Custom playbook base using 1 basic formation.

[VegasCSURam]

I'm still relatively new to this, so I was hoping I could get some input. Looking through playbooks2012.com has helped me a lot with learning the formations. In my dynasty I have a pocket passer QB and I like using a lot of ace formation plays. Would it be a bad idea to create a playbook entirely out of ace? I mean that I would use ace normal, ace y trips, ace big, etc. All the plays I would use out of the shotgun are there (such as pa four verticals for example). My thinking is that it seems like it'd be harder to read, there's no obvious transition to an empty backfield, things like that. And I'd throw in goal line tight formation too. Thanks in advance for the input.

[MIFB13]

I believe what you're referring to is a One Back offense. Don't be afraid to throw some pistol or shotgun in there as a change of pace.

[PowerofRed25]

Quote: Originally Posted by VegasCSURam

I'm still relatively new to this, so I was hoping I could get some input. Looking through playbooks2012.com has helped me a lot with learning the formations. In my dynasty I have a pocket passer QB and I like using a lot of ace formation plays. Would it be a bad idea to create a playbook entirely out of ace? I mean that I would use ace normal, ace y trips, ace big, etc. All the plays I would use out of the shotgun are there (such as pa four verticals for example). My thinking is that it seems like it'd be harder to read, there's no obvious transition to an empty backfield, things like that. And I'd throw in goal line tight formation too. Thanks in advance for the input.

Hmm, I think it could work and the problem you're trying to avoid is the same problem I have, getting in formation tendencies. In my case, it is running those spread wing formations and then going into non-wing formations to pass.

In your case, you may be better off adding Pistol Spread and Pistol Trips Open as your two "spread" formations since Ace and Pistol are pretty much interchangeable. If you jump into those formations once or twice early on and run a dive or something, you can get back into it later in the game to throw.

[VegasCSURam]

That's what I was thinking, I feel like my formation transitions would give away too much. I appreciate the pistol suggestion, I never understood it before.

Maybe I should rephrase the question. If I were to create a playbook that's all ace (and some pistol) would that work? Or is there some defensive formation that would kick ace's *** so a potential opponent would figure it out then own me... In a dynasty with UNLV, my offense just wasn't that good. My offensive line wouldn't be able to give the QB time to look, or the WR's time to run their routes, but when they could, they couldn't catch the ball. I started using short quick plays, pretty much working my way down the field slowly, but it worked for me. I really didn't use anything that wasn't under center, so that's what made me think that I could try to make a playbook that would cater to that style.

Or is that just dumb and I should just shut up and use pro or one back or something.

[BHavenBlazer]

I actually like passing out of ace and pistol formations for a reason most won't understand. I'm a college linebacker, and alot of our pass blitz packages consist of calling a blitz package, and then adjusting via check with me audible depending on which side the back is offset. Basically, the play call in the huddle has 2 calls(blitz from left, blitz from right) and the audible is called so the blitz comes from the side opposite the back. With Ace and pistol formations, my blitz package is somewhat neutralized by the backs alignment. So yes, you could be very effective running a 1 back type playbook. When building your playbook, start with 1 back offenses so you won't have to deal with formations that cannot be removed.

[PowerofRed25]

Quote: Originally Posted by BHavenBlazer

I actually like passing out of ace and pistol formations for a reason most won't understand. I'm a college linebacker, and alot of our pass blitz packages consist of calling a blitz package, and then adjusting via check with me audible depending on which side the back is offset. Basically, the play call in the huddle has 2 calls(blitz from left, blitz from right) and the audible is called so the blitz comes from the side opposite the back. With Ace and pistol formations, my blitz package is somewhat neutralized by the backs alignment. So yes, you could be very effective running a 1 back type playbook. When building your playbook, start with 1 back offenses so you won't have to deal with formations that cannot be removed.

I like Ace and Pistol for this reason, and even further beyond that, I just like balanced formations period.

My offense in two dynasties revolves entirely around balanced formations, I don't want to tip play side based on formation, I run equally to the short and field side and I like being able to read the D at the line and have a quick play flip audible to switch play sides without needing any formation adjustment.

So I will run Flexbone Normal, Wishbone Wide and Tight, I Normal/Twins/Tight/Slot, Pistol Cross/Ace/Spread as my balanced plays. No Strong/Weak FB, no offset back and even in my formations with a TE are incredibly balanced.

This is probably the most important thing to me offensively. Not balance of play calls, not balance of carries and personnel, but balance of formation. The last few years of NCAA I have gotten into awful formation tendencies where users would just know absolutely what was happening based on how I lined up. I feel that I get a lot more balance when I run balanced sets.

I'm not too comfortable running Ace in the game though. Pistol I run a ton of, but Ace, I just don't feel like my PA works whatsoever whenever I have tried to run it and if I am running straight drop passes, I'd rather have some space between me and the D.

[BHavenBlazer]

I was much like you when i first started by using balanced everything on offense. Pound the ball inbetween the tackles, speed options, and levels routes when i wanted to pass the ball(drags with a dig behind it, quick out with a flag or deep out behind it, etc) and other easy reads. I stayed in either 10(1 back, 0 TE's) of 12(1 back, 2 tight ends) and it was always symetrical. Even got into the flexbone and pistol cross formations because, like you, i wanted to flip plays/runs without typing it off.
Then, i went into this obsession with throwing the ball and the spread. Started going with lots of trips formations to creat mismatches. I love getting my fastest wr in a one on one situation on the 1 receiver side.
After that, i discovered a full back and power game. Strong I, I form twin TE, Weak I, flexbone tackle over, Ace Jumbo Z, etc. Learning win to call the counter and weakside dives when defense overplayed the strong side.
Then, thanks to a dynasty where i graduated Brandon Wheeden and had a scrambler for a starter in the 2nd season, i discovered the beauty of the option attack. Read options, speed options from the gun, triple options from the pistol and gun.

And now, my offensive attack today is a blend of all these. I run what i call an option game, where i count the numbers of guys in the box and adjust my play accordingly. 5 or less, imside run, 6 or more, pass. 1 high safety? Two outside verticles. 2 high safeties, a slant on one slot, out on the other or a levels combination between the slots. I still go balanced, but now i've incorporated unsymetrical balance(2 te's on one side, two wr's on other or 2 wr's on one side, 1 te, 1 wr on other). Now, i've fallen in love with 2 backs from the gun. Love the possibility of read options with a lead blocker as well as keeping an opponent guessing on which rb will block.

[VegasCSURam]

Wow, I like your approach but I'd have no idea how to read the defense like that. I suppose that'll be my next step, learning the defensive formations.