Four or Five WR Sets?

[HarlemYankee]

Is it at all possible to find playbooks that have four or five wide receivers? I don't understand this in the slightest. If you have an underneath/blocking type of tight end and a running back who isn't a great receiver, why must you force them into the 5 WR sets? I just don't get this whatsoever. Also don't quite understand why you can't adjust it manually through formation subs.

Seems like a bizarre oversight or mistake

[Richie71]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Well most teams when they line up in 5WR are including a TE and an RB.


Have you tried cycling through the personnel when selecting the formation?

[kennylc321]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Is it at all possible to find playbooks that have four or five wide receivers? I don't understand this in the slightest. If you have an underneath/blocking type of tight end and a running back who isn't a great receiver, why must you force them into the 5 WR sets? I just don't get this whatsoever. Also don't quite understand why you can't adjust it manually through formation subs.

Seems like a bizarre oversight or mistake

I made this same complaint and was told that (for whatever reason) those formations are located in the Run and Shoot formation. Since that is one of the generic playbooks, they are not available for custom playbooks (for whatever reason)

[GameBreaker35]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

It doesn’t happen frequently in the NFL, so it’s reflected in the team playbooks. Most teams would much rather put their 1st String TE or HB out there catching versus their 4th or 5th WR.

I think I’ve seen some formations that have the 4 WR package but you have to scroll to it in the play call screen. May want to check all of the formations for those too.

[kehlis]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

It doesn’t happen frequently in the NFL, so it’s reflected in the team playbooks. Most teams would much rather put their 1st String TE or HB out there catching versus their 4th or 5th WR.

I think I’ve seen some formations that have the 4 WR package but you have to scroll to it in the play call screen. May want to check all of the formations for those too.

That's not why it's done at all.

It's for matchups and substitutions. If the defense saw 5 WR's coming on, they would know what formation to expect and would react differently if they only see three WR's in the huddle and then are surprised by a 5 wr set.

[ADW]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

That's not why it's done at all.

It's for matchups and substitutions. If the defense saw 5 WR's coming on, they would know what formation to expect and would react differently if they only see three WR's in the huddle and then are surprised by a 5 wr set.

Of course that's a tell, but nearly every team's starting TE and HB are much better players than the 4th or 5th WR. Those guys are generally special teams players if they're on the active gameday roster. If they get any snaps on offense it's likely due to an injury to one of the guys ahead of them on the depth chart.

[tigerxtc15]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Can’t you just use the sub formation feature under your coach to put wrs there assuming your talking franchise


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[underdog13]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Of course that's a tell, but nearly every team's starting TE and HB are much better players than the 4th or 5th WR.

Umm what. Better receivers?

[reyes the roof]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

That's not why it's done at all.

It's for matchups and substitutions. If the defense saw 5 WR's coming on, they would know what formation to expect and would react differently if they only see three WR's in the huddle and then are surprised by a 5 wr set.

Since it shows the formation your opponent is using in the play Call screen, I’d love the option to go with 5 WRs. Since they already know my formation you aren’t really giving anything away by going 5 wide

[kehlis]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Since it shows the formation your opponent is using in the play Call screen, I’d love the option to go with 5 WRs. Since they already know my formation you aren’t really giving anything away by going 5 wide

Re-read the context of my post.

It wasn't about the game, it was referencing why it's done in real life.

[HarlemYankee]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

Can’t you just use the sub formation feature under your coach to put wrs there assuming your talking franchise


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

No, unfortunately if you're trying to sub a TE, it must be a TE/OL/FB... When you're trying to sub a HB it must be a HB/FB.

[HarlemYankee]

Re: Four or Five WR Sets?

It doesn’t happen frequently in the NFL, so it’s reflected in the team playbooks. Most teams would much rather put their 1st String TE or HB out there catching versus their 4th or 5th WR.

I think I’ve seen some formations that have the 4 WR package but you have to scroll to it in the play call screen. May want to check all of the formations for those too.

I mean, I understand that and I definitely agree with it... I'd never want to just play a game with reckless abandon and play an entire game with five WRs and an empty backfield, but it seems silly that even if you're throwing a hail mary, you have to have at least one HB and one TE.

I only ask this because I'm playing a franchise with the Jets... I had Lev Bell, Chris Clement and Gus Edwards as a three headed monster of an every down back, receiving back and power back... In one game, my starting tight end, Bell and Clement got hurt and I signed a very bad receiving back to be the Gus Edwards complimentary piece... So for the next couple of games, any time I had five WR's I had to use my backup TE and fourth-string FA RB as two of the receivers on the field, when it would have been much more effective to have my fourth and fifth string receivers on the field.

It just seems to me like something that you should at least be able to fix via substitution packages... If I want my empty set to feature five wideouts, why not? If it makes it easier to scheme for, then so be it