Big time update to Flexbone in NCAA 2010

[atlplayboy23]

Just got word from mm had to share the info this is from ncaa developer greg


Quote:
Just got word that you should expect some big time updates to flex bone this year. I was told the changes will take it to a level above where we were at on current-gen. Also, we have some new animations that will really help us with shotgun running plays, especially counters.

There's your little nugget of NCAA Football 10 info. And I know you will want finer details, but unfortunately I didn't implement it, so my knowledge is what I posted above. I'm working on getting him to post in the community (but it may not happen until after we release).

http://www.ncaastrategies.com/utopia...19#post1900319

[steebu]

Quote: Originally Posted by atlplayboy23

Just got word from mm had to Quote: Just got word that you should expect some big time updates to flex bone this year. I was told the changes will take it to a level above where we were at on current-gen. Also, we have some new animations that will really help us with shotgun running plays, especially counters. http://www.ncaastrategies.com/utopia...19#post1900319

Well, I'll believe it when I see it. Did my post about the option being broken get taken personally? I hope so! :-)

I'm appreciative that they're looking at it, but I'm a bit worried by the semantics used. First of all, Georgia Tech doesn't use a Flex Bone offense. The Flex Bone can and often does use a tight end. Georgia Tech runs a spread option, which uses four wide receivers and NO tight ends. There isn't a single tight end on the GT roster. Air Force, I believe, is the only team that uses the Flex Bone offense (often out of the shotgun, too). Navy runs the spread as well, as PJ's former QB coach is now the head coach there.

My whole point is I wanted the OPTION fixed. I don't care if they now have 280 new plays that can be run out of the "flexbone" formation. The OPTION needs to be fixed, meaning, the blocking schemes must get fixed. What would be really spectacular is if I call a triple with a load blocking scheme called, notice a numbers advantage to the other side, and when I audible my line changes the blocking scheme to a veer-in. HA! Expecting too much? Probably. But I still hope they fixed the OPTION, and not the "Flexbone".

[fistofrage]

Quote: Originally Posted by steebu

Well, I'll believe it when I see it. Did my post about the option being broken get taken personally? I hope so! :-) I'm appreciative that they're looking at it, but I'm a bit worried by the semantics used. First of all, Georgia Tech doesn't use a Flex Bone offense. The Flex Bone can and often does use a tight end. Georgia Tech runs a spread option, which uses four wide receivers and NO tight ends. There isn't a single tight end on the GT roster. Air Force, I believe, is the only team that uses the Flex Bone offense (often out of the shotgun, too). Navy runs the spread as well, as PJ's former QB coach is now the head coach there. My whole point is I wanted the OPTION fixed. I don't care if they now have 280 new plays that can be run out of the "flexbone" formation. The OPTION needs to be fixed, meaning, the blocking schemes must get fixed. What would be really spectacular is if I call a triple with a load blocking scheme called, notice a numbers advantage to the other side, and when I audible my line changes the blocking scheme to a veer-in. HA! Expecting too much? Probably. But I still hope they fixed the OPTION, and not the "Flexbone".

I agree with your statement.....HOWEVER.....I am concerened that this will be the next great CHEESE offense now.

Hear me out. I play with really tough sliders, I am currently playing a 5 team dynasty....

Georgia Tech
Mich State
ND
Colorado
Kentucky

Figured I'd take mid-low tier teams from some BCS conferences and ND and see what could happen.

GT leads the NCAA in rushing....Not suprising because GT is dead last in passing, but its not uncommon for me to rack up 250 to 350 yards rushing per game with them. I'm in week 10 and GT will probably have 2 1000 yard rushers. Ringer for MSU will struggle to get to 1000 and no one else will be even close.

My best receiver for the 5 teams has 750 yards receiving and my QB's aren't even close to winning league honors let alone putting up any national recognizable stats.

The stats I'm getting are pretty good......But I will tell you if the flexbone gets any more effective it would break the game. If implemented right, I don't have a problem, but when EA says they are improving things, it usually means WIIIIIDE OPEN. If you get what I'm saying.

It not uncommon for me to see low scoring games with my sliders.

ND lost to Michigan 13-10. GT beat VT 16-9. MSU beat Indiana 17-10. Kentucky beat Louisville 20-10, but lost to Alabama 71-3! A typical game will have evenly matched teams in the 20's. But GT's flexbone can break long runs at any time. The other offenses not so much. Ringer's only run over 20 yards was a 29 yard TD. Anderson from MSU broke a 59 yard draw out of the gun against Cal. Allen has 5 runs over 20 yards with a 75 yarder against Michigan his longest. But GT usually breaks 2 or 3 20 yarders a game.

Like I said I agree with what you are saying BUT it has to be done correctly and not WIIIDE OPEN or it will be the Cheese offense of choice.

[steebu]

Quote: Originally Posted by fistofrage

ND lost to Michigan 13-10. GT beat VT 16-9. MSU beat Indiana 17-10. Kentucky beat Louisville 20-10, but lost to Alabama 71-3! A typical game will have evenly matched teams in the 20's. But GT's flexbone can break long runs at any time. The other offenses not so much. Ringer's only run over 20 yards was a 29 yard TD. Anderson from MSU broke a 59 yard draw out of the gun against Cal. Allen has 5 runs over 20 yards with a 75 yarder against Michigan his longest. But GT usually breaks 2 or 3 20 yarders a game. Like I said I agree with what you are saying BUT it has to be done correctly and not WIIIDE OPEN or it will be the Cheese offense of choice.

Well, the hope is that it is done correctly, but the reality of GT's triple option (in real life) is they led the NCAA in plays of over 20 yards and plays of over 30 yards. They break long runs ALL the time. Against Georgia, the preseason #1 team in the country, IN Athens no less, they racked up over 400 yards rushing and 45 points. If that happens in real life, why can't that happen in the video game?

I agree with you, though, there is a fine line. If the option is "fixed" to where GT becomes the new Florida in the video game and people are winning 144-10 using 7 minute quarters then there's a problem.

[dex26-]

I hope this is true because this is the offense i run. I run the GT playbook. Most of my runs come out of the flex and wishbone. The offense is so flexable, you may have to make some adjustments and hot routes at the line, but this offense offers alot of different ways to attack a defense.

[Young J 334]

Quote: Originally Posted by steebu

Well, the hope is that it is done correctly, but the reality of GT's triple option (in real life) is they led the NCAA in plays of over 20 yards and plays of over 30 yards. They break long runs ALL the time. Against Georgia, the preseason #1 team in the country, IN Athens no less, they racked up over 400 yards rushing and 45 points. If that happens in real life, why can't that happen in the video game? I agree with you, though, there is a fine line. If the option is "fixed" to where GT becomes the new Florida in the video game and people are winning 144-10 using 7 minute quarters then there's a problem.

Gt wont have to become the new florida when a guy can take a team with a better line, qb and backs and just use their pb.

[fistofrage]

Quote: Originally Posted by Young J 334

Gt wont have to become the new florida when a guy can take a team with a better line, qb and backs and just use their pb.

Thats what I'm saying too. Teams should have a significant penalty at least in year one and Play now games if they switch playbooks. Look at Michigan last year, they didn't have the personal to run a spread even though they had 36 4 & 5* recruits on that roster.

I realize GT can run that offense well in real life and I saw what they did to Georgia. With GT in NCAA 2009, I can put up rushing numbers with the Flexbone. I am all for implementing the Flexbone to mimic what it does in real life, but I can already get similar stats. I don't want them to increase its effectiveness I guess is what I am saying because I already lead the NCAA in rushing with them.

[steebu]

Quote: Originally Posted by fistofrage

Thats what I'm saying too. Teams should have a significant penalty at least in year one and Play now games if they switch playbooks. Look at Michigan last year, they didn't have the personal to run a spread even though they had 36 4 & 5* recruits on that roster.

True, just because you have 4 and 5* guys on the roster doesn't mean you can make the offense work.

BUT

Look at what Paul Johnson did at Georgia Tech. He used a guy who came from a run n' shoot, dink n' dunk offense in high school (Josh Nesbitt), didn't have ANY of his "system" guys, and they go 9-3 and win a share of the ACC Coastal. So it CAN be done. But, I see what you're saying. I have no diea how you can actually get that to work in the video game, though.

Quote: Originally Posted by fistofrage

I don't want them to increase its effectiveness I guess is what I am saying because I already lead the NCAA in rushing with them.

Well, this IS EA, after all. They never said they were increasing its effectiveness. They just said, "that 'big time updates' will be coming to the Flex Bone offense in NCAA Football 10 ..." This probably means that they fixed the A-back animation and added 15 plays to the playbook.