That is awesome! I hope its the very near future, cause I know we've all wondered why there were so few guys on the team as far as per development aspect. Might also be to help them get ready for the next gen too, splitting them up at some point.Originally Posted by cdj
I tried 3-4 for the first time in extended action this year in the Big 12 dynasty I am in at TSO (TF). I really liked what it did for me but I had 2 major problems, especially in user games.
(1) I had to recruit faster LBs to keep up with the spread offenses in the Big 12. The first 2 years I had big strong guys that really got after the run and played downhill, but I soon found out that we couldn't stay with any TE's or even FBs in the passing game and it was murdering me. This meant I did not (could not because of necessity really) recruit bigger run stopping LBs that you need to hold down more run worthy teams. Now, partially this is because there are not enough different player types available, that would allow you to really go after a 3 star run stopping LB as opposed to a 4 star fast guy, for just the sake of filling that role in your LB rotation. And there also are not enough player types at the same level. AKA two or three or four 5 star LB's that are all really good, but have totally different attributes to their games. Certain types of ratings (speed and agility especially) are necessary to accomplish certain star power players, and I would really like to see that change where a slow guy can still be a star player out of HS, but his attributes are in run stopping/reading plays/block shedding.
(2) Second issue was that rotating was difficult to accomplish, especially at my DE spot because I had too many of the same player type, but just at different skill levels. So I could rotate, but I feel like I'm just losing attributes for no apparent reason. Of course, rotation is key to any defense, but especially a 3-4, because different situations call for those different player types. A look like the predator actually allows the true rotation of a solid 4 DE's if you've got them (3 DE's and the Hybrid guy) because you get the 2 starters for the 3-4 normal, a 3rd to rotate into the solid formation, and the hybrid on one side with a starter or rotating starters on the other side of the predator. And of course that gives you a guy that you can recruit strictly for the predator role, which will add a fun wrinkle to recruiting and form subs.
Cover 0 isn't an anywhere play, but it's definitely not a short yardage only situation. It depends on matchups though to determine it's true usefulness (something else, sadly, that isn't as much of a factor as it should be in NCAA). If I can (be that, my corners are talented or up against not so talented receivers), I have no problem putting them on an island to get extra pressure early (usually on 1st down towards their side of the field). But, I'd only do that if I was able to make sure that my corners played inside and loose (aka, giving up the sidelines but not the deep route).
I don't think cover 0 is a good short yardage play either. It (in theory of real life defense) gives up too much easy stuff. Washington State has used a ton of cover 0 the past few years in short yardage situations, and it's "move-the-chains-baby!" for the other team. Matchups in the game are most definitely not as much of a factor as they should be. I think it's a direct carry-over from animations not allowing different player types to make different plays on the ball, and of course not enough pronounced player types being available defensively from the CB and Safety positions. Big hitters are generally slower, coverage guys are generally faster, balanced guys don't really have great skills anywhere. There's Patrick Peterson's that do it all and then there's all the rest. There aren't really enough difference makers in multiple, different phases that are just solid 3 star players.
I think occasional use of it in the open field is ok, and I agree with you I would like to see a zone look out of this blitz package as well. I don't think we will, but it would be nice to give the same blitz look with different coverages behind it. That's also one thing that I would really like to see more of in the defensive playbook.My main issue with the play in question is the type of blitz that it is with Cover 0 behind it. Based on the play art (and scheme), that's a delayed blitz up the middle to get the extra man free. With Cover 0 behind it, a delayed blitz is definitely the last thing you want to do. That type of blitz is better used for zone coverage (usually some type of exotic look that's a combination of Cover 2 and Cover 3) where you have the extra time to get to the QB.
Those blocks would be really nice additions. They are kind of dangerous though, and if the ncaa would not allow late hits into the ncaa series (as has been argued), these are blocks that will never make the game. Sadly in that case, zone blocking would never work like it should.Gameplay wise, it hasn't changed much since '09. Defense has been terrible since jumping to next gen. Offense still don't have fundamental blocking schemes down (like actual pass protection). Zone blocking is still not where it should be because of the lack of cut blocking and crack-back blocking.
And HERE is where I agree with you quite a bit. Now, Chris may have a legitimate gripe for EA based on the fact that he's had the opportunity to actually talk to them and find out their level of football savvy, which may or may not indeed be decently high. However, it's obvious that before the last 2 years (with the additions of an old college qb to the EA team and a knowledgeable college football junkie to the helm of the team) the guys had no idea they were off base on some of the very basic concepts of football, ALA, football 101. I tried to think (as Chris is suggesting) for the longest time, that coding was the sole issue, and it still is a major one. But I think it was 3 years ago that I changed my thinking, when 09 was being worked on (before my blogging days began) and certain aspects of the game just didn't make sense. And then while 10 was in progress Ben H confirmed my thinking and mentioned something about blocking and interactions during a video for pass protection that just made NO sense what-so-ever, to simply promote the robotic (at the time) movements of the linemen and obvious suction blocking, as true football technique. And then of course recently the past 2 seasons it's been the formation of a pocket that's been promised and shown and promoted as true football technique, but not implemented at all correctly. Is it better? Somewhat yes, but not because of football technique knowledge. Along with major coverage flaws, which aren't easy to get right by any stretch, but as you eluded to here Mors, it's not even just the technique. It's the entire coverage system. And then last season the team promised a patch that would allow LB's to help out over the deep middle by getting the correct depth, and even said "LB's will now get the correct depth in their drops" and it did not even come close to happening.I'd actually have to disagree with that. I think their entire problem is not enough football knowledge. I think what could benefit them more than anything is getting guys that have actual input on the game to go to coaching seminars. There's plenty of them out there during the winter-spring period and that alone would increase their knowledge of the game by quite a bit.
Promoting your game is great and necessary. But this has been an ongoing theme of approaching certain and all aspects of the game, as it pertains solely to football. These are football junkies, in the fan sense of the game, and they are around football 24-7-365, so saying it's not getting better and can never be right is a lie for sure. But I think the average super-fan doesn't understand why techniques are how they are. They just understand the end results of the big picture, which is the way NCAA and Madden previously approached the game. In fact for Madden 10, the theme by the team was "If you see it on Sundays..." and last season it was "Be the Coach". That right there is how they approached the game, big picture. That's fine except the fine points of football that make 11 on 11 football function the way it does IRL are not being addressed in a manner that shows up in the game.
The addition of football savvy to the team has been a priority, as has been using the community for football feedback. And obviously with the jump last year of the way the offense operates, I have immense faith that the defense can be fixed (if it is indeed a priority) to function in a respectable and semi-appropriate manner. I gotta say, I have had some defensive wars on 11, but eventually the offenses get going, because the flaws in the game allow offenses the benefit. Nothing has to be perfect defensively, but it would be nice to get a game where for example, if a lot of man is called with help over the top, you have to either find your playmakers in good matchups, or throw underneath to your TE's and RB's, and just take what you can get. Then the defense comes up and makes stops. If a lot of cover 0 is going on, you have to take advantage of underneath routes and hit them consistently and just be patient, and you can't throw it deep to beat the coverage unless it's busted or you get the occasional play by your superstar WR, but otherwise it's picked or knocked down or overthrown. Basically it would be nice to have to play to the weaknesses of certain defenses, rather than to the strengths of your offense or just certain routes all the time. In this way a good, talented defense could really slow down a weaker opponent offensively and you could get some really good defensive games without anything being perfect.
If you're lazy to click through each photo on the NCAA facebook page, here's a video of all 25 plays with descriptions of each play.
At first I didn't think much of these new plays cuz of the bad zone coverage of the past but now I can actually see myself running these. Every now and then in 2011 I would run zone just because I like zone blitzes more then man coverage but in 2012 it might be all that i run now.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks