Formations

[Warhammer]

I think this has been discussed before, but does anyone have a list of which formations are good for which offenses?

For example:
Single Back normal - Good for medium to long passes and running up the middle.

Pro Formation normal - Good for short to medium passing game and running the ball outside of the tackles

I tried to put together a list of the available plays for each formation, but gave up after realizing how unwieldly such a list would be. What I am hoping to come up with is a list that would give us direction as far as whether or not a formation is good for running or passing, inside or outside, long or short, etc. Any ideas how to go about this?

[gstelmack]

Well, wouldn't the default weights the game assigns give you an indication of this?

[Warhammer]

Not exactly. Look at Running Situtations. Click recommend. What is the second highest weight? Mine is the Pro Formation. Per the game's documentation, this is a passing formation, not a running formation. So why does it have the 2nd highest weight? Now, before any one asks, my HC is rated EXCELLENT in offensive playcalling. So, is the documentation right, or should I go with my scouts? Also, let's face it, the recommended settings in the run/pass ratios are not the greatest either.

[Buzzbee]

Pro Formation is supposed to be a little better for running outside. Therefore it probably has a higher average per carry than I Form or the two TE sets, which are probably more geared for running up the middle.

I think the 'power' sets (I-Formation, two TE sets) give you less chance at breaking a big one, but also less chance for being stopped for a loss. The 'finesse' sets (for lack of a better word) such as the Pro or Single back tend to have a greater reward (longer runs) but also a greater risk (getting stopped behind the line). That is just my perception, so take it FWIW.

[Warhammer]

The more I play this game, the more I think that formations are the important consideration on offense. Not only for which formations you run, but also when you run them. Additionally, I think it is important to see how different similar formations are to one another.

For example, a single back 2TE set, is a much more versatile passing formation than a 2TE Pro Formation.

[PilotMan]

For example, a single back 2TE set, is a much more versatile passing formation than a 2TE Pro Formation.
Personally. one of my favorite's, especially on third down. You can get good blocking, if your TE's are good they may find a spot in the seam or over the middle, or you can run to either side with an extra blocker already leading the way, and you have your best WR's in too. If you have a great FB this is the place to use him. He can block, catch or run if you ask him too. This creates the hardest situation to defend.

[OldGiants]

The number of formations your QB knows is very important, IMO. I recently drafted a 25/35 QB who knew 12 formations coming out of college. With a mentor, he was up to 17 after two seasons. I kept expecting him to pop, but he never did and settled in at 37. Still, he was amazingly effective at making my running game go. He asked for too much money, I let him go and drafted a rookie with 25/66 talent, but only 9 formations. The running game suffered, despite the same RB and line. I assume it was becasue the old guy could call any formation, while the new kid couldn't get the team in the right formation.

Any one else have similar observations?

[Warhammer]

Yep, that has actually happened to me with a couple of teams. That is why I posted this originally. I was trying to see what the best formations for different things are. Obviously the 3 WR formations are better than their base formation for passing, but for TEs and running it is not necessarily the case.