Worth Noting: All Single Back is now viable.

Ben E Lou · 11-03-2007, 08:59 AM

I'd tried this in the past with horrible failure. I'm not sure if it is something that worked its way into 6.1, or if I simply didn't have a QB who knew enough of the single-back formations to make it work. At any rate, it's clear that using single back nearly exclusively is workable now, given a QB who knows all five single back formations. I just set up a game plan with the '07 Colts that used the five single back formations exclusively in the first five screens (extreme pass, pass, slight pass, slight run, run). On "extreme run", I used the 5 2 TE sets (including single 2TE) and the GL 3TE exclusively. Here were the results:

Has anyone else tried this with miserable failure in the past? I just wonder if I was doing something terribly wrong, or if this is a part of the 6.1 tweaks.

Ben E Lou · 11-03-2007, 09:20 AM

Dola:

Note that it's unknown (at least to me) whether or not this could be *optimal* for any given team's roster, but I'd certainly assume that for a team that has:

1. a QB who knows all of the single-back formations,
2: 3 solid WRs,
and
3: a crappy FB,

using pretty much pure single-back may well be the best way to go.

What I *DO* know is that when I tried it in the past, it just completely sucked--which it clearly doesn't any more. It may or may not be the best way to go for your team, but at least it's a viable option, which I think is a good thing.

bulletsponge · 11-03-2007, 10:13 AM

thanks Skydog. now to get 3 good WR and a good RB and i can do this too!

Ben E Lou · 11-03-2007, 10:43 AM

I'm very pumped about it for SP. It seems like I always have more depth at WR than any other position in my SP careers.

Pacersfan46 · 11-03-2007, 11:26 AM

I'd be interested in seeing how it would work without Peyton Manning at the helm, and maybe an average QB who knows the formations.

I think just about anything will work with him running it.

-- Steve --

Ben E Lou · 11-03-2007, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacersfan46

I'd be interested in seeing how it would work without Peyton Manning at the helm, and maybe an average QB who knows the formations.

I think just about anything will work with him running it.

-- Steve --

Well, when I tried this in the past, the familiar messages all over the place nerfed it tremendously. I'm talking like 3.0ypc and 40% completion percentage with a good QB and receivers. It was clearly related to the engine, not the talent, at least partially, if not fully. It is *possible* that it was a situation where the QBs I tried it with didn't know all five of the single-back formations, and that's what caused it. I strongly suspect, though, that any QB who knows all five of them can have success.

Ben E Lou · 11-03-2007, 11:50 AM

Dola:

I just tried it with my shortpass QB, who knows all of the single-back formations. No nerfing of it there, either.

Daimyo · 11-03-2007, 04:05 PM

Nice to know. I was disappointed in the past that it sucked so bad.

Dave Hansen · 11-03-2007, 06:08 PM

Gotta credit that awesome defense!

Sgran · 11-04-2007, 05:50 AM

I tried running a single back in my only serious attempt at TCY. maybe that's why Iowa never won much...

Ben E Lou · 11-04-2007, 02:35 PM

Nah. Completely different situation in TCY.

highfiveoh · 11-04-2007, 08:26 PM

Hmmm.. doesn't this sort of go against what Quicksand was getting at in the most recent topic he started?

QuikSand · 11-04-2007, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highfiveoh

Hmmm.. doesn't this sort of go against what Quicksand was getting at in the most recent topic he started?

While I don't have a lot of playcalling experience in FOF, my guess is that there are just plenty more short passing plays in each formation bundle than there are medium and long passes. Thus -- if you tried to run a limited-formation offense with a lot of medium or long passes, you'd probably run into the "familiars" too quickly for it to succeed. But I believe here SkyDog is running a primarily short-pass setup, and I think by and large short passing is just more diverse in the FOF playbook (even for passing formations) and less likely to trigger the "familiars."

Ben E Lou · 07-22-2010, 08:15 PM

Bumping this for someone who asked a question about the viability of this. I just ran a one-season sniff test in 6.3. It still seems to work perfectly fine with a balanced offense. I just went 20-20-20-20-20 on the formation screens. All three WRs had 100-yard seasons, the QB had a 96.9 rating, and the "starting" FB was on the field for 0 run plays and 0 pass plays the entire season--pretty fair evidence that it used the game plan I put in.

johnnyshaka · 07-27-2010, 10:22 AM

Hope your TE had a 3000-yard season cause your WRs definitely underachieved in an offense designed to have them excel.

:P

Disturbed · 08-03-2010, 08:41 PM

Thanks for the bump Ben. I was the one who asked him if it was still viable in 6.3.

I'm going to work on this. I find myself having more fun in FOF building teams based on concepts like this one, the 2 TE offense and such.

11-03-2007, 09:20 AM	#2
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Dola: Note that it's unknown (at least to me) whether or not this could be optimal for any given team's roster, but I'd certainly assume that for a team that has: 1. a QB who knows all of the single-back formations, 2: 3 solid WRs, and 3: a crappy FB, using pretty much pure single-back may well be the best way to go. What I DO know is that when I tried it in the past, it just completely sucked--which it clearly doesn't any more. It may or may not be the best way to go for your team, but at least it's a viable option, which I think is a good thing. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'! Last edited by Ben E Lou : 11-03-2007 at 09:24 AM.

11-03-2007, 10:43 AM	#4
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	I'm very pumped about it for SP. It seems like I always have more depth at WR than any other position in my SP careers. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

11-03-2007, 11:50 AM	#7
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Dola: I just tried it with my shortpass QB, who knows all of the single-back formations. No nerfing of it there, either. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

11-04-2007, 02:35 PM	#11
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Nah. Completely different situation in TCY. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

07-22-2010, 08:15 PM	#14
Ben E Lou Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Greensboro, NC	Bumping this for someone who asked a question about the viability of this. I just ran a one-season sniff test in 6.3. It still seems to work perfectly fine with a balanced offense. I just went 20-20-20-20-20 on the formation screens. All three WRs had 100-yard seasons, the QB had a 96.9 rating, and the "starting" FB was on the field for 0 run plays and 0 pass plays the entire season--pretty fair evidence that it used the game plan I put in. __________________ The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!

11-03-2007, 10:13 AM	#3
bulletsponge Pro Starter Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: TX	thanks Skydog. now to get 3 good WR and a good RB and i can do this too!

11-03-2007, 11:26 AM	#5
Pacersfan46 H.S. Freshman Team Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Indianapolis	I'd be interested in seeing how it would work without Peyton Manning at the helm, and maybe an average QB who knows the formations. I think just about anything will work with him running it. -- Steve --

11-03-2007, 04:05 PM	#8
Daimyo College Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Berkeley	Nice to know. I was disappointed in the past that it sucked so bad.

11-03-2007, 06:08 PM	#9
Dave Hansen n00b Join Date: Dec 2006	Gotta credit that awesome defense!

11-04-2007, 05:50 AM	#10
Sgran High School Varsity Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Budapest	I tried running a single back in my only serious attempt at TCY. maybe that's why Iowa never won much...

11-04-2007, 08:26 PM	#12
highfiveoh Banned Join Date: Oct 2006	Hmmm.. doesn't this sort of go against what Quicksand was getting at in the most recent topic he started?

07-27-2010, 10:22 AM	#15
johnnyshaka College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Edmonton, AB	Hope your TE had a 3000-yard season cause your WRs definitely underachieved in an offense designed to have them excel. :P

08-03-2010, 08:41 PM	#16
Disturbed Mascot Join Date: Aug 2009	Thanks for the bump Ben. I was the one who asked him if it was still viable in 6.3. I'm going to work on this. I find myself having more fun in FOF building teams based on concepts like this one, the 2 TE offense and such.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)