Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

[Scott]

With formation subs I’ve been thinking an awful lot about defense lately. More on that later, but the honey badger type of defender I think can be done with formation subs.

I’m looking at Lurker for LB with 90+ speed since he would have house call, knockout, bounced, hammer, and wrap up so could play coverage or in the box.

Field CBs could play the slot, or as a box LB/S since they have wrap up, but then I like the robber, knockout, blanket coverage, and ball hawk.

Hybrid Safety because that’s what the honey badger was. Wrap up, hammer, knockout, aftershock, and blow up are all solid, but I would also like him to be better in coverage.

At this point im leading towards a bigger field CB since I’m assuming he’ll have the speed, but then can tackle and cover as my true hybrid player.

Just one thing to keep in mind, you'll be limited to a total of 50 formations subs.

[Jeffruel]

I don't think that'll even be remotely an issue. I bet I get to 30 or so, not to mention I only use about 3 defensive formations any way.

[illwill10]

With formation subs I’ve been thinking an awful lot about defense lately. More on that later, but the honey badger type of defender I think can be done with formation subs.

I’m looking at Lurker for LB with 90+ speed since he would have house call, knockout, bounced, hammer, and wrap up so could play coverage or in the box.

Field CBs could play the slot, or as a box LB/S since they have wrap up, but then I like the robber, knockout, blanket coverage, and ball hawk.

Hybrid Safety because that’s what the honey badger was. Wrap up, hammer, knockout, aftershock, and blow up are all solid, but I would also like him to be better in coverage.

At this point im leading towards a bigger field CB since I’m assuming he’ll have the speed, but then can tackle and cover as my true hybrid player.

Hybrid Safeties would be a more viable versatile defender option if the ability loadout wasn't too run stopper oriented. If I were able to switch out a Hybrid Safety ability, I would swap out Hammer for Robber. That way, they could still tackle in space, but be more viable coverage options.I'd likely rely on formation subs as well.

I do think the Change Position method is still a viable option. They mentioned how they changed it and how you can't just switch to an unfamiliar position and gain abilities. But, I can see switching positions can still be an option. Having a hybrid safety with a star or better dev trait for a couple of seasons. Then, switch him to Edge, and hopefully, he'd get a big enough development in the offseason as an Edge for his JR season. Then switch him back to Safety for his senior season. That way, he'd have some pass rush ability at Safety

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[illwill10]

Just one thing to keep in mind, you'll be limited to a total of 50 formations subs.

I do hope Formation Subs works with Custom Playbooks.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[georgiafan]

If I have a specialty its the HB position that's always been my most loved positions hence the 80% run plays. Last year the 3 archetypes ranked in order of best was Power, Elusive and a distant 3rd receiving. If you wanted to throw WR deep threat converted to a HB you could argue its 1 or 2. This year I'm like a kid in a candy store seeing all the news one to pick from and how I'll use them.

As someone that's also looking to do things a little different than most people there is one new one that's sticking out to me and its "North / South Receiver" . I don't expect this to be anyone's top pick and I could see it not being as good with 2 and low 3*. I just have a feeling it's going to be a super useful one and the type that at worst you want one of on the roster as depth. The reason being he has receiving, and power skills so can play 3rd down back or power back. He supposedly has 3 power abilities in headfirst, downhill and arm bar. The safety valve is a big one to be able to be a 3rd down back. I could see a 4* gem coming in with 90ish speed and be a great all-around type of back. I could also see some decent strength and blocking stats so maybe a FB option

[canes21]

I know this is not exactly recruiting related, but all this talk has me thinking about how they could handle abilities differently.

What if they rid of limiting abilities by archetype and instead had the abilities limited by position. Any archetype could get any ability within their position. Technically, a Pure Runner could get Step Up, for example.

To keep it balanced, the players would generally have their ratings align even more with their archetypes. So, even though a Pure Runner could have the potential to get Step Up, the average Pure Runner wouldn't see his accuracy levels get high enough for it to ever become a real possibility.

However, when you did get lucky and got a dude that was an all-around elite player, say a safety that had excellent athleticism, amazing coverage skills, was a top tier tackler, and could even rush the passer efficiently he'd have the potential to get a nasty ability loadout that made him a truly standout player. The vast majority of safeties would never have the ratings makeup to possess many abilities outside of what their archetypes generally had, but this guy is the real deal, a surefire 1st round pick that can do it all and his unique, versatile loadout exemplifies that.

Yay or nay?

[Kyleimb]

100000% yes. Have never liked the strategy of each archetype having the exact same potential abilities. Anything that makes any aspect of the game more dynamic (with proper tuning, of course) should always be a yes. For me, I view the issue with the way abilities are setup now similarly to the issue with how any CPU defense that runs a 3-3-5 has the same exact plays and weighting vs trips as every other CPU team that runs a 3-3-5....it's too static.

[Jeffruel]

I’m looking at taking a little bit more of an interest in defense this year, so I’m sort of looking at my own scheme I’ll be putting together.

I have always liked heavy DB schemes going back to running 3-3-5 right when it came out on the old NCAA, and then moving to a 4-2-5 when it became popular. Through all these years I’ve shaped my defensive identity and learned I like 4 man fronts, speed, 2 high safety looks, and hybrid players, so that is what my defense will be based around.
I’m planning on calling it the 4-3 Hybrid.

The 4-3 Hybrid is going to be based out of the 4-3, but it is more of a 4-1-6. Thanks to formation subs, I’ll be able to get different players into different spots.

Safeties-Both safety positions will be coverage specialists with an emphasis on zone coverage. I like playing a lot of cover 2, so having 2 solid safeties over the top will prevent the deep ball.

Corners-Both corners will be Bump & Run. Based on the abilities I have seen, that seems like the best type of corner and most likely to lock down WR’s on the outside. Need high man coverage and speed on the outside.

Outside Backers-Here’s where things are going to get funky. I’m planning on putting Field CBs in the OLB spots. I like man coverage, and both of these 2 players will end up on the slot WRs in 2 high looks, have middle of the field in tampa 2, another frequent coverage of mine, but are also needed in run support. Having the abilities Wrap Up helps in run support, robber helps in zone, blanket helps with man, then ball hawk and knockout are a nice added bonus. Since they are corners, I’m looking for that wrap up ability and high tackle, since they should naturally be good at coverage.

Middle Backer-The middle backer is going to be one of 2 things. I’m looking for a Safety that is box specialist archetype, or a hybrid. Box specialist vs hybrid have 4/5 similar badges of after shock, hammer, blow up, wrap up, blow up and wrap up being the most important, and box has workhorse and hybrid has knockout. He will be in coverage quite a bit against the RB, but will also need to be able to make plays in the middle. Looking for tackle and speed here along with blow up and wrap up.

Defensive Line-Normally I would separate all of these, but I am looking for the same thing across the board. Physical Freaks. I need guys to get home on pass rush, but also shed blocks in the run game, and they have both types of abilities in Grip Breaker, Pocket disruptor, quick jump, and inside disruptor. I’m not worried about teams getting to the edge because I should have plenty of speed in the middle.

[canes21]

I’m looking at taking a little bit more of an interest in defense this year, so I’m sort of looking at my own scheme I’ll be putting together.

I have always liked heavy DB schemes going back to running 3-3-5 right when it came out on the old NCAA, and then moving to a 4-2-5 when it became popular. Through all these years I’ve shaped my defensive identity and learned I like 4 man fronts, speed, 2 high safety looks, and hybrid players, so that is what my defense will be based around.
I’m planning on calling it the 4-3 Hybrid.

The 4-3 Hybrid is going to be based out of the 4-3, but it is more of a 4-1-6. Thanks to formation subs, I’ll be able to get different players into different spots.

Safeties-Both safety positions will be coverage specialists with an emphasis on zone coverage. I like playing a lot of cover 2, so having 2 solid safeties over the top will prevent the deep ball.

Corners-Both corners will be Bump & Run. Based on the abilities I have seen, that seems like the best type of corner and most likely to lock down WR’s on the outside. Need high man coverage and speed on the outside.

Outside Backers-Here’s where things are going to get funky. I’m planning on putting Field CBs in the OLB spots. I like man coverage, and both of these 2 players will end up on the slot WRs in 2 high looks, have middle of the field in tampa 2, another frequent coverage of mine, but are also needed in run support. Having the abilities Wrap Up helps in run support, robber helps in zone, blanket helps with man, then ball hawk and knockout are a nice added bonus. Since they are corners, I’m looking for that wrap up ability and high tackle, since they should naturally be good at coverage.

Middle Backer-The middle backer is going to be one of 2 things. I’m looking for a Safety that is box specialist archetype, or a hybrid. Box specialist vs hybrid have 4/5 similar badges of after shock, hammer, blow up, wrap up, blow up and wrap up being the most important, and box has workhorse and hybrid has knockout. He will be in coverage quite a bit against the RB, but will also need to be able to make plays in the middle. Looking for tackle and speed here along with blow up and wrap up.

Defensive Line-Normally I would separate all of these, but I am looking for the same thing across the board. Physical Freaks. I need guys to get home on pass rush, but also shed blocks in the run game, and they have both types of abilities in Grip Breaker, Pocket disruptor, quick jump, and inside disruptor. I’m not worried about teams getting to the edge because I should have plenty of speed in the middle.

I feel like everyone is going to want the Physical Freaks. I do wonder if they will be a lot more rare and typically very highly rated prospects. I would imagine so, but I could see EA making them common and trying to balance it out with them having some low mental ratings(and them being OP regardless).

[illwill10]

I know this is not exactly recruiting related, but all this talk has me thinking about how they could handle abilities differently.

What if they rid of limiting abilities by archetype and instead had the abilities limited by position. Any archetype could get any ability within their position. Technically, a Pure Runner could get Step Up, for example.

To keep it balanced, the players would generally have their ratings align even more with their archetypes. So, even though a Pure Runner could have the potential to get Step Up, the average Pure Runner wouldn't see his accuracy levels get high enough for it to ever become a real possibility.

However, when you did get lucky and got a dude that was an all-around elite player, say a safety that had excellent athleticism, amazing coverage skills, was a top tier tackler, and could even rush the passer efficiently he'd have the potential to get a nasty ability loadout that made him a truly standout player. The vast majority of safeties would never have the ratings makeup to possess many abilities outside of what their archetypes generally had, but this guy is the real deal, a surefire 1st round pick that can do it all and his unique, versatile loadout exemplifies that.

Yay or nay?

I would like that as well. If a player has the rating to get said ability, then he should be able to get that ability. I wouldn't mind keeping the 5 physical ability limit that way you have to strategize how you want to build him out. The archetypes should still be the baseline for a player's ratings, but if a player does get a required rating for an ability, then he could get it.

With individualize rating progression, it would be easier to allow players to get abilities outside of archetypes. That way you can progress a player. Plus the Limitless ability could allow a player to gain a few cap Breakers

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

[illwill10]

I feel like everyone is going to want the Physical Freaks. I do wonder if they will be a lot more rare and typically very highly rated prospects. I would imagine so, but I could see EA making them common and trying to balance it out with them having some low mental ratings(and them being OP regardless).

That's why I wonder how viable that list is. Physical Freaks seems like the obvious choice. Can stop the inside run, rush the passer, quick jump, grip breaker breaker. So they are legit 4 down players. Especially if you can find tall Physical Freaks.

I just feel like there should be less Physical Freaks. Either there should be less of them or increase the chance of busts. There's always a lot of "Physical Freaks" in real life that never lives up to the hype

[georgiafan]

I agree the physical freak's seem like early leader in the clubhouse for OP defense guy. I would like to see them just 5* but I don't expect that. I would also like for that to be the athlete position and some of them come with TE skills.

[Jeffruel]

I agree the physical freak's seem like early leader in the clubhouse for OP defense guy. I would like to see them just 5* but I don't expect that. I would also like for that to be the athlete position and some of them come with TE skills.

I almost listed a backup archetype for my DL because I figured physical freaks would be the blue chip guys, but I’m shooting for the starts. Most likely edge setter and gap specialist though are my backup types.

[illwill10]

I agree the physical freak's seem like early leader in the clubhouse for OP defense guy. I would like to see them just 5* but I don't expect that. I would also like for that to be the athlete position and some of them come with TE skills.

It would be better if Gadget and Physical Freaks were in the ATH category.

Overall, Athletes needs to be overhauled or have the top skills listed when you scout them. Athletes should be the versatile players. I do wonder how they restructured the ATH archetypes since they expanded the archetypes. Are we going to see ATH Pure Runner QBs?. I feel Gadget and Physical Freaks have to be a part of the ATH archetypes.

If they're going to ATH archetypes based on the position archetypes, then it should the archetypes that are versatile ones. I wouldn't want to see a ATH WR that is listed as a Physical Route Runner or ATH LB Thumper.

[Jeffruel]

It would be better if Gadget and Physical Freaks were in the ATH category.

Overall, Athletes needs to be overhauled or have the top skills listed when you scout them. Athletes should be the versatile players. I do wonder how they restructured the ATH archetypes since they expanded the archetypes. Are we going to see ATH Pure Runner QBs?. I feel Gadget and Physical Freaks have to be a part of the ATH archetypes.

If they're going to ATH archetypes based on the position archetypes, then it should the archetypes that are versatile ones. I wouldn't want to see a ATH WR that is listed as a Physical Route Runner or ATH LB Thumper.

I do wish they would go back to how scouting used to be. If I’m scouting a player, I should know at least SOMETHING about them before I add them to my board. Then with that, like you said, athletes have their own tab, not getting cycled into the positions tabs.

[Kyleimb]

I'm really happy that we're finally getting the real positional designations that we've all wanted forever. But my gut is telling me we're going to need a lot of refinement on the execution of this going forward. I'd really like to see the evolution of the depth charts becoming dynamic based on each team's scheme. This isn't going to be an issue for the user as we understand where each depth chart spot is going to place the player positionally, and of course, we have formation subs now. But with the 3-4, for example, is the CPU going to have 5 techs properly in place, or are they going to have their edges there? Are the two outside backers going to be their Edge players, or is the game going to default those to the SAM and Will backer spot with the first and second Mikes at the two inside backer spots? My instincts are telling me it's going to be the second (and incorrect, for the most part) options in these two scenarios when we get our hands on the game. Though, I guess with the first scenario, it does seem like they are going to have big Edge types for these 3-man front schemes, so here's to hoping that the CPU properly understands that and recruits accordingly. I do disagree with having these guys as Edges overall though, as 280lbs+, 5/4i techs are typically closer to a lengthy defensive tackle than a traditional Defensive End.

I still think they should have gone with Edge and then just D-Lineman for the two defensive line positions. And then further delineate the types of each (ex. Nose tackle, 3 tech, 5 tech for D-lineman) with the archetypes and physical profiles. There's more nuance that would have to go into thinking this out because now I've just created a position (D-lineman), a role (Nose tackle, 3 tech, 5 tech) and then you'd still have the archetype (Run stopper, Power Rusher, etc.) but ultimately they either need to figure out something like this, or do it via dynamic depth charts based on the schemes while really having the CPU recruiting properly to their scheme firmly nailed down. I just know I'm going to be a bit annoyed the first time I play a 3 man front that's trotting out a couple 235 lb. Edges as their 5 techs.

[georgiafan]

This has been talked about in some other places, but wanted to lay it all out here as some big changes. It does look like recruiting skill tree will take the biggest hit from 25. The major change here is the perk to spend extra hours on someone has been moved from #2 (or was it 3) in tier 1 all the way down to #4 in tier 2. This means to get this you have to sign 2 top 5 classes. If you are doing things the sim way with a small school, you aren't getting that for about 5 years. It does appear like if you are going to do recruiting tree you will need to double up with a assistant coach and maybe they have the elite recruiter skills. I like how they have moved transfer interest here so that with the scouting still makes it good. It just doesn't look like it will be as good as last year.

I persally like the changes because we will still need house rules i'm sure. The biggest unknown is how good the sway works for #4. I know for me using UGA recruiting got way more fun when I could only put 50 hours on a player.

---

Archetype Perk: Double XP for signing a recruit
Cost 8 points each

#1 = Advanced Look: RBs take less time to fully scout

#2 Magnetic Personality: Increased starting interest from RBs

#3 = Portal King: RB transfers are more interested

#4 = Persuasive Personality: Increased chance to sway RBs

---

Elite Recruiter

cost 12 points each
need to spend 50 + have two top 5 classes


#1 = Ideal Situation: Boost to ideal pitch grades for RBs

#2 = Upsell: My school grades have a larger impact on RBs

#3 = Most Influential: Recruiting actions give a bonus to RBs

#4 = Always Be Crootin': Increase weekly recruiting hours for RBs