How about 120 ways to play defense next year?

[JerseySuave4]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jukeman

every team does not run the same basic 4-3 or 3-4 and etc... Do people even know what a "scheme" is???? The way defense is called need to be changed overall.. So yes, there should be "120 ways to win on defensive" Nice way to get off topic and say "people just suck"

i dont disagree that there should be 120 ways to win on defense but a lot of people's complaints are because they are so used to defense being easy to stop the cpu.

In real life defense is hard. You're at a disadvantage because you are reacting to the offense more often than not instead of dictating things the way the offense does. Especially with the rules and how much they are there to help the offense because people like scoring. I am a defensive coordinator for a hs team and there's no way i could go into a game, without seeing film on the team i'm playing but just having a basic background knowledge of the team, and call the defense and be successful more than not. You need to know who you're playing, what they run, who their stars are going into the game and then once the game starts its a chess match. You're going to win, you're going to lose, but you just can't let up that cruical mistake like a td. You have to pick when and where you blitz, hide your coverages, switch your personnel and fronts, etc.

I'm loving the defense in this years game. Could it be better? Yeah but i think a lot of that has to do with old schemes and same old plays. Some new plays and more team specific playbooks would be nicer but in terms of the on the field stuff i think its pretty good. In the demos on heisman i've gotten good pressure on the QBs, gotten a couple user sacks with the user controlled DE, got some sacks with the user controlled LBs that are blitzing.

Another thing is when you blitz with an outside guy or DB like a Nickel or SS, dont show it right away, even the cpu adjusts if they see it coming, i like to either shift to a "show blitz" look so the guys are moving towards the ball but some will drop out or if i'm controlling the guy slowly time it and creep up because if you time your movement good enough you get a jump on the snap (without having to try and actually jump the snap) and you get in the backfield quicker.

[IowaAJ]

I think the defense is harder on Heisman but it should be if you watch college football the offense tends to control the game in most cases. There are some defenses that completely shut people down. I like the defense and it is definitely a challenge for those that like to play safety and just blitz every time then try and get back that just won't work. The thing I have noticed is using the hit stick is not always smart if you don't square up the ball carrier and you go for a big hit, it is easier for the computer to break the tackle. I think defense will be a lot harder vs the computer this year especially with all the offenses they have added. I think it definitley changes the game because vs an Air raid team like Texas Tech you have to play more nickel and Dime coverages, vs a running team you have to use the base defense for the most part. So people have to decide before the game if a team loves to pass or run then you pick a defense based on this I personally love that you have to actually think about what the offense is planning to do in a game.

[berad88]

Quote: Originally Posted by footballdude1971

Disagree completely...you can't manually control a guy on defense and make a play on a passed ball (those who think you can, you can't...at least not like last gen)...the players don't perform an action (e.g. swat ball or jump) when you hit the corresponding button. Robo QB's with amazing accuracy and the speed of the pass all contribute to a sense of helplessness on defense. Lack of pass rush contributes to this as well. Like I said, all you guys who think defense is solid aren't going to "stop" anyone...the only chance you have is your opponent stopping themselves. Like I said, the defense in this game sucks.

Totally not true. I been having a great time manually defending the pass in the demo. I have made user interceptions and deflected a lot of passes. Also there is no robo qb. I have seen the cpu throw plenty of incompletions.

[Palo20]

I just hate that defense feels the same every year on both NCAA an Madden no matter which team I'm playing with.

In last gen, they at least tried to make more defense specific playbooks. The Cover 2 teams actually had more than one or two Cover 2 looks.

I'd like to see everything Adembroski mentioned plus strong and weak side defenders. It's been requested a ton, but Sam an Will LBs have different skill sets. So do SS and FS (they're basically interchangeable in the game now, they always stay on the same side). NT and 3 Tech are different positions. LE and RE even have slightly different skill sets in some schemes. Then of course the 4-3/3-4 debate: they're completely different animals.

Think about how much better franchise/dynasty would be if you really had to find specific players with very specific skill sets for your defensive system.

[Jukeman]

Quote: Originally Posted by Palo20

I just hate that defense feels the same every year on both NCAA an Madden no matter which team I'm playing with. In last gen, they at least tried to make more defense specific playbooks. The Cover 2 teams actually had more than one or two Cover 2 looks. I'd like to see everything Adembroski mentioned plus strong and weak side defenders. It's been requested a ton, but Sam an Will LBs have different skill sets. So do SS and FS (they're basically interchangeable in the game now, they always stay on the same side). NT and 3 Tech are different positions. LE and RE even have slightly different skill sets in some schemes. Then of course the 4-3/3-4 debate: they're completely different animals. Think about how much better franchise/dynasty would be if you really had to find specific players with very specific skill sets for your defensive system.

[ACardAttack]

Quote: Originally Posted by adembroski

defense does need major work. It's not fine. It needs three things more than anything. If these two things are added for N12, I will be one happy guy. * Tiered playcalling. My stunt and coverage are not interdependent unless a blitz is involved. What I'd like to see is the ability to call a formation, then a stunt/blitz combination, and then the system displays all coverages that work with the number of people in coverage left. Additionally, the coverage should adjust to use whatever defenders I do have.

This is what I am badly wanting to see in both NCAA and Madden....sure you can change everything at the line of scrimmage, but there isnt enough time.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Palo20

I just hate that defense feels the same every year on both NCAA an Madden no matter which team I'm playing with. In last gen, they at least tried to make more defense specific playbooks. The Cover 2 teams actually had more than one or two Cover 2 looks. I'd like to see everything Adembroski mentioned plus strong and weak side defenders. It's been requested a ton, but Sam an Will LBs have different skill sets. So do SS and FS (they're basically interchangeable in the game now, they always stay on the same side). NT and 3 Tech are different positions. LE and RE even have slightly different skill sets in some schemes. Then of course the 4-3/3-4 debate: they're completely different animals. Think about how much better franchise/dynasty would be if you really had to find specific players with very specific skill sets for your defensive system.

Some of what you said here, I agree with. DT's are more position specific, so are DE's. But, many times what the position is called in the defensive terminology is not the same from team to team. One of the best defensive coaches of the past 15 years calls the safety that lines up in the box the "free safety" and the one who plays in the middle of the field the "strong safety." It all has to do with the rotation of the defense. I wouldn't want to have players pegged in to do things they are not well-suited for.

Many teams use a "Sam" and "Will" LB, but that doesn't always mean that the Sam always aligns to the "strength" and the Will to "weak side." Hell, some teams call the strength to the 2 receiver side, some call the strength to the tight end. Some schemes align the "Sam" to the TE in over defenses, but align him to the split side in their under packages. Again, it depends on the secondary rotation. (That's why if they were going to go to tiered play-calling, I'd rather see it go from back to front, because that's how the best DC's design their defense, even though they might call it from front to back in their terminolgies). I don't think there are enough fronts, anyway. Why can't fronts be called to the field or the boundary? To the tight or the split? I could go on and on.

As for safeties being interchangeable, again it depends on the scheme. Defenses who hang their hat on what's called in coaching circles as middle of the field defenses definitely distinguish between a deep middle defender and a short one (this doesn't mean that they are never in a split safety defense, it just means that is their change-up). However, the so-called "Cover 2" philosophies certainly do not distinguish. Both players essentially have the same responsibilities.

The fact of the matter is, that while I feel the game/s are becoming fairly good representations of what you may see on any given Saturday and Sunday (Fridays too, I guess), there is just way too many intricacies involved and there is no way anyone can nail it to a T, and if they did, it would be hard for the majority of the people playing the game to truly understand what's happening. I try to just focus my opinions on things that I feel are fundamentals, but not try to nit-pick too much. One pet peeve of mine though is when people try to generalize and say "everyone" does "this." Because, you can find exceptions to almost anything scheme wise in the upper levels of football.

[Palo20]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

Some of what you said here, I agree with. DT's are more position specific, so are DE's. But, many times what the position is called in the defensive terminology is not the same from team to team. One of the best defensive coaches of the past 15 years calls the safety that lines up in the box the "free safety" and the one who plays in the middle of the field the "strong safety." It all has to do with the rotation of the defense. I wouldn't want to have players pegged in to do things they are not well-suited for. Many teams use a "Sam" and "Will" LB, but that doesn't always mean that the Sam always aligns to the "strength" and the Will to "weak side." Hell, some teams call the strength to the 2 receiver side, some call the strength to the tight end. Some schemes align the "Sam" to the TE in over defenses, but align him to the split side in their under packages. Again, it depends on the secondary rotation. (That's why if they were going to go to tiered play-calling, I'd rather see it go from back to front, because that's how the best DC's design their defense, even though they might call it from front to back in their terminolgies). I don't think there are enough fronts, anyway. Why can't fronts be called to the field or the boundary? To the tight or the split? I could go on and on. As for safeties being interchangeable, again it depends on the scheme. Defenses who hang their hat on what's called in coaching circles as middle of the field defenses definitely distinguish between a deep middle defender and a short one (this doesn't mean that they are never in a split safety defense, it just means that is their change-up). However, the so-called "Cover 2" philosophies certainly do not distinguish. Both players essentially have the same responsibilities. The fact of the matter is, that while I feel the game/s are becoming fairly good representations of what you may see on any given Saturday and Sunday (Fridays too, I guess), there is just way too many intricacies involved and there is no way anyone can nail it to a T, and if they did, it would be hard for the majority of the people playing the game to truly understand what's happening. I try to just focus my opinions on things that I feel are fundamentals, but not try to nit-pick too much. One pet peeve of mine though is when people try to generalize and say "everyone" does "this." Because, you can find exceptions to almost anything scheme wise in the upper levels of football.

That's why the general premise of the thread was about 120 ways to play defense. That should be the goal, and I think it can happen without getting too complicated. I understand that not everyone plays the same way, but that's the type of uniqueness we're hoping for in the game.

I'd love to see Saban, Belichick, Gregg Williams and others play with the single high FS more often. I'd love to have no clue where the Steelers' blitz is coming from. I'd also like to know that the Colts are pretty much sending 4 rushers and I'm still not gonna have much time to throw. I want 3-4 DEs to move inside (as most teams do) on passing downs and I want 3-4 OLBs to have DE type tendencies.

Most NFL teams play with LCB and RCB but some teams (Jets) use their best CB and have him match up with the best WR. I want to playthe Jets and have Revis covering my best guy. Sorry, I'm rambling again.

I just think that some of this stuff can be implemented into the game without confusing the "casual" crowd.