What Kind of Formations Will You Create?

[DLaren]

Quote: Originally Posted by jballa838

Offensively _ . . . . O . . . . _ . . . O O X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . O. . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

With the Raiders offensive line I couldn't even dream of coming out in a set that doesn't have a HB in the backfield. I might steal this idea and modify it a bit:


_ . . . . TE . . . . _ . . . O O X O O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . WR
. . .WR. . . . WR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _
. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . QB . HB. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

[newper77]

..WR..........o.o.0.o.o...WR......
............TE....QB..............
......................TE..........
......................HB..........

I'd keep the TE in the backfield as any TE/FB combo... Similar to an I-Form, just with a backfield shift out to the right means that I'd have two lead blockers for any sort of a running QB, and hopefully the D would overload that side, freeing up some passes to left wide out and tight end. Of course you could run some tosses to the right with the TE/FB coming up to help block, even run some playaction w/ the TE/FB pretending to block while the QB fakes the handoff to the HB... once the defender is penetrated past that point, the QB tosses one over their head to the TE/FB for a quick ten yards.

It will be fun to see how this game works with created formations... As with most games that have allowed created formations, you can always come up with something that the AI can't figure out. I remember in the first Head Coach I had one play where the QB would literally run around in a 360 degree circle when attempting to hand off -- he would miss the RB, and then just run up behind the RB who would act as a blocker. It was actually not a bad running play!

[x1Blumpkin1x]

Quote: Originally Posted by DLaren

I think I've come up with a good defensive formation: ...................FS............................. .......FS.......................... .................................................. .................................. ......................................SS.......... .................................. ....CB.......................LB............LB..... ...................CB........ ...........................LB....NT....NT....LB... ..............................

So you're going to get two traditional nose tackles to stuff in the middle. I'm assuming the LBs on the line itself will be physically built like 3-4 linebackers/pass-rush specialist DEs (bigger and faster than a 4-3 OLB)?

Would you handle the backfield similar to a tampa 2 where the SS would drop back into coverage like a MLB would?

[DLaren]

Quote: Originally Posted by x1Blumpkin1x

So you're going to get two traditional nose tackles to stuff in the middle. I'm assuming the LBs on the line itself will be physically built like 3-4 linebackers/pass-rush specialist DEs (bigger and faster than a 4-3 OLB)?

Exactly. The foundation of this defense will be built on having two traditional NT's (not UT's). I know it won't be easy to aquire two Sam Adams/Ted Washington kind of players in the middle, but that's what my goal is.

Then I need physical specimens on the LOS at LB; I think the Raiders already have this covered with Thomas Howard and Kirk Morrison. The MLB's don't have to be great atheletes, they just have to be good at shedding blocks and plugging the middle.

Quote: Originally Posted by x1Blumpkin1x

Would you handle the backfield similar to a tampa 2 where the SS would drop back into coverage like a MLB would?

The SS will have a lot of responsibility in this defense. I'll be using M.Huff here to cover TE's, blitz, drop into zone, play the run, spy the QB and if possible maybe even free-roam.

But if it turns out that we can't stop the run from this formation, then all of these ideas go out the window

[Sven Draconian]

I'm going to create all sorts of "end over" and "Heavy" stuff, such as..

TE.G.C.G.T.T.TE......WR
.......Q............
.......F............
.......H...........

Or
TE.G.C.G.T.T.T.TE
.......Q...............
.......F...............
.......H...............

Maybe do some with split backs

T.G.C.G.T.T.TE..........WR
......Q...........
..H...........F....

I also love the 4 WR sides for quick screen stuff

WR.....WR..............T.G.C.G.T.TE
....WR.......WR..............Q..............


And of course theres "Bear/Bull"

WR..........T.G.C.G.T.TE
....................Q....F......
....................H

And last but not least the Power-T

TE.T.G.C.G.T.TE
..........Q..........
....H.....F.....H...

Along with Endover
T.G.C.G.T.TE.TE
.....Q............
H....F....H

And Wing-T
TE.T.G.C.G.T.TE
.........Q..........H
....H....F..........

Most of these are obviously run-first formations, but thats because the game has never really shorted us on passing stuff.

[broncos24]

so we can actually make plays and custom formations like this???

thats pretty tight.

[DLaren]

Quote: Originally Posted by broncos24

so we can actually make plays and custom formations like this??? thats pretty tight.

Yea, I'm just curious as to how robust and in-depth the play-creator is.

Quote: Originally Posted by newper77

..WR..........o.o.0.o.o...WR...... ............TE....QB.............. ......................TE.......... ......................HB..........

Quote: Originally Posted by Sven Draconian

I'm going to create all sorts of "end over" and "Heavy" stuff, such as.. And last but not least the Power-T TE.T.G.C.G.T.TE ..........Q.......... ....H.....F.....H...

I have something similar that I plan to use in short-yardage situations...


...........TE.........O.O.O.O.O...........TE...... ......
.............................QB................... .........
.............................FB................... .........
........................HB.......HB............... ........

[bgeno]

Quote: Originally Posted by DLaren

Yea, I'm just curious as to how robust and in-depth the play-creator is. I have something similar that I plan to use in short-yardage situations... ...........TE.........O.O.O.O.O...........TE...... ...... .............................QB................... ......... .............................FB................... ......... ........................HB.......HB............... ........

Why not split out WR's at that point? You'd give yourself a better option on passes. The way I see it, splitting out two tight ends in that formation is basically like wasting two players. NCAA has had this formation for years (at least it used to) and they have WR's split out.