2 gap the 6 technique (Ravens early 2000s D)

[Coach Captures]

As a football guy I’m reaching out to EA to allow us the ability to be able to choose which gap we want to play a 2gap. Currently we are given that option with the “A” gap where we can run bear and eagle fronts. Only problem with the running an Eagle front is finding a player that can do it. Only Harrison of the Lions is really capable. Bear front is easier to find the prototype. Eagle front holds the line and bear front penetrates it.

That being said, I’d like the option to be able to 2 gap the “6” tech. This would simulate the front the Ravens used back when they had Sirrigusa and Adams at the 1 and 3 tech. If the LE could align over the TE in a base over front as a 6 tech, he could asssit inleveraging the outside zone runs. If the DE could 2 gap and align over the TE, he could force a double team combination block every play and allow the LBs to scrape without any of the O linemen getting a jump through and getting a hat on them while in pursuit. With this alignment, the DE could easily beat the TE 1 on 1 and control either “C” or “D” gap. This would force the RT to always have to assist the TE with the block. If the TE released 2nd level the LE would have leverage agaisnt the reach block of the RT. If the RT released 2nd level the LE could easily 2 gap the TE.

This defensive front is what helped keep Ray Lewis clean to pursue and play downhill. Of course having two beasts in the middle occupying both guards and the center with leveraging the front in a similar way helped. This is something that was 20 years ago, I’d like to see more options for defenses to leverage the offense.

[stinkubus]

If you've got a guy with reach elite at the right position you could probably create the front you want with line shifts.

[Coach Captures]

Quote: Originally Posted by stinkubus

If you've got a guy with reach elite at the right position you could probably create the front you want with line shifts.

Agreed and thanks. My next problem is finding a front that aligns 6,3,1,5. With the right player I could probably go with 7,3,1,5. I’d like to stay in an over front and keep 3 LBs second level.

[kennylc321]

I like your idea, but the problem is that real life doesn't always translate into the video game world. EA could totally implement this, but my concern is that when the ball is snap, the interactions remain the same. It makes me think of how you used to be able to have your DL to rush left, rush right, or pinch but when the ball is snapped, it felt like it didn't really matter.

I've been argument for the need of stunts but how the game plays never seems to be affected.

[Coach Captures]

Quote: Originally Posted by kennylc321

I like your idea, but the problem is that real life doesn't always translate into the video game world. EA could totally implement this, but my concern is that when the ball is snap, the interactions remain the same. It makes me think of how you used to be able to have your DL to rush left, rush right, or pinch but when the ball is snapped, it felt like it didn't really matter. I've been argument for the need of stunts but how the game plays never seems to be affected.

Agreed, right now I think the run game is good for the simple fact that run blocking and block shedding are not set to a 1:1 ratio based on attributes. This is evident when you run an under front with an OLB with leverage is consistently reach blocked by a much weaker TE. I test this each year. Madden 17 was the last year I’ve seen the ratio being close to 1:1. I’d say right now the defender needs to be about 10 points higher to really allow the defensive fronts to leverage properly.

[Coach Captures]

I’m also looking to play around with box fits versus spill fits. The use of QB contain agaiant some offenses really messes up gap control with the conventional spill force alley hinging of the defense.