Man-to-Man Coverage The Key to Stopping the AI QB in NCAA 09

[The Chef]

Well I tried this, against my better judgement since my secondary isnt supposed to be any good at running man to man, and I actually had a lot more success which was nice to see. Now I did this against Washington, in season two, and they were missing their starting HB but I held them to 55% completion and I seemed to make a lot more plays on the ball instead of just getting lucky previously. The only thing that kinda concerns me, if my team isnt supposed to be good at man but plays light years better in man anyways, what the hell is the point of recruiting a specific style of player for your secondary? It doesnt seem to make a difference, not a single CB on my team is better at man then zone but their play on the field says otherwise. I will continue to do this since Im getting better results but it kinda takes away from the recruiting aspect on some ways.

[BlyGilmore]

the problem pimping is IMO the zones are broken. you can have the greatest zone defender in the world but if he's out of position because the AI tells him he's supposed to stand out of position, it doesn't matter.

Also i'm not saying to never ever call a zone defense again. They work great in 3rd and Long situations. Having guys play zone behind man coverage is good. Robber zone defenses work very well. Zone blitzes are also a great tactic (since the DLs tend to occupy the quick pass lanes).

And if you augment some of the straight zone plays with the "QB Spy Zone" you'll have some success. For instance a Cover 2 is a lot more effective with the MLB spying in the middle.

[heavy_hitter]

You can basically run one Man defense all game long against the CPU. Go to the 335 stack split defense and run Thunder Green. This defense is in the 4-3 and others as well. I use the 335 because I get 3 safeties on the field rather that can cover. All my LB's are blitzing every play so you don't have to worry about them being in coverage.

Bump coverage and pinch the linebackers. Use the free safety to cover the RB out of the backfield. You will and up with 4-6 picks every game if you are good at user picking. If not you will get alot of deflections and at least 2-3 picks a game. The QB doesn't scorch me with this defense, although in theory he should be able to.

Running a cover 2 man does no good.

[DJ]

Really interesting article. I'm holding out for the release of the 2nd patch before I purchase this game, but this does give me a lot of hope that if EA does in fact fix the zone coverages that this will play a good game of football.

[rhombic21]

The fact that this is a viable strategy against the computer probably says more about how bad the CPU AI is than anything else. Nobody online plays man to man more than 25% of the time, particularly against teams like Florida or Missouri, because you'll get burned every single play.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by haze56

LMFAO. You know nothing about defense...So you're telling me a guy is going to stick with his man the whole game even though in spread offenses they crossing routes and slants? If you wanna make Texas Tech work for their TD's you play zone...Playing man is doing them a favor...It would be almost too easy..In a zone wr's can't pick cb's and it's harder for them to get open...Plus not every zone is the same...There's something called zone blitzes where defenders are coming from anywhere and defenders are dropping in coverage...You just never know...There's nothing complex about man to man at all...If you run a normal offense than man to man would be the best choice if you have the athletes...but playing man against a spread offense will lose you your job.

Texas Tech does not run a spread offense, they run air-raid. There is a big difference in the type of schemes that an air-raid team runs and a more conventional spread team uses. Plays like mesh and shallow cross are designed to attack man-to-man, but they rely heavily on 5 and 6 man protections, which are suceptible to the zone blitz.

Most college teams run ONE type of coverage 75% of the time and mix in some zone blitzes. USC is just one example, they run a version of under/eagle defense and play man free, with the ss free vs regular sets almost all the time, and when they don't, their zone blitzing. They still run other coverages, but rarely.

The game always spot-drops into zones, where in reality, most teams run more of a match-up concept, with defenders responsible for receivers in specific areas, not to oversimplify. Now days, only pro teams exclusively spot drop, because their athletes can cover the necessary ground and they can run more coverages. But even in the pros, spot dropping is going by the wayside.

Because the game just spot drops into zones that are related to the defenders alignment, this further complicates the defense. The whole idea about zone coverage is to cover certain zones on the field, not the defender dropping back x amount of steps etc. A hook/curl zone is a specific part of the field, and if a defender has that assignment vs the pass, it shouldn't matter where he aligns, that is his zone in a spot dropping scheme.

One more thing and then I'll shut up. Some of the coverage schemes in the game just aren't coordinated with the fronts and when the offense gets into non-regular type sets, with the weird spot-dropping zones, it leaves large gaps of green, leading to easy completions. A good defensive structure is designed back-to front, coverage first, because the zone scheme determines what kind of front you can align in and still be fundamentally sound vs the run and pass.

[GatorFan1963]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

Texas Tech does not run a spread offense, they run air-raid. There is a big difference in the type of schemes that an air-raid team runs and a more conventional spread team uses. Plays like mesh and shallow cross are designed to attack man-to-man, but they rely heavily on 5 and 6 man protections, which are suceptible to the zone blitz. Most college teams run ONE type of coverage 75% of the time and mix in some zone blitzes. USC is just one example, they run a version of under/eagle defense and play man free, with the ss free vs regular sets almost all the time, and when they don't, their zone blitzing. They still run other coverages, but rarely. The game always spot-drops into zones, where in reality, most teams run more of a match-up concept, with defenders responsible for receivers in specific areas, not to oversimplify. Now days, only pro teams exclusively spot drop, because their athletes can cover the necessary ground and they can run more coverages. But even in the pros, spot dropping is going by the wayside. Because the game just spot drops into zones that are related to the defenders alignment, this further complicates the defense. The whole idea about zone coverage is to cover certain zones on the field, not the defender dropping back x amount of steps etc. A hook/curl zone is a specific part of the field, and if a defender has that assignment vs the pass, it shouldn't matter where he aligns, that is his zone in a spot dropping scheme. One more thing and then I'll shut up. Some of the coverage schemes in the game just aren't coordinated with the fronts and when the offense gets into non-regular type sets, with the weird spot-dropping zones, it leaves large gaps of green, leading to easy completions. A good defensive structure is designed back-to front, coverage first, because the zone scheme determines what kind of front you can align in and still be fundamentally sound vs the run and pass.

Dude, I think you just explained this perfectly. But if I can add one more point...my main gripe is essentially how the defenders react to the play when they are in zone. What I mean is that when a pass is thrown to a receiver that is clearly in their zone (or right in front of his face) the defender doesn't react until it's way too late. I was playing a dynasty game last night and literally watched the defender just stand there with the WR coming dead at him and the ball was thrown to a spot where the defender should have made a play. The WR of course caught the pass, but it was a TD and my defender tries to tackle him in the end zone. I'm like WTF? Why are you tackling a guy in the endzone when you should have made a play for the ball.

[The Chef]

Quote: Originally Posted by GatorFan1963

Dude, I think you just explained this perfectly. But if I can add one more point...my main gripe is essentially how the defenders react to the play when they are in zone. What I mean is that when a pass is thrown to a receiver that is clearly in their zone (or right in front of his face) the defender doesn't react until it's way too late. I was playing a dynasty game last night and literally watched the defender just stand there with the WR coming dead at him and the ball was thrown to a spot where the defender should have made a play. The WR of course caught the pass, but it was a TD and my defender tries to tackle him in the end zone. I'm like WTF? Why are you tackling a guy in the endzone when you should have made a play for the ball.

Ive seen that as well, it seems in zone the defenders wait for the ball carrier to come to them instead of attacking the ball carrier, or in your example the ball itself. Its irritating when they run a pitch, Im in Cover 2 and the corner is right there but wont attack the runner until he gets to him.