Celeval
11-13-2003, 04:02 PM
Hey -
Going through the FOF-2004 demo, I'm noticing some possible issues with the formations. Namely that, the positions are wrong.
Questions about what makes a Flanker and a Split End/Slot Receiver (ref Single-Back, TE Pairs) aside; the bigger issue is in the Strong and Weak sets.
It's been my understanding and experience that the Running Back/Tailback is the deeper (and behind the QB) of the two backs, while the Lead Blocker/Fullback is offset from his position in the I - but the Formation layout (as shown in the Personnel pages) have them reversed. The RB is offset from the FB position in the I, and the FB takes the RB position.
I don't think this is right, and I'm not sure if this will affect the running games of computer teams (and humans who don't swap this up) - are they simply in the wrong place on the screen, or will the starting RB be lead blocking for the starting FB on lead block plays out of these sets?
Kevin
Going through the FOF-2004 demo, I'm noticing some possible issues with the formations. Namely that, the positions are wrong.
Questions about what makes a Flanker and a Split End/Slot Receiver (ref Single-Back, TE Pairs) aside; the bigger issue is in the Strong and Weak sets.
It's been my understanding and experience that the Running Back/Tailback is the deeper (and behind the QB) of the two backs, while the Lead Blocker/Fullback is offset from his position in the I - but the Formation layout (as shown in the Personnel pages) have them reversed. The RB is offset from the FB position in the I, and the FB takes the RB position.
I don't think this is right, and I'm not sure if this will affect the running games of computer teams (and humans who don't swap this up) - are they simply in the wrong place on the screen, or will the starting RB be lead blocking for the starting FB on lead block plays out of these sets?
Kevin