BELCO Game Plan Library, Version 2.0

[Ben E Lou]

NOTE: If you have questions about these, please post here publicly. You'll get a much faster response by posting in this thread, where any one of the hundreds of people who have read this thread may be able to answer your question within minutes, rather than waiting for one guy to respond to a PM. Thanks!
This is the next generation of game plans, definitely an upgrade from the original library. The idea behind this library is to give people some ready-for-prime-time offensive game plans. Most of these game plans will be somewhat similar to offensive philosophies that we've seen in the NFL in the last 20ish years. A few notes:

• For all game plans, I've tweaked just about everything: Basic, Miscellaneous, Adjustments, and the key formation screens.
  
• I've included upgraded versions of all six game plans from the original library. See that thread for reference regarding philosophy, teams that it matches, etc.
  
• Four new game plans are included. The first two are "RB Focus" and "TE Focus." As the names indicate, these are both designed to maximize touches for very good players at those respective positions. If you use those game plans with mediocre players, the won't get the ball as much as stud would. I can't do anything about that. That's the FOF engine. Their touches will be limited by their Route Running and Endurance, and their receiving targets will be affected by the Route Running of the other players on the field.
• A third new game plan is simply called "2 Tight Ends." It's a pure 2-TE offense on every play. Don't bother running this as-is if your QB doesn't know at least 3 of the 2-TE sets, but preferably four or five.
• And finally, there's "Insomnia," so named because it'll give the people who think they know how to play defense in FOF sleepless nights if you run it with the right personnel.
  
• Skill sets update: some skills are trumping everything else in version 6.4. No matter the offensive philosophy, I'd look for these always:
  • RB--Breakaway Speed, Endurance
  • TE--Big Play Receiving, Endurance
  • WR--Big Play Receiving, Endurance
• Sample seasons for most of the "standard" game plans were run with the 2010 Saints because of good all-around talent at skill positions and a 16-formation QB in Brees. Nearly any reasonable game plan philosophy will work well enough for that kind of team. Some of the more specialized ones are run on custom-drafted teams, or I traded to add specific players to the Saints who'd be important to run that kind of offense.
  

DOWNLOAD LINK: BELCO LIBRARY, VERSION 2

[Ben E Lou]

"WEST COAST" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

Mixture of running and high-percentage passing. The high-percentage pass may be used interchangeably with the run in some situations.


ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS
In general, in this offense one wants to avoid drops and negative-yardage runs, to avoid 2nd or 3rd and Long.

QB: Screen, Short, Accuracy, Timing

Backs: Hole Recognition, Getting Downfield, Route Running. Low elusiveness is desired.

WRs: Getting Downfield, Avoid Drops, Route Running

TEs: Getting Downfield, Avoid Drops, Run Blocking

OL: Balanced Run and Pass Blocking. Slightly more emphasis on run blocking.

SAMPLE WEST COAST SEASON:

[Ben E Lou]

"SMASH MOUTH" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY
Run-first philosophy. Passing is used to keep the defense honest, taking a few shots down field, but mostly staying conservative.



ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS
This offense looks to control the clock, mainly with running. Sacks are to be avoided. Most passing will occur on third downs, so that skill is more important.

QB: Sense Rush, Third Down, Two Minute

Backs: Hole Recognition, Low elusiveness

WRs: Third Down Catching. Avoid Drops.

TEs: Run Blocking, Third Down Catching. Avoid Drops.

OL: Run Blocking..

• The FB is left in to block a lot in this default, because it's assumed that a team running this will have a guy there focused on run blocking, and nothing else. If you happen to have a good there, by all means, send him out into the pattern more.
• By the same token, I made the assumption that a team using this would have an all-around stud RB--one who can make catches, too. If your RB isn't much of a pass catcher and you're using this offense, I'd leave him in to pick up the blitz more than prescribed.
• I chose to go "NFL realistic" with this game plan on 3rd down rather than just continuing to run even on 3rd and medium/long. It may be slightly better to crank up running in those situations if your QB and receivers suck.
  

SAMPLE SMASH MOUTH SEASON:

[Ben E Lou]

"RUN AND SHOOT" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

Pass-first philosophy, heavy on the short stuff, some medium. . Very little downfield passing. Running game is mainly used just to keep 'em off balance.

NOTE: The formations I have selected for this offense use 3-5 WRs very heavily. It's ideal to have a QB who knows all seven multi-WR sets if you're using this out of the box. If your QB knows few of those sets, you'll need to change the formations up. Also, to run this, the ideal is to have at least three solid WRs. A solid-endurance third WR is going to be on the field for 450-500 pass plays if he doesn't get hurt.


ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Screen, Short, Medium, Accuracy

Backs: Route Running, Getting Downfield

WRs: Route Running, Getting Downfield, Endurance

TEs: Route Running, Getting Downfield--Note that if you use the default formations included in this plan, TE isn't a terribly important position because he's not on the field a good 40% of the time.

OL: Pass Blocking

Usually the run/pass splits will still closely resemble the '90 Oilers and '95 Falcons. I suspect because of improved YAC in 6.3/6.4, this one is better than it used to be if you have a QB with enough formations. Beware of familiars if a low-formation QB tries to do this, though.

SAMPLE RUN AND SHOOT SEASON:

High completion percentage, low number of rushes.

[Ben E Lou]

"BALANCED" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

Avoid the familiars and keep the defense from being able to hone in on any one particular aspect of your offense.

ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

Nothing in particular. I use this mainly when I have a low-formation (less than 9) QB.

[Ben E Lou]

"PLAY ACTION VERTICAL" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

Force the defense to respect the run. On downs that are majority-run, when throwing, throw longer. Throw shorter in obvious passing situations so that the great majority of deeper passes avoid pass aggressive defense.

NOTE: Don't attempt to run this without at least one good WR.


ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Long, Deep

Backs: Blitz Pickup. If RR is high, then Getting Downfield. If RR is low, no worries.

WRs: Avoid Drops, Getting Downfield

TEs: Avoid Drops, Getting Downfield

OL: Pass Blocking

[Ben E Lou]

"GREATEST SHOW ON TURF" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY

Pass first, but enough running to keep the defense honest. Use the entire field in the passing game, from screens to bombs.



ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Sense Rush, Read Defense

Backs: Elusiveness, Route Running, Getting Downfield

WRs & TEs: To run this effectively, you want at least two receiving targets among your TE/WR group to have solid all-around receiving bars, say 50 and up.
OL: Pass Blocking

[Ben E Lou]

"RB FOCUS" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY
Specialty game plan designed to feature a stud RB, both running the ball and out of the backfield. I've used this in exactly one FOF MP game, so let the buyer beware. That said, theoretically, it seems like a very smart idea for a team whose primary offensive weapon is a stud RB.

ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Screen, Short, Accuracy

Backs: It seems pointless to run this offense if you don't have an all-around stud RB, or two solid ones and little else in the way of offensive weapons. If you have good RR RBs, your RB1 and RB2 may well total 35-40 touches per game in this offense. In addition, you probably want two FBs who can run block and pick up the blitz.

WRs & TEs: Third down catching. Avoid drops.
OL: Run blocking.

[Ben E Lou]

"TE FOCUS" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY
Specialized--but fairly balanced run/pass--game plan, designed to feature a stud TE. This is accomplished by:

• completely eliminating the formations that do not have a TE on the field
• keeping 90% or more of the team's pass plays in the 5-18 yard range
• virtually never keeping the TE in to block.

NOTE: If your TE doesn't have high Route Running and high Endurance, there's only so much that can be done to feature him in your offense.

ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Short, Medium, Accuracy

Backs: Nothing particularly special. Pretty vanilla game plan with regard to running.

WRs: Getting Downfield

TEs: Route Running, Getting Downfield. (But really, it's kinda pointless to run this game plan as-is without an all-around stud TE. The run/pass split and distances are quite similar to the West Coast offense, so if you like the distances and don't have a monster TE, just run West Coast.)

OL: Balanced run and pass blocking.

[Ben E Lou]

"2-TE" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY
Specialty offense to use when having two quality tight ends. It's also a huge plus to have a good/great RB if you're going to run this.

NOTE: If your QB doesn't know at *LEAST* three of the 2-TE offense, do not use this. Familiars will kill you with less than 3. If he knows four or five of the 2-TE offenses, you'll be much better off. This is most definitely viable with 4 or 5 formations. I've won a Bowl using a 2-TE offense that was pretty much identical to the one presented here. (I've tweaked it just a hair since then, but it's the same thing in essence, hopefully a little better.)

NOTE2: Because of the way Endurance is implemented in FOF with backups, assuming you use 100% playing time, your TE2 will get in on every single snap in this offense. Therefore, play your lower-endurance or better-receiving TE at TE2. TE1 is subject to normal endurance restrictions.
ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: 2-TE FORMATIONS!!!, Short, Medium, Accuracy

Backs: As mentioned earlier, because you're using 2 tight ends all the time, having a great RB is a big plus here.

WRs: One all-around good WR is desired in this offense, but only one. Because of the odd formation usage, your 2nd-best WR should NOT be slotted at SE. He should be slotted as the backup Flanker. The SE1 will only see the field in the Single-Back 2-TE set.

TEs: Route Running, Getting Downfield, Run Blocking. And of course, you want two of 'em.

OL: Balanced run and pass blocking.

[Ben E Lou]

"INSOMNIA" OFFENSE

GENERAL PHILOSOPHY
Run a ton, forcing the defense to respect that aspect of the game. When throwing, throw it long, Long, LONG. With the right personnel, this is an extremely difficult offense to stop.

NOTE: If you do not have a VG QB and at least one VG WR, don't run this.

NOTE2: You need at least two solid RBs to run this. Even with a very high-endurance RB1, RB2 will likely get 100+ carries in a season.

ADDITIONAL DESIRED SKILL SETS

QB: Long, Very Long, Third Down

Backs: Running skills. Receiving skills are immaterial. Even a RB with 90+ Route Running may get less than 20 pass targets in a season.

WRs: Avoid Drops, Third Down. (And the aforementioned BPR is of course even more huge in this offense.) You can get away with just one quality WR when using Insomnia because the defense can't double-cover when expecting the run. And if they don't expect the run a fair bit, you won't need much output from the passing game anyway.

TEs: Avoid Drops, Third Down.

OL: Run blocking.

[Ben E Lou]

FINAL COMMENTS/TIPS

GENERAL OFFENSIVE GAME PLAN TIPS

• I go for it on 4^th down significantly more than FOF suggest, and this is reflected in the game plans. So, if you are a runny-nosed weenie who likes to punt, you’ll need to adjust the Go 4^th Down settings on the Adjustments screen.
• As mentioned in the Game Plan Analyzer thread, the Pro Set is the worst of the formations. It is therefore not used very much in most of the game plans. If you have a low-formation QB and are struggling with familiars using one of these, decrease whatever formations are used most, and increase Pro Set to help bring things into balance. Pro Set may be the worst, but it’s better than familiars.
• In most cases, your starters should be set to 100% playing time across the board. The only exceptions to this are RB platoons and situations where you have backups who are nearly as good as your starters.
• Don’t get cute with the personnel screens by playing guys out of position. If they don’t have the positional experience, it simply doesn’t work well in FOF.
• Speaking of “screens,” if you didn’t realize it already, understand that the screen pass is significantly improved in the 6.3/6.4 family of patches.
• The “Choose Tendencies” section on the right side of the Miscellaneous Offensive Selections screen will very likely need to be altered by you. I’ve set the “Keep ___ in to Pass Block” percentages there based on the game plan, but the others should really be based on the talent of your personnel.
• Some of the “shenanigans” that used to work very well have been neutralized by Game Plan Analyzer. People are using it, and as a result they know if you’re throwing on 2^nd and short 90% of the time. My game plans therefore reflect a more balanced approach to 1^st and 5 and 2^nd and short. However if you’re playing SP against the AI or a MP game against a GM known to Rex it on defense, by all means, 1-1-98 that sucker to death and mock his Run Aggressive defense against your 30-yard completions. *shurg*
• And speaking of Game Plan Analyzer, because of its very existence, if you run one of the game plans in MP that are titled significantly toward running or passing (Smash Mouth, Run and Shoot, Greatest Show On Turf,) you’re going to be more susceptible to opposing defenses being ready for what you do. That said, if your players are good enough, it won’t matter all that much. Still, I prefer to “surprise” people with those types of plans once or twice a year when I’m going up against a defense that looks vulnerable to the run or the pass.
• The oft-neglected 3 Cs of FOF Offense must be attended to: Chemistry, Cohesion, and Coaching.
  • CHEMISTRY—Pursue triple affinity for your starting QB, and use extra rosters spots for high-affinity players, especially TEs and WRs.
  • COHESION—Keep your starters around, and augment it when you can in TC.
  • COACHING—Game the financial system, and get a Head Coach who is good at offense.

PLAN-SPECIFIC DISCUSSIONS

WEST COAST
High-percentage passing mixed in with the running game is the order of the day when using the WCO. With the proper personnel in place it’s possible to flirt with 70% completion. If you have a team that’s well set up for passing and you like to play it safe, this may be the game plan for you. I prefer to stretch the field more, but can’t deny that this type of game plan can be more consistent in certain circumstances. This is a good plan to use if you’re looking to avoid mistakes and/or familiars, too. Everyone with good RR gets involved. I’ve seen as many as five players with 50+ catches in the same season in this offense.

SMASH MOUTH
Line it up and pound the rock. On first and 10, the TE is on the field 90% of the time, and the FB is out there 80%. The idea is to control the ball and the clock. It’s likely the ideal system to use when you’re outmanned, because running this successfully is the best way to minimize your opponent’s offensive snaps. I wouldn’t use it every week with good all-around talent on offense, though. There are better ways to approach offense when you have better talent. Still, as mentioned above, I’m not afraid to mix this in, especially if I think my opponent is going to overplay the pass.

RUN AND SHOOT
Throw, throw, and then throw some more. This offense features short and medium passing, and a lot of them. Probably the biggest thing to remember when considering this offense is that your 3^rd WR will be on the field for 450-550 pass plays a year usually. If your WR3 isn’t particularly good or if you have good receivers at FB and/or TE, you should tweak the formations—mainly in “Slight Passing”—accordingly, or use something else. The other concern with this offense is familiars. Six formations get heavy use in this system. If your QB doesn’t know most/all of them, you’ll also need to do some serious formation tweaking, or just do something else. All that said, with the advent of 6.3/6.4, this type of offense moved from “gimmick that doesn’t work very well in FOF most of the time” to being a legitimate and viable system. With YAC being a bigger deal now, it’s possible to run this short-pass offense and still be in the upper half of the league in yards per catch.

BALANCED
This offense should keep the defense honest. It’s a great fit for a team with a young low-formation QB--especially one with solid surrounding talent--because the nature of the system is such that the familiars are kept to a minimum. Everything that matters for familiar avoidance—formation usage, run/pass splits, pass distances, run directions—is set to spread the play calling around. This is also a great system to use with a top-tier “do-everything-well” offense. Keep in mind that you don’t see the familiar message until familiarity gets *really* bad. In this system, you rarely see that message, and I suspect that also don’t go particularly far down that road very often, either.

PLAY ACTION VERTICAL
Ah, yes, the good ol’ Run-N-Stun, FOF’s most dangerous offensive philosophy: in favorable situations, run it more than you pass it, but when you pass it, throw it downfield. It’s the NFL before Bill Walsh, and highly effective with the right personnel and peripheral setup. Stack up on the 3 Cs to lower interceptions and increase completion percentage, and then watch as over half of your long passes are in the “money zone” of 9ypa or greater in FOF.

How 1^st and 10 is handled is a major key to this offense. The run is called frequently enough that, assuming the running game is even half-decent, the defense cannot sit on the pass. Also, 90% of the formations used on 1^st and 10 include a tight end, and 65% include a FB, making the run more effective. And of course if you add a quality RB and/or OL to that mix, you have the ingredients for a very solid rushing offense. Using this, my CCFL RB has been in the top 5 in rushing the last two seasons, and led the league in rushing last year. On the 1^st and 10 passing front, the RB and FB are kept in to block in the huge majority of plays, helping reduce sacks and hurries, and there’s no use of the 4-WR and 5-WR formations that force nickel defense. And of course, when the defense expects the run, it can’t double cover anyone. It’s a deadly combo. A look at Gameplan Analyzer from my most recent CCFL season reveals that, as expected, the biggest damage in this offense is done on 1^st and 10. It averaged 8.09 yards per play, 4.77 yards per run, and 13.45 yards per pass. No other situation featured numbers that good, and of course no other situation comes up in the game nearly as often.

Another key to this game plan is that you aren’t throwing downfield much against Pass Aggressive defenses. It throws the short passes long enough that you can use nearly all short on 3^rd and low/medium yardage, and still get enough yards to pick up the first down. My CCFL team only ran 29 plays all year in 3^rd and 11 or worse, and we just ran it on roughly half of those. All in all, when the 3Cs are properly attended to and the proper talent is in place, this is the most difficult style of game plan in FOF to stop.

GREATEST SHOW ON TURF
I really love this offense, but a decent defensive game planner can slow it down by increasing nickel/dime and expecting the pass more. Still, it’s sometimes my game plan of choice when I want to showcase hefty skill position talent because it gets everyone involved in the offense and uses the entire field. Good-receiving RBs and/or FBs will get their share of screens, downfield receivers get to stretch the field, and tight ends can get their share of targets, too. Because of the tilt toward passing, and quite a bit of it downfield against defenses expecting it, completion percentage is usually on the low side for the talent involved, but not unreasonably so. And again, if the 3 Cs have gotten enough attention, many of the disadvantages are offset enough to make this a very explosive offensive system. Lastly, if you’re normally a running team, throwing this one in there every now and then can really catch someone flat-footed.

RB FOCUS
This type of system was a bad idea prior to 6.3/6.4, but it’s now quite viable and effective, especially if you happen to have WRs with mediocre Route Running but high Big Play Receiving. Those guys will take some of those non-RB short passes to the hizouse for you. But all in all, as the name suggests, this game plan is mainly about the RBs, maximizing their touches without allowing the defense to focus too heavily on run or pass. “When you got a hoss, you RIDE him!” (Note that by using this game plan, increasing FB carry % and using the TE as the primary extra blocker, you can also get the FB involved heavily, too, but mostly at the expense of RB touches.) A true all-around stud RB can approach 500 touches with a good run-pass balance in this offense, especially if the WRs have mediocre RR. And if you have two good backs, they can really carry an offense. I’ve never used it for an entire season, but in the most recent MP game where I used this, the my RBs combined for 29 carries and 188 yards, and 6 catches for 42, and we didn’t see a single familiar message. (And look at the YAC the aforementioned high-BPR WRs put up.) This system (or something similar, just ask Cuervo) can be very effective at minimizing the negative impact of mediocrity at QB and/or WR. One other thing of note: if you happen to have players at RB and FB who have low RR and some good WRs and use this, those WRs will catch a ton of screen passes and have very high catch% and YAC. (Remember what I said about screen passes???) {RKG, before you read this next sentence, back away from your keyboard and get some Kleenex.} In that setup, with low-RR RBs and FBs, I believe it’s possible for a WR to break 1,000 YAC in a season with this game plan. {Now, RKG, go clean up. That’s just gross.}

TE FOCUS
First off, understand this: you cannot win consistently in FOF with the TE as your primary weapon, so don’t think for a minute that this offense is a way to do that. It’s not. It is, however, a great offense to use if you have a strong WR1, strong TE1, and mediocrity or worse at WR2 and further down the line. It’s also good if you have WR1/WR2/TE as your primary weapons, and a big dropoff from WR2 to WR3 because it keeps the TE on the field all day long. It’s a nicely balanced run/pass game plan that maximizes the opportunity for the TE to make catches, and mainly presented here to help the many people who have asked “how do I get my TE more targets?” But remember, if your TE lacks in RR and/or Endurance, he’s going to be limited in targets no matter what you do.

2-TE
There’s not much to add to what I’ve already said about this. The key things to remember before you even consider doing this are as follows:
· Your QB *must* know at least three of the 2-TE offenses. I strongly recommend four or five, though.
· Put your lower-endurance TE at TE2, as he will not leave the field.
· In case it’s not obvious, it’s pretty dumb to use this if you don’t have two TEs with good receiving skills.
· It’s equally dumb to use this if you have more than one solid WR.
FWIW, I have won one FOF MP title using this system and had a few winning seasons, so it’s definitely viable with the right personnel.

INSOMNIA
If you like to live a little dangerously, are willing to sell out completely to the 3 Cs, have strong WRs and a good RB, and are willing to do something completely different and radical, this game plan is for you. But if you can’t say “yes” to all/nearly all of those thing, then I’d stay away. This ain’t for the faint of heart. The dice giveth, and the dice giveth away in this game plan, but by applying the 3 Cs and running the ball a huge amount, you can significantly increase your completion percentage and lower your interception rate. And by throwing so many of those passes in the higher-YPA distances, you can hit a few times every game and really rack up the wins and stats. But understand that even with the improved odds, with as few passes as you’re throwing and as risky as they are, just a little bad luck in any given week can torpedo your offense. Still, it’s a fun system to use.

[QuikSand]

I think this is, to quote a comment made by someone else in another context, "a bad idea whose time has come." I personally prefer the idea of having to compete on many levels in this game,but after this much time with the same basic game structure, it's pretty clear that we have some people who have "cracked" an awful lot of the game itself. Continuing to let the same people have massive advantages in gameplanning, to go along with their far superior understanding of player development and ability values... it's hurting the multi-player game, at least at its top levels.

Ben is the right guy to do this, and it's probably the right time for it to happen, This, along with Ben's recent dumps of intelligence on the game at its clearest, have a chance to narrow the playing field and possibly reinvigorate interest in multi-player for many of us.

I'm not sure that goal is actually attainable, but I applaud the move by Ben here. Hats off.

[isaccoubaldi]

Thanks. Great work!

[scorp]

Thanks for sharing the information Ben. It's always nice when the elite of a community are williing to share information to help others.

[Young Drachma]

Wow.

[Antmeister]

Freaking unbelievable. Much appreciated.

[apelikejay]

I think this is great.

There are potentially great coaches out there who would never reach that next level because they lack the ability of scientifically analyzing the data, they just don't work that way, but are perfectly able to "read from a book" and learn. This is becoming that book.

With the run and stun being the definitive playbook, it's great to have alternatives when maybe you don't have the personnel (pass blocking, sense rush, bpr, ect) to run the definitive.

[Dutch]

It's pretty sad to see us need this out in the open, but I understand why Ben's doing it.

Perhaps next is to have some of these gameplans (not neccessarily just BELCO's GP's but any widely accepted GP put into Greg's utility for installation into anybody's gameplan library.

Also, something I'd like to do if I have time is post some of my gameplans and see if the crowd-at-large can tell me what's wrong with them.

[cuervo72]

If anything, Insomnia should keep Jim up.

[zdub]

Much thanks Ben. This is amazing

ZeroW

[zullojer]

very cool

[Subby]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

If anything, Insomnia should keep Jim up.

No kidding. Those results are unbelievable.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

If anything, Insomnia should keep Jim up.

Originally Posted by Subby

No kidding. Those results are unbelievable.

To be fair, the results I posted were mainly to get conversation going. I can't get those sorts of results with a default team. However, with the kind of monster chemistry and cohesion an experienced FOF player can build in SP, sure. However, it still puts up some interesting numbers with the right default team:



The last two NFL QBs to put up north of 10.0 ypa were named Van Brocklin and Graham. Of course, their teams had pretty similar run/pass splits and pass distances as the Insomnia game plan, so there's that.

I'd be very interested in seeing what a monster MP team might do with that game plan.

[Ben E Lou]

Commentary and additional screenies added for Balanced.

[Hammer]

I had a look at insomnia. Pretty tough to put together a defensive gameplan to counter than approach. I think you would just have to play the run with a 2 deep and pray if there is a running attack that commands respect. Kind of depends on the talent that is using that gameplan though really.

You have some sort of shot that dice rolls screw the plan. The deep pass might not get called that often or not connect that often. You could see a fair few 3 and outs. Still impressive thinking Ben, I like it.

But your favourite plan is still the play action vertical?

[Ben E Lou]

Yeah still PAV. For my tastes, Insomnia is a little too risky to use every single week. I do use it in MP from time to time, though.

[Hammer]

The only thing I could say against the PAV, and it is minor, is that it allows the defense to go into a 1 deep in certain circumstances. Because there is next to no long passing in certain situations. Maybe a more even spread would stop this.

The 1 deep is the same against the short pass as the 2 deep, last time I looked - just worse against the medium and long game. The 1 deep is obviously better against the run, than the 2 deep. So without any real deep threat it allows the defense to stack up in certain situations.

[Sef0r]

There is 1 gameplan I will be taking away from this and I thank Ben for it, though admittedly I'll probably modify a little - but still, this is great.

I think the biggest thing to come out of this library may actually be to motivate people into now spending time on defensive gameplanning. These GPs rape REX...time to put some effort into DEF gameplanning.

[conception]

Originally Posted by Sef0r

There is 1 gameplan I will be taking away from this and I thank Ben for it, though admittedly I'll probably modify a little - but still, this is great.

I've modified the passing distances (though not the choice between short and long) several times to match the QB's strong points.

[Ben E Lou]

Screen shots and mini-discussion filled in for all game plans.

[Ben E Lou]

OK, I've added the most crucial stuff (other than the actual plans) now. You're going to want to take a look at post 12. It's essentially the "FOF MP In-Season Guide."

Now that this is complete, I'll be able to answer more questions. Also, I'd like for people who have already used any of these (or tweaked them) to start commenting. Keep in mind that now that Game Plan Analyzer is out, you're not really revealing anything by telling which game plan you ran.

[davehibb]

Wow... So much info to take in here and pretty much spoilt for choice.

I'm a little undecided which philosophy to go for on one of my teams.

I've got a stud QB. Big red bars in everything except Read Defense. Limited formations - 11 or 12.

I have one WR with big GD and BPR bars my No.2 WR has 100GD and 40-50 BPR but both have relatively poor RR. My No. 2 guys has the most with around 50.

I have a good RB but he's just a runner, no receiving skills.

I have 2 decent TEs with receiving bars around 50.

It seems like I have individual guys that fit the profile for a few of these differen't plans but which one plan would best make use of all these guys.

[Hammer]

Very well thought out comments Ben.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by davehibb

It seems like I have individual guys that fit the profile for a few of these differen't plans but which one plan would best make use of all these guys.

Insomina!!!

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by davehibb

Wow... So much info to take in here and pretty much spoilt for choice.

I'm a little undecided which philosophy to go for on one of my teams.

I've got a stud QB. Big red bars in everything except Read Defense. Limited formations - 11 or 12.

I have one WR with big GD and BPR bars my No.2 WR has 100GD and 40-50 BPR but both have relatively poor RR. My No. 2 guys has the most with around 50.

I have a good RB but he's just a runner, no receiving skills.

I have 2 decent TEs with receiving bars around 50.

It seems like I have individual guys that fit the profile for a few of these differen't plans but which one plan would best make use of all these guys.

Good case study here. Let's break it down by process of elimination.

I've got a stud QB. Big red bars in everything except Read Defense. Limited formations - 11 or 12.--OK. So I'd ditch the most imbalanced stuff immediately. Buh-bye to Run and Shoot, Smash Mouth, 2-TE, and Insomnia.

I have one WR with big GD and BPR bars my No.2 WR has 100GD and 40-50 BPR but both have relatively poor RR. My No. 2 guys has the most with around 50.--With poor RR WRs, you should probably stay balanced or tilt a bit toward the run, so let's drop GSOT, too.

So now we have left...

West Coast
Play Action Vertical
Balanced
RB Focus
TE Focus


I have a good RB but he's just a runner, no receiving skills.--As mentioned above, this doesn't really eliminate anything, even RB focus. It'll just shift more of those short passes to WRs and TEs.

I have 2 decent TEs with receiving bars around 50.--Ok, so no reason for TE Focus.

So we're down to four:

West Coast
Play Action Vertical
Balanced
RB Focus

I don't think you can go terribly wrong with any of these four, based on what you've described. If you don't have the chemistry/cohesion/coaching combo, then you might want to shy away from PAV.

[davehibb]

Thanks for breaking that down for me Ben. I'll certainly be looking at those remaining plans in more depth.

I've never really focused on chemistry for any of my teams. Truth be told, I'm not entirely sure how it works or how to maximise it's potential.

Cohesion is something I've put more thought into the longer I've been playing and coaching has been the most obvious of the '3 Cs' to invest in, again, I never realised until recently what an impact they all have collectively.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by davehibb

Thanks for breaking that down for me Ben. I'll certainly be looking at those remaining plans in more depth.

Don't look too hard. I'd just pick one and go with it, watch a season or so in Solevision for any obvious issues, then tweak accordingly.

I've never really focused on chemistry for any of my teams. Truth be told, I'm not entirely sure how it works or how to maximise it's potential.

The short version is in my FOF MP Offseason Guide:

• If you're wanting to build strong chemistry, go after guys with high personality ratings as your position-group leaders.
• Also on chemistry, be willing to cut bait on your failing former draftees in favor of chemistry-helping backups. In other words, if you've got a guy you drafted as a 23/56 player, he went to 25/51 in TC and is now in year 3 and 28/46, he's heading for 35/35 or so. Unless he's an affinity match, there's no reason to keep that guy around. Pick up a 35/35 veteran for three years at minimum salary who also helps you in chemistry. You get a better player to be your backup, he's cheaper, and he helps everyone at his position group play better.

To elaborate on the first point above, position leadership is determined by some combination of Experience, Leadership rating, and maybe years on the team. But the *strength* of the affinity/conflict is primarily determined by the Personality ratings of the leader and the person with whom he has the affinity/conflict. Therefore, collecting leaders with high personality puts you in a position to have a bunch of Exceptional Affinities. Once you get the leaders in place, just start looking for the guys highlighted green on player searches. And keep in mind that the difference between 42/42 and 35/35 in FOF is pretty minimal, so be willing to grab that 35/35 backup who has 98 personality and is an affinity for you over the 42/42 guy who has no affinity. The 35/35 affinity guy probably helps your team more than the 42/42 guy (assuming no particularly important high or low bars there).

Cohesion is something I've put more thought into the longer I've been playing and coaching has been the most obvious of the '3 Cs' to invest in, again, I never realised until recently what an impact they all have collectively.

I can't quantify it, but I once stated that my success in FOF is probably more about the fact that 1.05^8=1.48 than anything else. In other words, I suspect that I'm getting lots of small bonuses over most of the other guys I'm in leagues with, and that they collectively add up to a big boost. Maybe chemistry gives me a 5% boost over the league average. And cohesion another 5%, and having the top coach gives me another 5%. And picking up tips here and implementing them gives me another 5%. And the training camp shenanigans another 5%. And the game plan shenanigans another 5%. It's fully possible that no one factor is huge, but when you focus on them all, it really helps you out. All I can say with certainty is that across multiple leagues, roughly a year ago I started focusing much more heavily on chemistry and cohesion where I'd never done so before. (I already had some of the better coaches.) And I've seen a noticeable uptick in performance across multiple leagues since then.

[isaccoubaldi]

Ben, can you give me some advices on how to set the "finesse running percentage" in the formation window?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by isaccoubaldi

Ben, can you give me some advices on how to set the "finesse running percentage" in the formation window?

I've actually never tinkered with that. If "football logic" works, I'd increase the finesse percentages on formations like 4-WR that are used primarily in passing situations, so that you run more draws, under the assumption that draws do better against a defense expecting the pass. But I have no idea if that actually helps. Somewhere in my head I believe that JG or Ethan said that these are there mainly for variety.

[Dandelion]

great stuff..
The only thing that bothers me a bit is that there's %s for long passes in 1st and 1 to 1st and 3 situations.
From what I deducted from the game logs, those 1st downs have to be right in front of the opponents endzone, as FOF doesn't seem to work with spot fouls except on KO/P returns.
I just checked a (single..) season with the Gameplan Analyzer and of a total of 949 plays only 4 (!) were 1st and 1 to 3 situations.

Wouldn't be sending one's WRs on deep routes of 9+ yard be contraindicated right in front of the opponents endzone? Even in FOF, I mean, with it's statistical approach to figuring out a plays result..
How's Your rate of success there?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Dandelion

great stuff..
The only thing that bothers me a bit is that there's %s for long passes in 1st and 1 to 1st and 3 situations.
From what I deducted from the game logs, those 1st downs have to be right in front of the opponents endzone, as FOF doesn't seem to work with spot fouls except on KO/P returns.
I just checked a (single..) season with the Gameplan Analyzer and of a total of 949 plays only 4 (!) were 1st and 1 to 3 situations.

Wouldn't be sending one's WRs on deep routes of 9+ yard be contraindicated right in front of the opponents endzone? Even in FOF, I mean, with it's statistical approach to figuring out a plays result..
How's Your rate of success there?

FOF changes those to short passes. I just keep the standard numbers there just in case.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Yeah still PAV. For my tastes, Insomnia is a little too risky to use every single week. I do use it in MP from time to time, though.

And actually I ended up using it for an entire season in the CCFL, and was extremely pleased with the results. QB Rating jumped 25 points from previous season despite having slightly less talent, and wins went from 10 to 15. We did shorten up the longer passes a bit, down to PAV level, since we didn't have much at WR.

CCFL: Atlanta Falcons 2023

[Ben E Lou]

Also, I think I need to add a "spread" offense to this library. I've got an interesting situation in the BFL that others might have elsewhere: three decent (37/37 to 42/42) backup WRs, and a talent void at TE. I'm using a ton of 3WR/4WR/5WR sets. TEs were only on the field for 183 out of 550+ pass plays. The team wasn't great, going 11-5, but got hot in the postseason and won the title. I like it because it's very different.

I used it all year in 2002:

BFL: Atlanta Falcons 2002

I think I tweaked it a time or to during the 2002 regular season. I definitely haven't touched it at all in 2003.

BFL: Atlanta Falcons 2003

[merry]

Why is a high RB elusiveness bad in some passing offenses?
Thank you,
Merry

[aston217]

The idea is that elusive guys are boom/bust. The ones who will squeeze through for a nice 8- or 10-yard gain on a busted play, but the ones who will also dance around and lose 3 yards.

So, on the whole a bit less consistent than the high HR/low elusive guys -- but IMO, elusive is a great bar to have when they don't have too much else going for them (good physical ability, etc).

[garion333]

Yeah, low elusiveness means they won't get as many negative yardage plays. For teams that like to throw, but not have pass aggressive defenses against them (ie. 3rd and long, like 3rd and 15) the 2yrd gains on 1st and 2nd down are better than a 5 yrd gain and 5 yard loss.

Something like that.

[corbes]

Ben, would you be willing to explain some of the game-plan adjustments you've made in the library? My theory is that you're trying to maximize mismatches against the corresponding defensive adjustments that Rex usually makes. An alternate theory is that the adjustments represent a desire to keep the pedal down on offense. Am I close?

My apologies if you've explained this before--I tried to search for the explanation but couldn't find it.

[xjayex]

Thanks Ben.

[aston217]

I haven't looked at these gameplans but I do believe both of those are the reasons for some of those offensive adjustments. Defenses usually start expecting run when they expect the offense to run out the clock with a lead; throwing long in those situations can be devastating and really put a game out of reach.

In addition to racking up insane stats for your guys, which we all like to see.