheesy. I do have a concern that people will think I pass the ball too frequently for their taste, but I'm running a spread offense. I think I would have a problem if someone said that I'm playing with Colorado I MUST operate Colorado's offense the way Colorado runs it rather than say the way Texas Tech does.

I also think a little bit along the way of HA in that I don't necessarily see the point of forcing myself to call plays I know will fail just to be realistic. I don't want to play cheesy nor do I want to be play cheesy people -- I just hope our definitions are the same. I haven't played anyone among FOFC I consider particularly cheesy.

Which brings is back to what is cheesy. It's a video game. Personally, I have fewer concerns about whether a guy passes 90% of the time or runs the same play over and over than I do about whether the plays are executed realistically -- i.e., the guy who goes Tecmo Bowl and dances around and throws nothing but bombs the entire game.

Are "trick plays" cheesy? I'll be honest and admit that I felt bad my first game because I called an option pass play that I executed perfectly and threw for a TD and I was afraid that was too chesy. Of course, I've run it since then with much less success so I don't feel as bad.

Is button mashing cheesy? I can't run the football. I suck at it. I'm not good at button mashing but when I play my dynasty I'll spin, juke and hurdle my ass off trying to get an extra yard or break a run. Is that cheesy?

So far the definition we seem to have is rolling out and throwing underneath. Is cheese just like porn -- you know it when you see it?

Bottomline, if you think someone in our leagues is cheesy, I think you should tell them. Be honest.

I agree with your post entirely. I think if you are a pass-happy or run-happy offense (say you throw 80-90% of the time), that's not cheesy. If you are playing against a team with a weak secondary who have poor coverage skills, isn't realistic to go after those weaknesses. If a team has a weak interior defensive line, wouldn't it be natural to alter your game to take advantage of that? As far a trick plays, I usually run two or three a play. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. It's the eliminate of the unexpected. I remember playing Kodos once and he pulled off a fake punt pass that just baffled me. Not that he was cheesy at all, it was a great play call (of course, I never had success with the fake special teams plays in the pass versions). I just was caught off guard. Part of out-smarting your opponent is to throw them an element of surprised (if you have the talent to do it).

I think if you roll-out with a fast quarterback every play, that could be cheesy. That's not to say you can't do it; sure you can. But not every play. If you are in the pocket and get flushed out by a collapsing pocket, I can see a roll-out. However, you can defend that if you wanted to. You might not be able to stop it every play, but you can distribute that pattern by sending a quick linebacker on a flat or QB spy hot route.

I agree with you on just being honest. I would want to know. Personally, to me, it's kind of hard to be describe cheesy players. You just know it when you see it. I haven't played any here that has been to cheesy at all.

[Kodos]

Just as a side note, you might be thinking of someone else. I don't think I've ever run a fake punt pass. Those damn things never work. If I go for it on 4th, it's with a regular play.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Just as a side note, you might be thinking of someone else. I don't think I've ever run a fake punt pass. Those damn things never work. If I go for it on 4th, it's with a regular play.

It was you. It was 4th and 3. For close to punt, too far from a real shot at making the field goal. I was in a punt block formation. I've only played Sun once and Mike once in the regular play; than cartman and I play our RFL game.

[Kodos]

Hmmm. Okay. I'd say that's extremely unusual for me to do that then.

[Anthony]

HENCE.....the element of SURPRISE!!!


i too will run a regular play if i have to go for it on 4th down. i don't go for it on 4th down unless i'm within 10 yards of a 1st down and i'm under the opponents 40 yard line. i rather not punt in that situation and i don't try FGs before the 30 yard line. if i'm gonna miss the FG and give you good field position then i might as well give you good field position going for a 1st down. 'tis better to fail at trying to get 7 pts than it is to fail at trying to get 3 pts. that's how i look at it.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Hmmm. Okay. I'd say that's extremely unusual for me to do that then.

Trust me, I remember that play.

[Grammaticus]

I missed this thread back when it was started and got a chance to give it a quick read Saturday night. Just got around to putting my thoughts together. Sorry, it is a long post, but there is a lot to respond too.

Of course the player Wade and Kodos are talking about is me. Wade had only played two games, so it was pretty easy to determine when Kodos was ruled out. Plus I played Kodos and although he passed a bit more than he ran, he actually ran the ball more than most people so far.

Wade and Kodos, I'm sorry to hear that you considered your online game with me as a bad experience. I think you both hit on a few things that are accurate. A few other points made are not correct. Although I realize they may still be your perceptions and as the saying goes a persons perception becomes reality to them regardless of fact.

Correct assessments:

I ran a spread offense and generally threw shorter passes designed to emulate a short pass ball control offense. I threw about 80% of the time and ran very unsuccessfully 20% of the time. I used the SMU playbook, where all (except goal line and special teams) formations have 3+ WRs (almost all are 4 WR). The idea was to play Texas Tech / spread style football. I believe this is a very realistic type of NCAA football played by a rapidly growing number offenses in the NCAA. I think Wade's "realistic" approach is highly subjective in a console football game. I would argue that I emulated a much more realistic version of spread football than Wade emulated a North Carolina rush based balanced attack. NC rushed the ball roughly 53% of the time in 2007. Wade rushed the ball close to 25% of the time in our game. Kodos rushed the ball about 33% of the time and a good portion of those were option run plays, where he got the majority of his rushing yardage and big plays in general.

Incorrect assessments:

Kodos, I certainly did not run the same 5 plays over and over or just constantly roll out and just look for the open guy underneath. Most of my passes were in the air from between the tackles and usually immediately at the end of my dropback. A few plays are designed to roll out and I may run those. But not often as they are PA. Otherwise rolling out was infrequent and usually when I was under pressure and often resulted in big loss sacks or INTs. I have a system of going from play to play that almost always requires changing formations. I use a wide range of plays. Again, all of my formations in the playbook had 3, 4 or 5 WR sets. In all seriousness, I don't have 4 or 5 money plays. Nothing "usually" works for me. It just depends on what is happening defensively. I generally felt like you were running the option and hitting the underneath pass most of the time too. I also considered our game very much above the belt, fun and competitive. It’s a shame it would have earned an ignore from you. But, I guess you can’t please everyone.

Many things have been identified as broken versus the CPU. Not all of these are broken against human opponents who can make adjustments to play. If you want to take away the underneath pass game, then make the adjustments. Just realize that it opens up other types of plays to a higher degree of success. Just like in real life football. You may not stop completions, but you can definately stop the first down. I have lost a lot of games against both the CPU and human opponents.

I think at the end of the day, neither of you really like the spread in this game and in Wade's case you don't like excessive passing (even short passes) when you are in the lead, even though spread offenses do this in real life. Maybe it is a longing for circa 1980's college football, I don't know. I don’t think you are wrong to like a certain style of football. But understand, there is more than one style of football.

Wade, regarding your comment about thinking Rice was not a gimmick team, I don't know what you define as gimmick (it's your description not mine). Basically they run a spread offense and put the ball in the air over 525 times in 2007. Also, their leading rusher in attempts and yards was their QB. Rice conformed to their style in the last 4 or 5 games of the 2007 season where they put the ball in the air 60 plus times per game. You are likely to see that from Rice in 2008. Honestly, if I had played Rice more to their true form, I really would have rolled out and turned it up field a lot. It would have generated more runs, but I think the rolling out would have given you fits.

I plan on employing a spread offense in the online league as well as the tourney and could pass about the same amount of time. I expect to rush a good 10% more against the CPU. If this is going to cause problems with a lot of the players, I will be happy to step out of the league and / or tourney and be replaced with someone else. I certainly do not want to play console games with someone who is having a “bad experience” or just “sticking it out” to finish the game. But I am also not going to limit my participation based on the feelings of one or two players.

[Bigsmooth]

Some good points Grammaticus. The spread offense is taking over college football and it is a huge difference from the "1980's" ball I grew up with. Often times, when watching, say, Oregon play last year, I wondered how they could ever be stopped when Dixon was on. Usually they weren't stopped. You have to give EA some credit for adapting the game to this style. I'm not sure where I'm going with this....but my point is, due to the new era (spread O) of college ball, the line between cheese and sim styles has blurred (in regards to console NCAA gaming).

When you think about it, the real life spread offense is the definition of cheese. It is (at it's roots) a gimmicky system used by less talented, smaller, slower teams to gain a competitive advantage. When programs with great talent start using it (West V, Oklahoma, Oregon) it is almost unfair at times.

blah, blah...stuff.

[Logan]

Well, I played Gramm in the tourney league, and I definitely didn't think he was cheap, cheesy, whatever you want to call it. I held Rice to 10 points with Kentucky, a team I'm not too familiar with, probably because I'm used to going up against spread offenses and I know the best way to play it (even if that isn't 100% effective).

[wade moore]

I appreciate the post Gramm.

I think you hit on a key point - in the back of my mind I still have not fully accepted to Spread Offense as anything but a "gimmic" offense - video game or real life. So, I'll take the criticism on that one. In addition, I didn't know that Rice ran a spread in real life - so that also makes a difference.

So - I will take a step back and accept that the plays you called may fit a realistic spread offense. That being said, I'm not sure if you realize how much you roll-out. While I know there are college offenses designed around the roll-out, I think most could agree that rolling out consistently gives a decided, unrealistic advantage in this game. Like I said - I'm not sure that you realize how much you do it. You say it creates sacks and INT's, but in reality in this game it generally gives a huge advantage to having time to pass, finding open mind, etc.

At any rate. I'll keep a more open mind to the spread offense. I would love if someone was willing to give any general concepts on how to stop it. I tried everything I could against gramm and nothing even slowed him down, let alone stopped him. Maybe I'm missing something, but I sure as hell couldn't figure anything out.


A side note - it's not really fair to use my running % as some example of how I play. I was down 2-3 TD's for the entire game so I had to pass a lot more.

[Kodos]

Part of it definitely could be that I don't like the spread offense (IU runs it, but I chose another playbook because I like a variety of formations like the I, Strong, Weak, etc.) Another problem for me is that on my standard def TV, underneath roots often end up off of the screen for me, which makes a passing game based on them tougher to defend. I can't see if a guy is being covered or not a lot of the time, especially on screens.

I'll agree with Wade -- you may roll out, or drop back, more than you realize. I just could never get to you before someone underneath opened up. It didn't matter if I sent blitzers or sat back in coverage, or if I switched between man or zone coverages. Nothing allowed my guys to cover long enough where we'd get adequate pressure on the QB to disrupt things.

It'd help if the game was stronger at covering underneath roots, or if QBs were punished more for leaving the pocket or throwing on the run. Or if the pass rush worked. A large part of the problem is the game itself.

Anyhow, I don't want this to be a witch hunt or anything. It just reminded me of how most random people play online, so maybe I'm just more averse to that style of play than others. I don't want to hurt someone else's enjoyment of the leagues or the tourney.

[Galaxy]

I usually will hot route a defender (or defenders) to a hook zone to help in the short coverage game, or either a flat or QB spy hot route to help take away the flanks from passing (such a screen or HB flank route) and running (with the QB on a roll out). Also, I haven't tried it, but what about the hot route a defender to man coverage on a particular player. I think in this year's game, you have to hot route defensively more so.

Hopefully the patch will fix some of the problems.

[Kodos]

I never use hot routes on D, so that's likely part of the problem.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by Kodos

I never use hot routes on D, so that's likely part of the problem.

Should play around with them and see if they help.

[Anthony]

hot routes would hardly work with me. i have no problem using a no-huddle offense. with no huddle and a quick snap you don't have time for defensive adjustments. ask wade, in our Air Force vs/ Army game (i was Army) i went to the no-huddle on my last drive and he didn't have enough time to really make any adjustments and i tired out his D.

[wade moore]

Originally Posted by Anthony

hot routes would hardly work with me. i have no problem using a no-huddle offense. with no huddle and a quick snap you don't have time for defensive adjustments. ask wade, in our Air Force vs/ Army game (i was Army) i went to the no-huddle on my last drive and he didn't have enough time to really make any adjustments and i tired out his D.

Yeah, definitely made a difference. The good thing is the audible setup has expanded so it gives you (as the offense) a lot more uptions out of a no-huddle.

[wade moore]

Side Note:

One o fthe secondary shifts. The "Man Align" shift. In previous versions I used this a lot. It would slight guys (especially LB's and Safeties) that were in man to shift down to be by the guy they were covering.

When I use this this year it appears to do exactly zilch. Anyone else notice this?