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 / Formation Discussion Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2011-10-27 10:40:23 (ID: 14566) Report Abuse |
|
Following on from the discussion in the rookie area about the utilisation of the FB in the I formation, maybe we should have a proper discussion abou tthe impact of formations in RZA. It seems to me now that maybe they don't have quite the impact they should.
These are my feelings on what should be the pros/cons of each formation, and the options available, feel free to argue: Rated each out of 5 for Rushing/Passing/Protection Pro Set - totally balanced, FB is lead blocker running to the strong side, but usually the ball carrier when running to the weak side with the RB becoming the lead blocker. Decent pass protection, but the QB needs the extra time as he takes the snap under the C so has to get back and set himself in the pocket. Ratings 3/3/3 I formation - fairly balanced with the emphasis on the run. The RBs are lined up to naturally provide the FB as a lead blocker. Also good for short yardage FB dives to both sides. Passing is slightly weaker than the pro set as the backs are not initially set to block/run routes. Ratings 4/2/2 Big I formation - the additional TE provides extra run blocking and pass protection. Adequate for very short passing, but terrible for longer pass plays due to lack of WRs. 5/1/4 Wishbone - the lack of TE moves the blocking emphasis onto the backs - and 2 good blocking backs should make this a potent running formation, especially to the outside. The backs are also key to the pass, as they need to pick up rushing LB/DL, or be ready to take short dump off passes. 5/3/3 (but only if the backs are good blockers - feasibly 3/2/2 with poor backs) Shotgun 2 WR - excellent pass protection with 2 TE - the longer snap also gives the QB more time set himself and find a receiver. Lack of a lead blocker should weaken the running game - the chance of a QB fumble should be increased due to the longer snap. 2/4/5 Shotgun 4 WR - sacrificing the protection for extra downfield receivers - this formation should require a strong OL and an intelligent/agile QB capable of hitting secondary receivers on short routes if hurried by the DL/LB. Running is very poor, but the chance of completion of all passes greatly increased - IF the QB can get the time. If the OL cannot do their job, then sacks/fumbles/interceptions are strong possibilities. 1/5/2 Last edited on 2011-10-27 10:41:17 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sfniner08
|
posted: 2011-10-28 17:31:01 (ID: 14714) Report Abuse |
|
I would say in general that seems right. The times when that doesn't fit is when the defensive formation is off. Say it is a 443 defense in the 4 wr shotgun. Lots of open wr's. If a dime defense is on the field for a rushing play.
The premise for each seems correct to me though. Proset might be skewed more to passing but is the most balanced. I haven't used the wishbone to be honest. It seems that for a big gain that rb needs to get through those levels which unless your rbs/fbs are very strong and fast is unlikely. No wildcat? lol My Niners actually have used 3te sets stacked to one side. It can be effective with the right personnel. Probably not feasible here though. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2011-10-28 22:41:02 (ID: 14736) Report Abuse | |
|
The Wishbone is a good running formation, but pretty poor passing formation.
On running plays, you effectively have the Triple Option whereby the defender must choice which attacking player to target and QB can either keep the ball or pitch to two other players. At times, it worked well in college ball of yester year, but today and in pro ball (where I think defensive speed is much greater), I don't think its particularly effective. For passing, the fact that you have 3 RBs means you've depleted your potential passing targets to only two receivers. Often times you play the 'Bone with just a single WR and a TE. This means on passing plays, the defense can focus on fewer targets and because there is often fewer WRs, the offense doesn't stretch the field much vertically. Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-11-03 09:22:17 (ID: 15219) Report Abuse |
I think this game needs offense formation called by me as 5-6. OT-OG-C-OG-OT FB-FB-FB HB-HB-HB  Last edited on 2011-11-03 10:02:43 by dark_wing |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Formation Discussion | |
