Madden NFL 25 - Formation Audibles (UPDATED)

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by juicer420

...It's so much better and realistic than what we had before. And we haven't even seen it yet. How can anyone criticize this already?

LOL

10 char

[juicer420]

Here's how the entire system should work.

1. We need out of game formation substitutions back.
2. Coaches can then set all their formations as they would like. Even HB in the slot, TE outside, or WR in the backfield etc.
3. Then when you audible, the game can match your current on the field personnel with formations that you set up.

So, if you have one formation, lets say a 3 WR set with 2 backs...but you play a TE as one of the WRs...if you audible, you can either go to a similar formation that you set or to a 2 WR/2 HB/1 TE.

And vice versa. If you come out in a base set, but have a formation with the TE lined up outside, then when you audible...you can go to this variation formation that you decide.

Also, multiple position eligibility is needed.

[BezO]

IMO, this is how the system should work...

Select personnel
Select (any) formation
Select play (all possible play types & route combinations should be in all formations)

If you want to audible, same, except personnel of course.

I like formation subs from the huddle, but more for using a 2nd RB, repositioning WRs, etc. It should not be the lone mechanic for unconventional positioning.

[FlyEaglesFly3]

Quote: Originally Posted by BezO

IMO, this is how the system should work... I like formation subs from the huddle, but more for using a 2nd RB, repositioning WRs, etc. It should not be the lone mechanic for unconventional positioning.

I really enjoy formation subs. I love substituting in my Big back for short yardage, or put a TE at FB, motion him outside of a tackle to balance the formation, put in a tall WR near the end zone, etc. very fun to be strategic.

[juicer420]

Quote: Originally Posted by BezO

IMO, this is how the system should work... Select personnel Select (any) formation Select play (all possible play types & route combinations should be in all formations) If you want to audible, same, except personnel of course. I like formation subs from the huddle, but more for using a 2nd RB, repositioning WRs, etc. It should not be the lone mechanic for unconventional positioning.

If you choose your personnel first, you should be limited to the formations you can select or audible to. The last thing I would want to see is someone choose 4 WR personnel (so I would choose a dime or quarter coverage) and then they come out in a heavy formation with wideouts playing TE and fullback.

I think the limitations need to be there. But on the same token, players with versatility should be able to be used in multiple positions.

Which is why I say they need to add multiple position eligibility. If a dude like Cobb could be a WR and a HB, even with the formation limitations, you could expand your personnel to more formations when he is on the field.

I also like in the huddle subs, but I think we should be able to set our formations before hand. And make changes on the fly in the game.

[FlyEaglesFly3]

I think the problem is that the real NFL is a game about matchups and weaknesses.

In madden those matchups don't matter.

Example.
Chip Kelly likes TEs because they're too big for CBs and too fast for LBs. in madden the height and weight against the CB really hasn't mattered, and TEs can use their body over CBs.
LBs can play good man coverage with any TE in the game as well.

If you have a LB mismatched on a WR, the WR can only go deep to beat that LB, into the safeties they go. In the NFL, WRs like the matchup because they know they can run any route against a LB, and it's a mismatch not only in straight speed, but they're much more agile as well. I think making the players smaller/field bigger would fix some of these issues.

Videos have confirmed that a 5'0 160 lbs OT with a 5 rating in all attributes can hold his own against Courtney Upshaw, so blocking with a WR with a 50 blocking rating will be able to contribute vs LBs and DEs, that's why I don't want WRs to be able to move in to TE or RB

[juicer420]

Quote: Originally Posted by FlyEaglesFly3

I think the problem is that the real NFL is a game about matchups and weaknesses. In madden those matchups don't matter. Example. Chip Kelly likes TEs because they're too big for CBs and too fast for LBs. in madden the height and weight against the CB really hasn't mattered, and TEs can use their body over CBs. LBs can play good man coverage with any TE in the game as well. If you have a LB mismatched on a WR, the WR can only go deep to beat that LB, into the safeties they go. In the NFL, WRs like the matchup because they know they can run any route against a LB, and it's a mismatch not only in straight speed, but they're much more agile as well. I think making the players smaller/field bigger would fix some of these issues. Videos have confirmed that a 5'0 160 lbs OT with a 5 rating in all attributes can hold his own against Courtney Upshaw, so blocking with a WR with a 50 blocking rating will be able to contribute vs LBs and DEs, that's why I don't want WRs to be able to move in to TE or RB

I agree with this. The ratings, interactions, and physics need to be improved. There's no denying that.

One thing I wish we could receive are scouting reports of opponents. I don't play online head to head often, but I do play in franchise with a handful of friends.

I would love to see scouting reports that showed me the personnel groupings and formations my opponent typically runs. In my "gameplan" I would like to match up those personnel groupings with the defensive personnel I choose.

So in game, when my opponent chooses a specific set, my defensive personnel is picked for me based on what I game planned. Then I can choose the coverage and defensive play I would like to run.

Obviously, allow me to change my mind on the fly if my gameplan I chose isn't working.

That's how they do it in the NFL. Teams are allotted enough time to match personnel changes the opposing team makes on offense. So when certain groupings step onto the field, the defense is sending its counter moves on the field as well.

A scouting report will also let me know that a team will use a Randall Cobb in multiple positions. So I need to decide if my defense can stop the run in the nickel defense or if I need to run my base defense and match up Cobb with a safety or linebacker.

When the Niners played the Packers early in the season...when Cobb was on the field, they ran a nickel defense. Even if he lined up in the backfield. They just stuck Bowman on him and he did an adequate job. This is because the Niners can stop the run in their nickel defense.

These are the type of match ups and match up problems we need to see in Madden. Not trying to defend an out of position player that has more speed than the guy covering him.

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by juicer420

If you choose your personnel first, you should be limited to the formations you can select or audible to. The last thing I would want to see is someone choose 4 WR personnel (so I would choose a dime or quarter coverage) and then they come out in a heavy formation with wideouts playing TE and fullback.

No need to separate personnel from formations in that case.

IRL, a defensive coordinator is basing his personnel on the offense's personnel (also considering down & distance). He doesn't know what formation the offense will come out in.

Have you not seen a team in base personnel split 1 or both RBs? TE lined up outside a WR? It's not only done with versatile players. It's sometimes done with players that will probably never catch a pass from there just to dictate & reveal coverage. Teams will send their blocking, no hands FB out to WR just to see what the defense will do. Do you send a LB, SS or CB? What does that say about the coverage & who does that leave to cover the other 4 eligible receivers? The RB is not always sent out there because he's the next coming of Marchall Faulk.

Quote: Originally Posted by FlyEaglesFly3

I think the problem is that the real NFL is a game about matchups and weaknesses. In madden those matchups don't matter. Example. Chip Kelly likes TEs because they're too big for CBs and too fast for LBs. in madden the height and weight against the CB really hasn't mattered, and TEs can use their body over CBs. LBs can play good man coverage with any TE in the game as well. If you have a LB mismatched on a WR, the WR can only go deep to beat that LB, into the safeties they go. In the NFL, WRs like the matchup because they know they can run any route against a LB, and it's a mismatch not only in straight speed, but they're much more agile as well. I think making the players smaller/field bigger would fix some of these issues. Videos have confirmed that a 5'0 160 lbs OT with a 5 rating in all attributes can hold his own against Courtney Upshaw, so blocking with a WR with a 50 blocking rating will be able to contribute vs LBs and DEs, that's why I don't want WRs to be able to move in to TE or RB

Now we're talking. Why not insist on these fixes instead of the limitations & band-aids? Do we want more realistic blocking or position limitations? More realistic route running or position limitations? More realistic footwork & coverage or position limitations?

But we're asking for & celebrating band-aids to hide these problems instead. How do you build on that? When whatever team uses whatever player in some new way this year and it takes off around the NFL, then what? How did the limitations for the Wildcat work out? How sweet would the spread option already be had we all been asking for the real fixes the last 5 years?

Aim high fellas!