erhardt perkins/New England Pariots offense

[rakernk]

Quote: Originally Posted by rakernk

here is Part 10:

I'm Done. Again if you want to make suggestions about which plays/formations to add to the playbook I'm all for it.

also, what would be the recommended Run/Pass and Aggressive/Conservative sliders to help create an accurate offense for the New England Patriots?

I also understand that the Patriots like to use smart football players, but what would be the minimum awareness rating be for this playbook to be effective? I tried scouting players and figuring out which player is smart, but the awareness rating does not show when scouting players

[doncicfan77]

Most of that looks good to me. One thing I did notice is that you probably don't want PA Inverted Veer, since the play action element comes from the running play, which isn't a very Brady-ish play and you rightly left it out anyway.

The PA aspect is tricky in general, since it's obviously a huge part of what the Pats do, but EA has always struggled getting play action to "feel" right and NCAA 14 is no exception. Seems like even when the PA plays are "set up" they only rarely feel like they're catching the defense off-guard (at least in my experience).

The more I think of it, the more I feel like the biggest thing you can do to mimic a Pats PB is just include enough a variety of formations from the different personnel groupings you might base out of in a given season depending on your personnel -- so 11p first and foremost, 10p for seasons where you might have 4 really good WRs, 12p when you have an Aaron Herna-- I mean, a really good TE2 to complement your Gronk-type TE1, etc.

That's not to say you need 5 different 12-personnel formations, not at all. But I've seen folks say "less is more, don't throw in a bunch of formations you'll rarely use." I mostly agree with that, but /most/ of a given team's playbook won't be used from game to game and even season to season in many cases. The extra formations are there in case it's suited for a particular roster you have or a specific opponent, etc. I don't like to max out my playbook though, 24 formations (or 26 including Goal Line and Hail Mary) is usually around the most I feel comfortable with.

I like to identify a couple of formations in my CPB every season that I don't think I'll use regularly, based on my personnel that year. And for those formations, I use formation subs to put in the backup guards, or backup center/tackles, and maybe one or two WRs from the bottom of the depth chart. That way during a drive I can run one play from that formation if my O-line is gassed/in the red, and also possibly get a couple of touches to some of my reserve players.

Also I haven't played Madden in ages, but something I'm surprised I didn't think to suggest before -- if you have a copy of a Madden game from the last 10-12 years, you could throw it in your console and check out their playbook in Madden. Trying to copy it play-for-play would probably cost you your sanity, but it would at least give you an idea of the variety of formations to look for.

Really, though, as someone who's spent more hours than I'd want to admit on CPBs, here's what I know to be the most important requirements in a playbook:

1. Do you have enough pass-first spread forms that you'd feel comfortable running a HUNH 2-minute offense in a game you're trailing late in the 4th?

2. Do you have at least one smashmouth running formation for those times you just need to impose your will on an inferior team and/or convert on 4th and short, or milk the clock to preserve a lead?

3. Do you have enough variety in your forms that you can get the ball to your playmakers no matter their position? (The Shallow Cross series is great for this, especially for Welker types who are good in space).

4. Most importantly, is your playbook fun to play with?

If the answer is "yes" across the board, you've accomplished your goal.

[rakernk]

Quote: Originally Posted by doncicfan77

Most of that looks good to me. One thing I did notice is that you probably don't want PA Inverted Veer, since the play action element comes from the running play, which isn't a very Brady-ish play and you rightly left it out anyway. The PA aspect is tricky in general, since it's obviously a huge part of what the Pats do, but EA has always struggled getting play action to "feel" right and NCAA 14 is no exception. Seems like even when the PA plays are "set up" they only rarely feel like they're catching the defense off-guard (at least in my experience). The more I think of it, the more I feel like the biggest thing you can do to mimic a Pats PB is just include enough a variety of formations from the different personnel groupings you might base out of in a given season depending on your personnel -- so 11p first and foremost, 10p for seasons where you might have 4 really good WRs, 12p when you have an Aaron Herna-- I mean, a really good TE2 to complement your Gronk-type TE1, etc. That's not to say you need 5 different 12-personnel formations, not at all. But I've seen folks say "less is more, don't throw in a bunch of formations you'll rarely use." I mostly agree with that, but /most/ of a given team's playbook won't be used from game to game and even season to season in many cases. The extra formations are there in case it's suited for a particular roster you have or a specific opponent, etc. I don't like to max out my playbook though, 24 formations (or 26 including Goal Line and Hail Mary) is usually around the most I feel comfortable with. I like to identify a couple of formations in my CPB every season that I don't think I'll use regularly, based on my personnel that year. And for those formations, I use formation subs to put in the backup guards, or backup center/tackles, and maybe one or two WRs from the bottom of the depth chart. That way during a drive I can run one play from that formation if my O-line is gassed/in the red, and also possibly get a couple of touches to some of my reserve players. Also I haven't played Madden in ages, but something I'm surprised I didn't think to suggest before -- if you have a copy of a Madden game from the last 10-12 years, you could throw it in your console and check out their playbook in Madden. Trying to copy it play-for-play would probably cost you your sanity, but it would at least give you an idea of the variety of formations to look for. Really, though, as someone who's spent more hours than I'd want to admit on CPBs, here's what I know to be the most important requirements in a playbook: 1. Do you have enough pass-first spread forms that you'd feel comfortable running a HUNH 2-minute offense in a game you're trailing late in the 4th? 2. Do you have at least one smashmouth running formation for those times you just need to impose your will on an inferior team and/or convert on 4th and short, or milk the clock to preserve a lead? 3. Do you have enough variety in your forms that you can get the ball to your playmakers no matter their position? (The Shallow Cross series is great for this, especially for Welker types who are good in space). 4. Most importantly, is your playbook fun to play with? If the answer is "yes" across the board, you've accomplished your goal.

Thank you for the advice. I was also wondering about the player archetypes for the playbook. I understand a slot receiver needs to have high agility so would a possession receiver work there? I also was wondering if I should either use a Balanced Wide Receiver or Speed Receiver as a number 1 because I thought a balanced Wide Receiver might have a higher awareness than a speed receiver, even though a speed receiver would bring a randy moss element to the playbook. Also, Should I use a Balanced/blocking tight end or a Receiver Tight end because I know/heard in his prime Rob Gronkowski was not only a great blocker but also a great speed for a Tight End and quality receiving abilities, but as he got older, he became a more of a red zone threat and extra lineman.

[nofx94]

This might be a helpful thread:

Principles of Pro Style Offenses
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/top...ink_source=app

[rakernk]

Quote: Originally Posted by ms1356

i think any standard nfl formations from UC would fit 11 personel TE formations 2x2 and 3x1 10 personnel 2x2 and 3x1 12 personnel te / wing looks some 2 back formations the beauty of the system is it should work regardless of formations, because its concept based, for example tosser is their term for double slants so, no matter the formation #1 and #2 run slants Ghost is their 3 level flood concept, so no matter the formation, #1 runs a go and #2 runs the deep out and the 3rd wr from the sideline runs a flats, no matter if hes a WR, a TE or a Running Back in teh back field, if he's 3rd form the sideline he has a quick out on ghost https://grantland.com/features/how-t...rady-patriots/ https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/wha...rhardt-perkins https://www.bigblueview.com/2016/7/1...brady-patriots concepts i'd use stick drive flood slant flats verts smash power counter bootleg those concepts should be in pretty much every playbook formation you can find The theory here is that no matter the formation, there is an outside receiver, an inside receiver, and a middle receiver, and each will be responsible for running his designated route. For the quarterback, this means the play can be run repeatedly, from different formations and with different personnel, all while his read stays effectively the same. Once receivers understand each concept, they only have to know at which position they’re lined up. The personnel and formation might cause the defense to respond differently, but for New England those changes only affect which side Brady prefers or which receiver he expects to be open. This conceptual approach is how the Patriots are able to run the same basic plays, whether spreading the field with four or five receivers or using multiple tight ends and running backs.

Which University are you talking about? Just curious.

[rakernk]

does anybody have a New England Patriots-Esque Playbook that combines the Rob Gronkowski/Edleman era and Randy Moss/Wes Welker Era? I've been trying to create my own but I'm having trouble finding the correct plays but I end up having more than I should.

[rakernk]

Hello.

Based on the available play book styles, would the New england Offense be a spread offense, Pro style offense, Multiple offense, spread option offense, run n shoot offense, Pistol offense, one back offense, air raid offense, run balanced, or any other play book style?

[rakernk]

Quote: Originally Posted by doncicfan77

This approach is bound to be frustrating. But that's not to say it's impossible, just that you'll end up having to make a thousand compromises, and the final result will be very watered down/diluted compared to how you envisioned it. If you could pick formations and plays independently of each other (and include any play in a formation except for plays that would be impossible because of that formation's personnel and/or alignment) it would be different. But the CPB system has so many limitations that trying to reproduce a particular team's playbook will make you want to pull your hair out. I remember once looking through a PDF of an Urban Meyer tOSU playbook from 2013 or '14 or so, and was kinda surprised at how different it really is from their in-game playbook (though the devs did a decent job with the tools they were given). The good news is that the Pats mostly used fundamental, sound spread concepts very similar to common ones that are in the majority of the 10p/11p Shotgun forms (though you'd obviously be less interested in 10p). Route combos with simple reads that put defenders in horizontal and vertical conflict, etc. So you shouldn't have any trouble finding plays that, at the very least, wouldn't be out of place in a Pats playbook from that era. I'd look at the most common 11-personnel and 12-personnel formations. The Oklahoma PB has a lot of 11p/12p with solid route combos/concepts. I'd also skim the Air Raid books specifically for what 11p and 12p forms (and concepts in those forms) they use. There'd be lots of 11p forms in Raid books, but not so many 12p forms, so the 12p ones would be easier to find. There are countless 11p forms, but my personal favorite 12p forms are Twin TE Slot Wk and Ace Twins (both in the Gun but their Pistol/under center equivalents would probably be good too). TE1's corner route in Ace Twins: Slot Under is lethal (and the primary/slot route would be excellent for a Welker type, come to think of it). Those formations, even if they're not your thing, will at least give you an idea of what other forms and route combos to look for. With any book, you want your passing game to have an answer to the various types of coverages. Just spitballing but here's how I remember the Pats of years past attacking various coverages: Cover 3: This one's easy -- Gronk up the seams. Beyond that, lots of stuff gets open underneath Cover 3 (hello Welker -- slot outs, or crossers from the slot. Outs to Moss along the sideline under his CB's soft deep coverage). Cover 1: Damn near any common spread playbook passing concept. The Spread books were modeled after the spread-to-run styles of Meyer, Kelly, Malzahn, et. al. And these schemes used passing concepts that specifically exploited Cover 1 since their goal was to force defenses into Cover 1 to stop the run. (Check out the route combos in Pistol - Spread: RnS Switch Dig and Shotgun - Empty Spread: WR In; basically, the one where the wide receiver on one side runs an un-pressable post or a dig, and the slot receiver cuts behind him and runs a wheel up the sideline.) Cover 2: Anything that exploits the MOFO (middle of field = open) coverage (e.g. posts from Gronk/Welker, if the safety on that side commits to the post maybe you have a Moss running a fly up the sideline behind him). Cover 4: The (X/Z/H/Y) Shallow Cross series in particular and the Mills route combo in general (I'd Google it if you aren't familiar with it -- you'll find something that explains it better and more efficiently than I could.) I don't know for certain that the Pats featured these concepts specifically but I'd bet my right hand that they did, simply because they're such common fundamental concepts in modern spread offenses. Like every modern NFL team they also ran a handful of option routes, so maybe look for 60 X Choice with your Moss type running the option route and your Welker/slot guy running the cross. And H+Y Option type plays with your H and your TE. It'd be hard to implement option-route concepts in-game the way they're run in the modern era though, since the game tries to emulate the unambiguous if/then options of the Run N Shoot (and doesn't do a very good job even just doing that). And of course they would split Gronk in the slot and even out wide sometimes, you can do that with formation subs (or, in many formations, the different packages you access with the right stick on the play call screen). Take all this with a grain of salt, just spitballing like I said -- what I can confidently recommend though is googling Chris B. Brown's articles, anything he's written about the Pats offense either on his old blog (smartfootball) or Grantland or what have you. That'd be a great resource. Really you can't go wrong just using the most common/reliable route combos in the Spread and Air Raid books, minus the option-based ground game if you want to emulate the Pats even down to Brady's slowness They really just ran a basic modern pro-style Spread as we know it today, while making the most of the personnel they had in a given year; their strength was always having smart players who could learn quickly, so they could adapt their scheme pretty radically -- in some cases even from one season to the next -- to get the ball to their playmakers wherever they happened to be lined up (and if that ain't the spread in a nutshell, I dunno what is!)

Which Spread or air raid play books do you think can be used to recreate a Randy Moss/Rob Gronkowski New England offense? I'm combing the 11 and 12 personell of Ohio State, University of California, Oregon Ducks, and Texas tech, but im not sure if those would work.