Defensive Schemes

[bboos]

Hey guys, I was wondering what type of defensive schemes you guys run? I play mostly ccm against the computer and my run defense always gets torn up. I've tried both 3-4 and 4-3, I prefer the 4-3 because its a little better against the run. I normally run this type of scheme:

DE Speed Rusher
DT Run Stopper
DT Run Stopper
DE Speed rusher

OLB Run Stopper
MLB Run Stopper
OLB Run Stopper

CB Man
CB Man

FS Balanced
SS Balanced

I was thinking about maybe playing DE Run Stoppers and essentially having 4 300+lbs on the line, but am worried i wouldn't get much pass rush. Just wondering what you guys run and if you have any tips for me? Thanks.

[ajra21]

Re: Defensive Schemes

i have always played 3-4 base. i only play as the niners so they kinda dictate that. but i'm 14 years into my CCM so i could have changed. i don't for two reasons:
1) it uses a NT type DT. they don't play much because you end up in nickel so often which takes them off the field. this keeps them from ever demanding lots of money. i have two excellent NTs and i have recently tied them both up for six years apiece at a total of $10m. that is $10m for twelve years.
2) most CPU teams play 4-3 in my CCM, which means the players i'm looking for are in less demand. there aren't many 3-4 ILBs so i can get the one that fit my scheme. now i will admit, finding pass rushing 3-4 OLBs is tough but there are plenty of 250lb-260lb speed rushing DEs that can be moved to 3-4 OLB.

my 3-4 base stuff the run. i've been the best run D 11 years our 14 and the other three years i've been top four.

my 3-4 base is like this:

RE - 3-4 versatile
the players at this position tend to be 290lb plus 4-3 DT who i move to 3-4 DE. it gives me good pass rush skills at this position. i want good ACC and solid STR.

DT - NT and/or run stopper
tend to use NTs who have 94 plus for STR. i edit them to DE and then back to DT so they become a run stopper. this way their OVR is higher plus they develop better & faster.

LE - 3-4 run stopper
these are genuine 3-4 Des in the 310lbs plus. they need above 85 STR, with solid SPD (75 plus). they are there to stop the run. my current one has over 120 career sacks by the age of 35.

OLB - pass rushers
my CCM started with genuine 3-4 OLBs but these are seldom in the draft. now, all of my guys were speed rusher 4-3 DEs who excellent ACC (88 plus). the closer to 255-260lb the better but i do have a 277lb guys who has 98 ACC with 80 SPD.

ILB - prototype
for years my guys were 3-4 tacklers but recently i moved them to OLB & then back to make them prototype. they must have at least 86 SPD & at least 88 ACC. the rest i'll develop.

CB - prototype
i rarely draft a guy shorter than 5'11". i want 90 SPD but i don't need them to be faster. if you develop their MCV, ZCV, PRS & PRS you don't need elite speed. i edit a new CB to FS, and then back. this always puts most CBs to prototype. if it doesn't, they'll be balanced. then do it again the next year & they'll become prototype.

FS & SS - prototype
my current FS is a playmaker while my SS is a run support. however, the guys i'm developing are prototype.

you may notice that i prefer prototype players. this is because this designation tends to have the highest in scheme OVR.

if you read all this, i'm sorry - we both have too much time on our hands.

[bboos]

Re: Defensive Schemes

Haha, I guess we both do have some time on our hands! Interesting theories as to why you run a 3-4. My problem with the 3-4 is that it seems to leave glaring holes for the running back and, like you mentioned, it hard to find good pass rushing OLBs in the draft.

[josefrees]

Re: Defensive Schemes

I have success with all types of defenses and while I sim mostly, have had success running all types of defenses. My current favorite is the Tampa 2 because of how easy it is find players that fit the scheme cheaply. You can get away with cheap skills.

When using the others I tend to have my whole defensive player types at balanced. I really hate one trick ponies and value general versatility. One of the biggest weaknesses of the 3-4 is the OLBs are often terrible pass coverage players so I will either convert prototypical MLBs and work on their pass coverage. Once the regular players get old and I have to deal with pretty much only drafted ones, I will use more DLman. If you get the luck of the draft there are a few extremely versatile players.

[josefrees]

Re: Defensive Schemes

*"so I will convert prototypical MLBs and work on their pass rushing"

Sorry typos

[Quillen32]

Re: Defensive Schemes

I run my 34 system almost identical to ajra21, except my LOLB is more of a balanced LB. I ran a lot of 3-4 under and I personally like someone who has good zone coverage because I usually hot route them to cover the flats or to spy the qb on 3rd down.

[HollaMV7]

Re: Defensive Schemes

So ajra21, when you actually change position players from one position to the next during offseason and then back to what they originally were, it changes their player type? Also is it cheaper to upgrade certain traits and attributes this way?

[ajra21]

Re: Defensive Schemes

Haha, I guess we both do have some time on our hands! Interesting theories as to why you run a 3-4. My problem with the 3-4 is that it seems to leave glaring holes for the running back and, like you mentioned, it hard to find good pass rushing OLBs in the draft.

my wife isn't very well. throw in the playoffs on TV and we've not moved from the couch all weekend.

i run 3-4 base because i play as the niners who have the best LBs in the game. i never switch from that although i did consider doing so once.

I run my 34 system almost identical to ajra21, except my LOLB is more of a balanced LB. I ran a lot of 3-4 under and I personally like someone who has good zone coverage because I usually hot route them to cover the flats or to spy the qb on 3rd down.

i run plenty of 3-4 under too. but let's be hones, in madden - just like in real life - you spend a lot of time in nickel & dime. my NT is a part time player which keeps costs down for the salary cap.

So ajra21, when you actually change position players from one position to the next during offseason and then back to what they originally were, it changes their player type? Also is it cheaper to upgrade certain traits and attributes this way?

i'll answer the last question first. yes it can be cheaper to upgrade players like this but i generally don't do it. in fact, i'm unable to recall a time i did.

ok, next answer isn't so quick.

generally, each player is designated with a "player type" & "scheme". it is visible on the roster screen when you click on a player. for example: leon sandcastle is designated as a man to man CB coming out of the draft. but look at his OVRs for the different schemes shown in lotus' guide:

89 balanced
90 protoype
88 zone
87 man to man
85 run support

this tells us that despite his designation being man to man, he's actually better suited to zone, balanced & prototype the best.

when you edit a player to a new position, the game will eval their abilities, ratings & traits to make a decision on their new player type for that new position.

move sandcastle to FS & the game evals his abilities & judges he's best for being a playmaker FS. however, move him back to CB & the game re-evals him for the CB position and tags him as prototype which is more in line with the ratings above, not as the original man to man designation. it pushes his OVR from 87 to 90.

generally, most D positions have a player type that gives a consistently higher OVR. when it comes to MLB, CB, FS & SS, it's prototype. i set my schemes to prototype and then edit my players (flip-flop) them back & forth to get the player type listed for them. it bumps their OVR up.

for 3-4 DL guys, run stopper is generally the highest designation, although sometimes you get versatile for a DE.

we know in the whole scheme of things it doesn't help much but young players do earn more XP if they are playing in a scheme that matches them. also, i generally find that simmed games go more my way when my players arch my scheme.

man, i need the game to start.