no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / Out of Position Penalty Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:15:40 (ID: 85719) Report Abuse |
|
If blitzing was properly sorted out, and blitzing LBs for example has a chance of stuffing back in a the backfield, then we would not be having this conversation now.
The fix for this is not to 'make a formation worse', it is to sort out the flaws in the way the game handles defense so that these situations do not exist. And that 'flaw' does not suddenly mean making the Dime stronger against the run, it means making all defensive formations a little more flexible by adding proper blitzing. By all means get the CBs to line up closer to the LOS when expecting run, but will people start crying again if that means WRs break big plays? But such changes also need a revamp in the offense... passing is already very weak compare to running, we NEED the ability to complete med/long passes, we need proper blocking from FBs/TEs, and we need RBs/FBs to be a threat in the passing game. If you were to get a penalty to rushing from the sg4wr, would you accept a bonus to passing?... oh hang on, didn't people complain passing was too strong last season when it started blowing away defenses who were over reliant on the 5-3-3? Now teams are over-reliant on the Dime due to paranoia about big plays, and they are getting beaten on the ground again. Swings and roundabouts - hopefully proper blitzing would redress the balance. Simply nerfing the sg4wr won't. And yes, I built my team around the formation, starting from about season 2. For the sole reason that everybody else ran the ball all the time, and I wanted to do something different. Nothing to do with irrelevant FBs in the I formation, poor use of TEs etc, I wasn't even aware of all that then, I wanted to build a team around a mainly pass orientated offense. Last edited on 2013-03-05 20:33:51 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Nogard
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:27:25 (ID: 85720) Report Abuse |
|
That´s bullshit. If you use different formation allways for some plays your offense is readable in Real life too.
Many teams use the same formation many times but do different plays which look quite similar. Example here are the Houston Texans whith there 3 TE Offense. Or the Patriots. Sure they don´t use the SG4WR very often more the SG2 but it is mostly a single back offense. In RZA you have at the moment only 3 single back formations (SG4 SG2 and GLO). The Patriots did only use 2 back offense at the Goalline with an OG as FB this season. And I talked about with the single back formation. You haven´t the mess of different formations in RZA. there is no heavy wing offense with 3 TE o WR on 1 side and so on. So it is normal that you use some formations. Next point is roster management. The NFL teams don´t plan there roster for all different formations. the same here. If I plan a roster for a single back offense or a pass heavy offense. I cant play with a roster for a single back offense mostly with 2 or 3 backs. Or pass mostly with only 1 or 2 Wr. It is a sim and not everything is like real football. this is not possible. And sorry for this but I think a little bit your ae only a little bit lazy to set up a better Defense playbook. If you predict that your opponent runs from SG4 in several situation why you must defend it with the dime? last difference to real football. FBs or backs in general are allways used in blocking for the QB or the Ballcarrier same with TE. Here the RB never blocks and FB only a passrusher on passing and TE only blitzing or DE on running game. It is a case of balancing why it is as it is. and it is your management/coaching fault when you only use the dime. Last edited on 2013-03-05 20:32:44 by Nogard |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:33:23 (ID: 85721) Report Abuse |
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:33:32 (ID: 85722) Report Abuse |
|
I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying so we're not that far apart in the end.
- LB Blitzing leading to the lone back being tackled for a loss should certainly happen, agreed. - The fix is not to make any offensive formation worse, I agree as well. IMO the fix is in giving the defense a boost (out of any formation) if the offense keeps using the same formation and calling the same plays. - We also need an ability to call man or zone coverage on D... if I could do that I'd be way more inclined to not always use the Dime against the SG4WR because I could put a fast LB on the 3rd/4th WR instead of a dimeback which would mean more players in the box... That or as you said make the CBs line up closer to the line of scrimmage when expecting run, also having the ability to put one of the 2 safeties in the box when expecting run would help immensely. - Passing is too weak, medium and long passes need to be improved, blocking needs to be improved too and backs need to be able to catch the ball too, agreed. - "If you were to get a penalty to rushing from the sg4wr, would you accept a bonus to passing?" That's not what really, if you only run out of the SG4WR a few times a game I'm perfectly fine with you getting significant yardage on the ground because you'd be catching the D off-guard. What I have an issue with is team CONSISTENTLY running out of the SG4WR because that's extremely unrealistic. The only reason why you should be able to run out of the SG4WR with any kind of success should be because the D wasn't expecting it, by definition if you do it repeatedly then the D will not be surprised anymore. - Finally, I don't care how you build your team using any formation over 50% of the time should not work, ever. Balance and catching the D off-guard to take advantage of mismatches are the keys to a successful offense, not finding one formation that repeatedly works. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:37:02 (ID: 85723) Report Abuse |
|
I got good yards from the Gun today on the ground, but look how I got them:
Shotgun 4 WR Dime 4DL MLB 4CB 2SF 8/ 114/14.3 20/71/3.6 Shotgun 4 WR 5-3-3 13/20/1.5 12/48 /4 Shotgun 4 WR 4-3-4 0/0/0 1/3/3 8 rush vs 20 pass against Dime, is that 'consistently' rushing from the Gun? I would argue not. And look at the effect the 5-3-3 had on me! I've got an excellent QB, several very good receivers and a big strong line - yet my passing game really struggled today against lesser opposition, even when I went with 4 WR and he sent the 5-3-3. Passing needs a boost int he form of proper med/long passes, and maybe more options in there, rather than just right/left/middle Last edited on 2013-03-05 20:41:44 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:44:37 (ID: 85727) Report Abuse |
|
Nogard wrote:
That´s bullshit. If you use different formation allways for some plays your offense is readable in Real life too. Many teams use the same formation many times but do different plays which look quite similar. Example here are the Houston Texans whith there 3 TE Offense. Or the Patriots. Sure they don´t use the SG4WR very often more the SG2 but it is mostly a single back offense. In RZA you have at the moment only 3 single back formations (SG4 SG2 and GLO). The Patriots did only use 2 back offense at the Goalline with an OG as FB this season. And I talked about with the single back formation. You haven´t the mess of different formations in RZA. there is no heavy wing offense with 3 TE o WR on 1 side and so on. So it is normal that you use some formations. Next point is roster management. The NFL teams don´t plan there roster for all different formations. the same here. If I plan a roster for a single back offense or a pass heavy offense. I cant play with a roster for a single back offense mostly with 2 or 3 backs. Or pass mostly with only 1 or 2 Wr. It is a sim and not everything is like real football. this is not possible. And sorry for this but I think a little bit your ae only a little bit lazy to set up a better Defense playbook. If you predict that your opponent runs from SG4 in several situation why you must defend it with the dime? last difference to real football. FBs or backs in general are allways used in blocking for the QB or the Ballcarrier same with TE. Here the RB never blocks and FB only a passrusher on passing and TE only blitzing or DE on running game. It is a case of balancing why it is as it is. and it is your management/coaching fault when you only use the dime. So you're saying that Houston or the Pats use the same formation more than 50% of the time? Please send me a link supporting that because I absolutely don't buy it for a second. They might use similar formations but not the same one and that's a key difference. Roster management, NFL teams don't have 70 spots on their rosters, we do, so we have the ability to build a more varied offense than NFL teams do. Finally, "If you predict that your opponent runs from SG4 in several situation why you must defend it with the dime?" because I'm leaving my MLB (my best player) in a one on one situation with the other team's FB starting 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage. I'd say the odds are firmly in favor of my MLB most of the time. And because I'd still want 4 CBs on the field to cover the 4 WRs in case my opponent decides to pass... If I could I would however put an extra safety in the box so I'd have 4 CBs in man coverage plus a deep safety to play the pass as well as 6 guys in the box to play the run... It's not like the D has to guess right every time to stop the offense, imo it should be more about the offense having to fool the D than about the D having to guess what the O's going to do on each and every down. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2013-03-05 20:58:02 (ID: 85729) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
I got good yards from the Gun today on the ground, but look how I got them: Shotgun 4 WR Dime 4DL MLB 4CB 2SF 8/ 114/14.3 20/71/3.6 Shotgun 4 WR 5-3-3 13/20/1.5 12/48 /4 Shotgun 4 WR 4-3-4 0/0/0 1/3/3 8 rush vs 20 pass against Dime, is that 'consistently' rushing from the Gun? I would argue not. And look at the effect the 5-3-3 had on me! I've got an excellent QB, several very good receivers and a big strong line - yet my passing game really struggled today against lesser opposition, even when I went with 4 WR and he sent the 5-3-3. Passing needs a boost int he form of proper med/long passes, and maybe more options in there, rather than just right/left/middle We both agree that passing needs a boost, I'm definitely with you on this one. Regarding the game you played today I have several issues. - You lined up in the same formation (SG4WR) 75% of the time, that's highly unrealistic and should not work imo. - You ran 29% of the time out of the SG4WR for over 14yds per carry, I think that's way too high but my perception might be wrong. As I said earlier I'd really like to see the NFL average for such runs (single back from the SG versus 4 CBs) in order to make a real life comparison. - You only gained 4yds per pass attempt in SG4WR vs 5-3-3. That's way too low, especially considering that you ran it as many times as you passed it when your SG4WR was facing the 5-3-3 so we can't even argue that the D knew what was coming. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Nogard
|
posted: 2013-03-05 21:06:30 (ID: 85731) Report Abuse |
|
lol you say it yourselves. they use similar formations yes but that is not possible in RZA so you can summarize similar formations in RZA in using one formation.
your 1 MLB should cover the whole backfield? not possible in real football too. and RZA is a zone defence so the MLB defend his zone and you have to deal with it. By the way did you see the conference final between Falcons and SF? in single back formations your LB missed the tackle completely cause he thought the Kaepernick runs himself but the RB has him and he never saw that. Not possible in RZA. So it is unrealistic lol yeah cause it´s a sim no real football and without the stupidity of real human beings on the field. this whole discussion is completely senseless. cause you found in a SIM allways things that arent the same way in real football. This is quite impossible. That´s why I am out of this stupid discussion now. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2013-03-05 21:23:53 (ID: 85734) Report Abuse |
|
Nogard wrote:
your 1 MLB should cover the whole backfield? not possible in real football too. and RZA is a zone defence so the MLB defend his zone and you have to deal with it. My MLB should cover the FB one on one... and from the SG the FB starts 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage giving my MLB even more time to get to the FB. I know we don't currently have man defense in RZA and that's part of the issue, in real life in a Dime each CB could cover a WR and the MLB take care of the single back. The 2 safeties could be playing zone over the top. And no, similar formation does not mean same formation. A single back with 4 WRs will not be defended the same way as a single back with 2 WRs and 2 TEs so another helpful thing would be to add more formations to chose from in RZA. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Nogard
|
posted: 2013-03-05 21:25:16 (ID: 85735) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
Roster management, NFL teams don't have 70 spots on their rosters, we do, so we have the ability to build a more varied offense than NFL teams do. Ah by the way. NFL teams have a 53 DC+ IR + Trainingcamp. The roster you mean isnt the 70 player roster here it is the 55 player DC so quite similar. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Out of Position Penalty | |
