NCAA Football 10 Blog: The Rebirth of the Flexbone Offense

[zoltan]

Quote: Originally Posted by noplace

When will EA explore how a true option works. I would like to see how its executed with a defense on the field. On that misdirection option everything seems to bunched up. Spacing is bad

as you could see from the video the line splits are unchanged. in a true option attack offense the line splits are wider set apart somehwat like a shotgun formation. but it appears they havent done anything different thus the lack of space on that play.

so they have the correct concept down, but will it work without the correct linemen arrangements????? we wont know yet because they didnt put defense in those videos, so it was showing just a shadow of the play rather than the play in it's entirety.

who knows maybe with defense the new o line interactions will be brilliant in zone blocking hahah

[J.R. Locke]

Line play is still nowhere close.

They need wider splits to open up holes....fundamental football....

As I thought it would be though.

[yanks26ngoin]

Glad to see that Army gets the Flexbone this year, but, Rich Ellerson's offense does not feature a TE, or at least it didnt at Cal Poly. Did Army send a playbook this year, or formations that featured a TE, or did you use the same exact plays as Navy's and Georgia Tech's offense?

[kcarr]

I didn't see this mentioned before so I will mention it.

Flexbone Twins Over
In this formation #8 should be ineligible as a receiver. Of the 7 people on the line he is not one of the uncovered guys on the end. He is covered by #84. #75 is in an eligible position. Not sure about the NCAA rules on players with ineligible numbers playing in eligible spots but if they aren't allowed to then this could cause some rule problems.









Flexbone Slit Wing Z

Same goes for this one but here #36 is the normally eligible receiver who is ineligible because he is covered by #84.


Flexbone Tackle Over
Here while #75 is in the TE position he is covered by #84 and should still be ineligible. Although #36 is lined up next to the guard he should be eligible.

[Wet Bandit]

But those covered players would only be an issue if they can actually catch a pass, right? And we don't know whether that's the case.

[heavy_hitter]

Quote: Originally Posted by J.R. Locke

Line play is still nowhere close. They need wider splits to open up holes....fundamental football.... As I thought it would be though.

When has EA had fundamental football philosophy in NCAA?

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by Wet Bandit

But those covered players would only be an issue if they can actually catch a pass, right? And we don't know whether that's the case.

If they catch a pass or go downfield on a play where there is a forward pass. If they go downfield it is still an ineligible receiver downfield as being covered like they are they are a lineman. Just pointing it out in an attempt to make sure they are aware and do it correctly.

[stylee]

kcarr - good points.

Paul Johnson runs formations with ineligible WRs quite often. I think the playbooks will probably keep these guys from having pass patterns.