PDA

View Full Version : Is it cheese? DB at WR or WR at TE



FAIRDALE KINGS
05-21-2011, 09:46 PM
Basically I want to know what the community feels about:

DB at WR
WR at TE
CB at QB
FS at DE
All are cheese
Some are Cheese
None are cheese






Backstory:

I was playing in an online dynasty with five other guys. In year 2035, one of the guys coaching LSU began playing his 95 overall FS at WR (99 speed, 99 acceleration, 76 catch). The thing is that he wasn't even playing defense because he was the third-best Free Safety on the roster. The guy is 46 years old and is a great guy. He has been the commissioner of multiple leagues and other online dynasties that I have played in. He's actually won four BCS titles during our current 25 year dynasty. After the season was over the commish (Alabama) told the guy that if wanted to continue using the Free Safety on offense as a Wide Receiver that he needed to change his position to WR. He was no longer allowed to use Formation Subs and play the FS at WR. He would have to take the penalty and lose his 87 Awareness.


When week seven arrived in 2036 and the commish (who has won 15 titles) was looking at the stats he noticed that the Free Safety was still playing Wide Receiver... and was also listed at the #3 CB. (No big deal about a FS playing CB... but it was weird because the starting FS was an 80 overall.) The commish wasn't upset. In fact, he told the LSU coach that he could play the FS at WR and that he would beat him by 42 points again this year... But in the future there would be an "official" league rule prohibiting such tactics.

The commish argued that it would be cheese using a fast CB at QB exclusively to run Ace Big Speed Option all day... or line-up in 5 WR and run Four Verticals and scramble with a 99 speed player. He said that FS or CB at WR was no different than a CB at QB or using a FS lined up at DE.

Well... the LSU coach resigned immediately and said that he couldn't remain in the dynasty under those conditions. And that the rule ruins the spirit of the college game. When I talked to the LSU coach about the issue he brought up Deion Sanders (Cowboys WR/CB), Troy Brown (Patriots WR/CB) and Devin Hester (Bears WR/CB).

I told him that those arguments were apples and oranges. You can not compare college football with pro football. In college the players are only allowed to practice 20 hours per week. In pro football there are no limits and they can watch film all day. I also shot down his examples and let him know that Deion and Devin Hester never had a reception in college. And that Troy Brown had one interception at Marshall during the 1-AA National Championship intercepting a Hail Mary vs. Youngstown State. He was only use in prevent.

I also understand that Chris Gamble (Ohio State) and Charles Woodson (Michigan) had significant impacts as players that played both ways. Gamble started 5 games in 2002 on both offense and defense. Woodson had 25 catches and 3 TDs in two years playing both ways.


Anyway... I'm the commissioner of a 1* dynasty which we just started two weeks ago. Right before all of this happened in the other dynasty. Today I played the LSU guy who is coaching New Mexico State in my dynasty. Recently I purchased the Hauppauge! so that I can record my dynasty games. After the game was over I tallied the totals and discovered that the N.M. State coach had played his best CB at Wide Receiver for 23 of the 36 plays either in Ace Big or Pistol Slot.

Five of those plays that he didn't line-up on offense he was in either Goal Line (twice) or 5 WR (three) throwing Hail Mary passes. So basically 23 of 31 plays this guy lined up his CB at Wide Receiver. Fourteen times he lined up his 95 speed WR at Tight End against my 74 speed outside linebackers playing for Army.

My feelings are that he is just lining up his fastest players and trying to exploit their speed. He user catches everything and he threw multiple bombs to the CB. Yes he caught 1 pass for 50 yards but I defended the other four attempts. The WR didn't kill me by any means but it is BS to defend. I don't want to be forced to use my fastest WR at CB to defend his CB at WR. His WR at Tight End caught two critical passes in the first and second overtime periods leaving the slower LBer covering him as he ran Inside Cross. Again... it is hard enough trying to defend TE's running crossing patterns because they can NOT be bumped at the line. But now defending a blazing fast WR lined up at TE who is unbumpable running a crossing route is worse. I don't want to put a CB at LB to guard him in the Ace Big set.


If I wanted to play this way I would use play in the East Lobby online and not in a dynasty with friends.



Please share your thoughts and discuss...

JBHuskers
05-21-2011, 09:52 PM
I think they're all cheese IMO.

Jayrah
05-21-2011, 10:02 PM
The way he is using it, IT ABSOLUTELY IS CHEESE! Not because of the move of position necessarily imo, but because the game has absolutely no way to counter it. If EA added a player lock feature, where a certain defender could line up vs a certain offensive player all day, then maybe not. But exploiting matchups like that doesn't happen in college.

Here's what happens: A team with a great athlete will get him the ball in a variety of ways, including Special Teams, a few hand offs on end arounds, maybe a screen. But they never throw the guy at receiver all game and say "go get it". Players aren't good enough in college for that. Also, I don't think I've ever seen a Safety play both ways. I don't ever remember Patrick Peterson (the best safety in college in recent memory for me) lining up at WR. Punt returner yes, WR no.

EA needs to put the penalty on a player that does that anyway. When he lines up at a position, he should automatically be taken (only while he's at the position for however long), to what he would be rated if you took him in the offseason and changed positions. That way, problem solved.

FS to DE is ALWAYS CHEESE. CB has NEVER lined up at QB. EVER, in the recent history (past 25 years) of college football. Wr at TE is (again, the way he's using it, but not necessarily all the time)

morsdraconis
05-21-2011, 10:30 PM
Of course it's cheese. There's a reason there is a position change option available at the beginning of each season. Don't change the position of the player? Too god damn bad. That type of shit is just dumb.

FAIRDALE KINGS
05-21-2011, 10:36 PM
I can understand using a WR at TE by using Personnel Packages. But to use Formation Subs and go into Ace Big and insert a WR at TE that's not right. The same personnel grouping is used for his Pistol Slot formation.

The defense can not detect if he is under center running the Ace Big with the CB lined up left and WR lined up at Left Tight End...

OR

is he running Pistol Slot with his Fast WR lined up in the Slot on the left with his CB lined up on the right.


NCAA '11 does not allow the user to match-up according to the offensive personnel. I would have taken my one fast CB and lined him up on the fast CB all game and manually defended the Inside Cross myself ran by his fast WR at TE (or slot).

steelerfan
05-22-2011, 02:19 AM
FS at DE is flat out cheese.

WR at TE would need a weight restriction, IMO, to even Position Change him.

CB at WR is a tough one. I'd lean toward calling cheese, unless it was a Position Change.

On 10, I used a CB in the Wildcat because he was an ATH when I recruited him and he had a serviceable arm. I noticed it when my top QB got knocked out for 10 weeks and I was comparing arms to decide if I should remove a Redshirt from one of my backup QBs. I only ran about 5 plays per game out of the Wildcat so I didn't think it was a big deal since he was an ATH, was like my 5th best CB, and wasn't playing as a "traditional" QB or HB. If it's just a speed exploit, it is cheese, IMO.

FAIRDALE KINGS
05-22-2011, 09:11 AM
WR at TE would need a weight restriction, IMO, to even Position Change him.




He was using a 6'1 169 lb. Wide Receiver lined up at Tight End... in the real world that bean pole would get destroyed. Instead the guy played in the Ace Big formation 14 plays and he actually had three pancake blocks against my DE and OLB. He was only lining up at Tight End in the Ace Big formation to exploit his 95 speed.

Pig Bomb
05-22-2011, 09:30 AM
smells like stinky cheese.... just taking advantage of speed match-ups

like people have said, in real life the other team could easily counter these moves but within the game it's an exploit and can't be combated properly

This reminds me of the old days when Madden competitions started sweeping the country...everyone would move their secondary players to linebacker and linebackers became the D-lineman - because speed kills in the game

rhombic21
05-22-2011, 09:30 AM
Here's what happens: A team with a great athlete will get him the ball in a variety of ways, including Special Teams, a few hand offs on end arounds, maybe a screen. But they never throw the guy at receiver all game and say "go get it". Players aren't good enough in college for that. Also, I don't think I've ever seen a Safety play both ways. I don't ever remember Patrick Peterson (the best safety in college in recent memory for me) lining up at WR. Punt returner yes, WR no.

Just for clarification purposes, there have been instances of this. Reggie Smith was a CB/FS at OU, and they were planning on playing him at WR in a few packages (and did in an early game), but then he got a hairline fracture so they decided to restrict him to defense and special teams only.

Chris Gamble played a significant amount at WR and CB at Ohio State.

Also, Patrick Peterson was a Corner, not a safety.


CB has NEVER lined up at QB. EVER, in the recent history (past 25 years) of college football.

I think you're overstating this one too. Eric Weddle (Safety at Utah) played in a wildcat package quite a bit during his senior season, and I'm sure there have been other instances. It's really not all that uncommon to have guys at DB who played QB in high school, and are therefore good wildcat type players.

I don't really see the problem with CB at QB. Most everybody agrees that it's legitimate to play HB's at QB, and HB's often have even better running attributes than CBs do. Same thing goes for WRs. There are even packages in some formations that put your WR in at QB.

FAIRDALE KINGS
05-22-2011, 10:06 AM
Andre Woolfork started 12 games at wide receiver his Sophomore season. He had 39 catches at wide receiver. Also in 2000, Andre Woolfolk played cornerback vs. UTEP for ONE game. He became the first Sooner to play both offense and defense in the same game since Steve Zabel in 1969. Andre Woolfolk played a significant defensive role in the second half as he took part in 31 plays as a cornerback after halftime.

In 2001, Andre Woolfork started the first four games at Wide Receiver and the first nine games at left Cornerback before he was finally injured. He had 6 receptions in four games at Wide Receiver... hardly an impact player.

In 2002, Andre Woolfork was moved full-time to defense and played exclusively on defense.

I understand that there are exceptions to the rule... but the Woolfork experiment playing both ways was a circus during his junior year and they finally pulled the plug on the experiment five games into his junior season because he was NOT productive playing both ways. He had six catches in four games.

Woolfork, just like Chris Gamble and Charles Woodson, was not trotted onto the field on offense and told to run a NINE route every single pass play. The only reason this guy uses his CB at WR is because the user is trying to exploit his speed. Maybe if the guy was trying to legitimately utilize the guy as a WR and was using the guy to run drags, slants, posts, Circle or POCO routes... but instead all he does is HOT route him to a streak and see if he runs past the corner every time.


You also used the example of Reggie Smith from Oklahoma. He had ONE reception in his career as a Sooner. He did NOT see significant time playing both ways.


And I understand that some players can be used in certain situations on occasion. It's true that you can use PERSONNEL packages to put a CB in the slot or a WR at Tight End. But this guy is not using those playbooks or those options. He is using Formation Subs which is a known work-around to avoid player's losing AWR. Instead of putting the CB as the #2 receiver on his depth chart and the fast Wide Receiver at #2 at TE on the depth chart... He goes into Formation Subs and is trying to exploit the game.


Chris Gamble started 5 games during his sophomore season in 2002 on both offense and defense. But he was another guy that started on offense as a wide receiver before they moved him full-time to cornerback. Gamble had 31 receptions during his Sophomore season which he started all 12 games. His junior season he was moved full-time to defense and started 13 games at Cornerback. He was used in some packages during his junior season and had FOUR receptions in a very limited offensive role.

FAIRDALE KINGS
05-22-2011, 10:26 AM
Eric Weddle rushed 51 times from the Wildcat as the Quarterback at Utah.

He also passed 6 times in two seasons. He completed 2 passes for 40 yards with a 25 yard touchdown pass. He was hardly a threat to pass the ball.

Personally I don't think that I would mind someone using a CB/FS at Quarterback because it would be advantageous to me on defense because they are limited what they can do offensively... and would be one-dimensional. The same thing could be said for anyone using a HB or WR at Quarterback especially in the Wildcat because you are usually not allowed to Hot Route the receiver routes and these type of players have terrible ratings at THA/THP. Also the Quarterback is not allowed to sprint automatically in Wildcat passing plays and has some awkward animation which limits his mobility running in the pocket until he passes the LOS.

For the sake of this discussion I was just trying to gauge how the community feels about these topics. I have some guys in my dynasty that are upset and I'm trying to see how I can address these sitations. I know for a fact that one guy would will push the envelop when/and if he discovers that it is okay to play defensive players on offense at Wide Receiver because they have 99 speed.... Then the next problem will be him putting a HB/WR/DB at Quarterback with 99 speed, 99 acceleration to run the speed option and/or load option every single play.

Like I said... I would have no problem allowing someone to use a CB/FS to play Wide Receiver on occassion for some situations. I just can't see a guy using him for 75% of his offense. If he decides that the guy is worthy enough to play both offense and defense then he needs to make the changes via the depth chart NOT formation subs OR the person needs to change his position in the off-season.

My biggest problem is someone that is exploiting the game by using FORMATION SUBS to avoid player's losing Awareness.

rhombic21
05-22-2011, 10:27 AM
If all the guy can do is run streaks, and maybe a drag or two, then is he really all that hard to stop?

When I play, I don't even use my fastest receivers as starters unless they have good route running abilities. Not because of some kind of sense of sportsmanship, but because it's not even all that effective. If the guy has horrible route running skills, then he won't get open on anything involving a cut/break. And go routes are really pretty easy to stop.

We are agreed that the fatigue issue is unrealistic, but I just don't see this as something that is enough of a concern to do anything about. I can also see your point about limited practice time, which is why you rarely see this type of multi-position athlete (because it takes a combination of great athletic skills, but also a really good football brain that can quickly process/learn new things).

I just get a kick out of people saying that all people are doing is "exploiting speed." That's a legitimate football tactic. Hell, the Oakland Raiders pretty much draft skill players on speed alone.

Maybe I just disagree with those who see speed as overpowered. I agree that that was the case on older versions of the game, but in my experience, the other ratings come into play a lot more now, so speed isn't overpowered. If a guy is fast but has horrible position ratings, he's generally less effective than playing a slightly slower guy with better position ratings.

In your particular case, it sounds like the guy is just kind of a douchebag, so no matter what rules you come up with, he's probably still going to play shady.

But maybe the rule should be that a guy cannot start at multiple positions unless he has 70+ AWR at both positions. That would seem to leave room for a few "once in a generation" type athletes. If a guy has lower than 70 AWR at his non-default position, then he can only be used in formations where default package subs will put him in the game, and in ONE additional formation via formation subs. That seems to strike a reasonable balance.

Rudy
05-22-2011, 11:12 AM
EA just needs to make sure the catch ratings of CBs are low enough that people won't want to use them at WR. Same goes for guys with zero arm playing QB. People wouldn't play little guys at DE or TE if weight mattered either. Some of this is stupid cheese but you have to also hold EA accountable for allowing these to things to prosper with their engine.

mgamcbro
05-22-2011, 11:14 AM
IMO all are cheese except DB @ WR

PeteyKirch
05-22-2011, 03:08 PM
It's hard to say because I can nearly think of an example for each of those changes at my School within the last year.

We would have our one big body WR 6'6/220lbs line up at TE and then Flex out quite a bit.

We have DBs that are sometimes brought in for their speed, and right now our 4th and 5th WRs have been flopping back and forth between CB and WR.

CB at QB is interesting, because well at Rutgers Mo Sanu was recreated to be a Safety, but was moved to WR due to well no bodies being available, and he soon became our Wildcat QB, and would throw maybe 2-3 times a game.

FS at DE is just silly. However FS to LB is fine since sometimes a player is a step too slow at Safety, but would be just fast enough at OLB.

Jayrah
05-22-2011, 05:24 PM
Just for clarification purposes, there have been instances of this. Reggie Smith was a CB/FS at OU, and they were planning on playing him at WR in a few packages (and did in an early game), but then he got a hairline fracture so they decided to restrict him to defense and special teams only.

Chris Gamble played a significant amount at WR and CB at Ohio State.

Also, Patrick Peterson was a Corner, not a safety.



I think you're overstating this one too. Eric Weddle (Safety at Utah) played in a wildcat package quite a bit during his senior season, and I'm sure there have been other instances. It's really not all that uncommon to have guys at DB who played QB in high school, and are therefore good wildcat type players.

I don't really see the problem with CB at QB. Most everybody agrees that it's legitimate to play HB's at QB, and HB's often have even better running attributes than CBs do. Same thing goes for WRs. There are even packages in some formations that put your WR in at QB.

So Smith could play cb. Which is ok to play some wr from.

I forgot peterson was a corner. He covered ground like a freaking safety.

Wildcat is NOT qb positioning. In some formations it's ok. But a cb won't run option offense.

Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk

JeffHCross
05-22-2011, 09:02 PM
Gamble started 5 games in 2002 on both offense and defense.Only 5? I guess that was because he was our #3 receiver and would often start in the slot -- no slot, no start. Huh.

ram29jackson
05-22-2011, 09:05 PM
DB at WR
WR at TE
CB at QB
FS at DE
All are cheese
Some are Cheese
None are cheese


DB at WR is not cheese but the rest are.

Its college ball there are plaenty of athletes that can move around. I'm thinking of the iron man days too, QBs were WRs and RBs. Of course ,only in a logical sense though- free safetys cant be defensive ends- wide receivers cant block at tight end.

in a dynasty I would want to find an athlete I could use at QB and Tailback and maybe even free safety in pass situations to go towards earning a Heisman !

theres no reason a DB cant be a receiver in the same game if he is a great athlete- look at the guy from Stanford last year.....

Jayrah
05-22-2011, 11:04 PM
2 guys from Stanford.... Richard Sherman (DB/WR), although he played almost exclusively CB last season after starting his career at WR. And the other was Marecic who played lb and fb

souljahbill
05-22-2011, 11:07 PM
http://images.free-extras.com/pics/a/american_cheese-875.jpg

ram29jackson
05-22-2011, 11:17 PM
http://images.free-extras.com/pics/a/american_cheese-875.jpg

well,..yeah, ..thats definitely cheese...could be processed though ..?

Pig Bomb
05-23-2011, 09:37 AM
I'm all for being creative with coaching and moving players around but only if the player ratings support it. Last year I was running a dynasty and had multiple QB injuries that wiped out the position. I searched my team for help and found a TE with a higher passer rating [pass power/pass acc] than all my QB's but the starter [who was now out for the year]. So I moved him to QB.

So, unless the ratings support the position change I don't do it because I can make any player play way better than their ratings when I am controlling them. Just give me the fastest player and I can make him a record setting option QB instantly.

Same thing goes with recruits...I always put them in the position where they are rated the highest rather than putting them where their speed can be used to my advantage. I'm shooting for realism not cheesy victory.

All this being said there are plenty of legitimate formations like Wildcat that give coaches the freedom to use whoever they want at key positions normally reserved for special players like the QB. There are also teams that use a two QB system with 1 guy thats a better runner and 1 guy who is a better passer.

In the end as long as the coach has legitimate creativity in mind and is not just using speed sub abuse I'm cool with it.

In fact I saw a story not long ago about an Arkansas high school team that basically NEVER punts, period...and they always onside kick.... and they have won state championships! Statistics back up his methodology.... maybe I'll ru that this year in NCAA? :)

Koach Vonner
05-23-2011, 10:36 AM
Man that is Cheese all the way !!!!!!
Using a WR at TE - would depend. Is his hand down or is he standing up. If he is standing up then it's not cheese. That's just a sub. We do that all the time in our offensive scheme. If it's a lightweight guy and you are putting his hand down, that is cheese.
CB/WR - Just do a position change if that's where you like the guy.
CB at QB - Str8 cheese. You can have plenty of other guys run your offense out of the Wildcat. Use a 3rd string RB or WR. Also, what are you trying to accomplish from the Wildcat? 2 yards. Get a 3rd down back. Score a TD? Use a speedster.

morsdraconis
05-23-2011, 10:24 PM
It's really simple logic if you ask me:

Outside of a dynasty game, absolutely cheese.

Dynasty game, why the hell wasn't he position changed to begin with? Lack of quality players for that position because of injuries? Then that's one thing, but just to play a DB at QB for solely running the ball out of the option is just dumb as shit. Recruit a QB worth a damn and stop being a lame ass.

souljahbill
05-24-2011, 06:50 AM
Man that is Cheese all the way !!!!!!
Using a WR at TE - would depend. Is his hand down or is he standing up. If he is standing up then it's not cheese. That's just a sub. We do that all the time in our offensive scheme. If it's a lightweight guy and you are putting his hand down, that is cheese.

I did this in '11. I had a shotgun formation that used 3 WR and a TE but I never ran out of it so I subbed a WR into the TE spot and he did put his hand down.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Colossal28
05-24-2011, 01:58 PM
Just for clarification purposes, there have been instances of this. Reggie Smith was a CB/FS at OU, and they were planning on playing him at WR in a few packages (and did in an early game), but then he got a hairline fracture so they decided to restrict him to defense and special teams only.

Chris Gamble played a significant amount at WR and CB at Ohio State.

Also, Patrick Peterson was a Corner, not a safety.



I think you're overstating this one too. Eric Weddle (Safety at Utah) played in a wildcat package quite a bit during his senior season, and I'm sure there have been other instances. It's really not all that uncommon to have guys at DB who played QB in high school, and are therefore good wildcat type players.

I don't really see the problem with CB at QB. Most everybody agrees that it's legitimate to play HB's at QB, and HB's often have even better running attributes than CBs do. Same thing goes for WRs. There are even packages in some formations that put your WR in at QB.

I was attending OU when reggie was there. He was by absolutely no means an offensive player. In fact, he struggled in the secondary. He was loved/drafted because he had potential as a superstar special teams player, which he also underperformed at.

Subbing players without switching positions is pure cheese. The computer plays, doesn't coach. It's basically been summed up in previous posts, but the cpu doesn't react to these changes by matching a defender that can cover, also CB at QB is just silly, these are people who want to outrun the defense rather than outcoach it.

ram29jackson
05-24-2011, 07:14 PM
historically, there have been plenty of multi position players in college football history. we should be able to have some fun emulating that ! Tebow is considered one of the greatest players in college history but he was more of a running back than a QB. I wouldnt mind getting a Jim Thorpe type in the video game !

AustinWolv
05-25-2011, 10:11 AM
I vote cheese, especially on the WR at TE and FS at DE. I can see dropping a DB at WR and at QB now and then, but NOT for a majority of the plays. And a WR at TE really only happens when that WR is huge and can create that matchup problem on the real field, but still possesses the possibility of being able to block........a sub-220lb WR isn't all that effective taking on DEs and LBs on the real grass.........


My feelings are that he is just lining up his fastest players and trying to exploit their speed. He user catches everything and he threw multiple bombs to the CB.
Cheeeeeeeese.
Stick skills are one thing, but when someone has better stick skills than another person, it overcomes the ability to play the game intelligently as stick-skill user-catch guy has always taken advantage of it. Even if they don't cheese other things, they'll always throw a lob or two downfield that a real QB would never chance and then chase it with their user-catch, especially if they know their opponent isn't all that good on the sticks because the CPU has historically sucked at high-pointing the ball.
Anytime someone is throwing multiple lobs downfield........cheese. Real teams only take those chances now and then, not every series.