Tiered Play Calling Revisited

[LBzrule]

KB, I think it goes back to untethering things. When on defense why can I not see stuff until the offense starts approaching the line? Why can I not select anyone? I think it's going to take a slightly different view on defense out of the huddle or actually open up the screen earlier so that you can make the calls. I thought about the call auto-switch thinking about speed in the calls. With the Safety's you are only going to make an open and/or closed support call. With the MLB you will make a line stunt, front call.

This should take less than 7 seconds and give you time to also make coverage adjustments Cover Black, Combo, Squeeze and give you time to get on a player of your choosing. All of that other stuff that we have in the game pre-snap defense now I'm willing to jettison. Yes I'm willing to jettison, having people drop guys off the line into zone coverage, especially when they can drop everyone off. That's the type of stuff that needs to be gone. The play book should have your 2 man rush plays. People only do this stuff situationally in real life anyways and those situations are primarily red zone and up at the end of the game trying to make the offense use the clock. I've watched coaches tape on every team and nobody runs this stuff as a base defense. Yet I log on to Madden and that's all people do as a base defense. Sure it gives people a chance to be creative and what not, I just think we are getting away from football with it though.

[LBzrule]

KB also that example you gave with the 63 PRC OLB is exactly why I talked about that trait and also why I talked about this topic. Right now EVERY OLB in Madden plays the edge the same regardless of rating.

[BezO]

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

Bezo, I think depending on the team both methods are applicable in the NFL. The method I described was what the Chiefs used to do. You have your personnel package that is 3-4 but they would get to the line and call the front based on the offensive formation. I know some coaches do it, but I'm not sure going with the shell in the huddle and line stunt package in the huddle is the best idea. Think about this. You might know it is 3 WR. But you don't know if it is Doubles, or Trips. You want your shell aligned based on that, not just calling a shell and not knowing if it is doubles, trips, bunch. Same thing with your stunt. If they come out with bunch to the right, I don't want that end and tackle on the right along with any other personnel that might be stunting with them doing it on the bunch side. I want that on the back side. This is why I think at the line is more conducive. You see the offense and therefore you can outflank it and you can match your shell with the pass strength of the formation. That's best done at the line IMO, not before.

No doubt teams use this method. My concern is more about the video game aspect. Unfortunately, we do know the formation. And will your opponent give you time to finish constructing your scheme at the line? What are you stuck with when you don't get the call in?

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

The bolded would work with what you are describing. I never thought about the auto-align because no game has ever done that and I don't see them ever doing that. Who knows. These are all just ideas.

Yeah, my suggestion is definitely a collection of ideas, some I haven't mentioned. I'm a bit disconnected as I haven't even played the retail version of '13. My brain probably won't be in full Madden mode for some time.

Quote: Originally Posted by LBzrule

Also Bezo, another reason why I want the user to call it is because it gives room for error and huge breakdowns that even the best defenses give up at times whereas if it is auto programmed then if you have the players then it auto-shuts down. I don't like auto-anything. In a game I would want to mimic the breakdown in communication on defense and gives the users something to learn about defensive football. Combining this with the edge setting trait I discussed in taz's thread, what I want to avoid also is that even if you make the correct calls, this does not automatically mean that you are going to bottle it up. If you do not have an edge setting guy it might be the case you need to go with a coverage that has your CB's as the force players rather than your linebackers. What this does is force people out of using the same coverages and also forces them to scheme based on their personnel and nothing else. At least that is the hope. Using the Ravens as an example, since I would have Suggs and Upshaw then I would more than likely call a great deal of 1 high safety looks because those guys can set the edge. But, if my team does not have OLB's that are stout at the point then I will need to run something else. CB's may be the force run players instead.

I think the same miscommunication can be achieved when defenses don't make the proper adjustments from the call in the huddle.

I think 2 skilled players with a certain level of sportsmanship could make your method work though. But what about an opponent that quick snaps you every play? What about those that don't understand front 7 run responsibility let alone a DB's role?

Also, though a good call wouldn't always mean success, is this putting too much player awareness in the hands of the user, allowing him to always make the best call using a team with a high rate of miscommunication? Philly comes to mind.

[at23steelers]

I don't understand why they cant have a playcalling system with default options, allowing the user to not have to understand all the football jargon, wheres another system would be more indepth, and suited for hardcore sim players. Why do they have to pick a side? The more options the better.

[shttymcgee]

Shouldn't the "support" be attached to the coverage? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your idea, but isn't in redundant to have to call "cloud" support in cover 2, etc.?

[LBzrule]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

Shouldn't the "support" be attached to the coverage? Maybe I'm misunderstanding your idea, but isn't in redundant to have to call "cloud" support in cover 2, etc.?

Mcgee, generally as you know it is. I just think it will be easier for EA to give the user control over it, otherwise we'd have to expect them to write it for different plays, which is definitely feasible.

[LBzrule]

^^ also I was trying to think of ways they can have the run support not tied to the "play." It seems like the way the program is built, things can go over the top of one another but things cannot exist within one another if that makes sense. So it is easy for them to write something external to their plays, but much more difficult to write something INTO the plays other than what the play says the player does. So when you look at zone, that's why even on run plays linebackers just start dropping to their zones rather than playing run first.

[Find_the_Door]

I'm totally in favor of tiered play calling, however, I know EA isn't. They're too much about casuals, and "getting players in and out of games much faster".