Is Rex that bad?

[nickelback]

Just wanting to get everyone's take on Rex defense. I just completed five seasons using the Quack Attack offense and Rexing defense for those 5 seasons. The results were pretty darn good. We finished in the Top 10 in total defense each of those seasons. The team went to the playoffs all five years, going to 4 Super Bowls and winning three of them. Just wondering if I was just getting lucky, have good enough players to overcome Rex's shortcomings or if using Rex is a actually a viable option for those who can't gameplan defense.

[Ben E Lou]

If you have a great offense, your defense will always be good as long as you don't do just plain crazy stuff.

[Hammer]

In MP you really need to gameplan an opponents Offense to get ahead of the game. Its tough to get to grips with defensive game planning, but its certainly possible to improve on Rex. It makes the game that much more fun also, when you study and understand an opponents Offense, and plan its undoing. I don't think you can have as much influence on Defense as on Offense though, there will be plenty of times where you do everything right and get killed anyway.

[Eaglesfan27]

I recently won a championship with a Rex defense. However, I carefully plan every facet of my offense.

[gstelmack]

Rex isn't that bad. He uses 4-deep zone way too much, and can be a bit aggressive (which is only bad if you don't have much Play Diagnosis on your defense). In MP leagues, GMs get crafty with their offensive gameplans to take advantage of Rexed defenses by, say, throwing more inside the red zone (when Rex looks for more runs) and other "against the trend" assignments, so you have to be careful there. But most of the crafty gameplanning GMs will also tell you that the overriding key to successful FOF defense is "big red bars", especially at DE and CB.

[Hammer]

But most of the crafty gameplanning GMs will also tell you that the overriding key to successful FOF defense is "big red bars", especially at DE and CB.

I think "big red bars" in the right places are what really counts in the main. A 50/50 guy can be better than a 70/70 guy.

Against the grain of what I have read on here, I also think its benefical to have a primary system. You don't have to invest so heavily in defensive talent. I recently had a number 1 ranked defense (MP) running a BnR the majority of the game, going to Zone in the obvious situations. The overall rating of the players were very average, but they were specifically good where I needed them to be. Much like in FOF2004 style, I went with BnR specialists.

I'm going for specialists at DE and CB (pass rush tech and BnR respectively). If I'm going to have stud anywhere, its at safety. A guy who is great against the run, can make picks - generally big red bars accross the board at safety. At LB and DT just looking for run defense.