Substitutions (WR in TE spot)

[TheRezyReb]

I run a pass heavy custom playbook, that being said I do have some formation substitutions. I have been catching some hell because of one in particular, sometimes I have a wr line up in the te spot. What is wrong with this???? Why is this considered cheese? I mean hello, it's called bump the right stick a few times, or I will use the formation sub option. Opinions please!!!

[morsdraconis]

It's considered cheese because WRs don't line up as TEs in real life. TEs might line up as WRs in real life, but definitely not the other way around. The slot position is there to try to exploit going LBs. There's no reason to try to do it even more by putting a WR in the TE position.

It's just not straight play to do that. There are plenty of formations already that exploit coverages, no need to do something unrealistic.

[TheRezyReb]

It's considered cheese because WRs don't line up as TEs in real life. TEs might line up as WRs in real life, but definitely not the other way around. The slot position is there to try to exploit going LBs. There's no reason to try to do it even more by putting a WR in the TE position.

It's just not straight play to do that. There are plenty of formations already that exploit coverages, no need to do something unrealistic.

The ace bunch pakage(for example) has a 3 wr set OR a 2 wr 1 te set,OR a 2wr fb set. The purpose of the spread O is to get the ball in your best player/s hands by putting them in diff positons all over the field, hence running backs linning up at wr(same as motioning to the line). Or wr motion options to wr's........ ect ect ect! My argument is that your te is a hybrid player - a reciever and a blocker.. depending on the offense being used i.e. power run, he's a blocker, pass heavy he's a reciever. I don't use the power run gm, I use a wide open pass attack mixed with screens and draws. I always want 3 or more wr's on the field, the te postion for me is a primary recieving position, one of my main targets, why not put a guy that has a better ability to catch the ball in that position?
I mean aftr all, isn't a te just an oversized wr? I'm willing to give up the better blocking for better receiving.

[AustinWolv]

The TE is dropped into those sets (like the ACE bunch that you listed) in order to ENHANCE the blocking ability to get to the edge. Spread out the defense WHILE keeping some power aspects. Same with the FB. You don't drop a WR onto the LOS to take a TE's spot because a DL or LB will destroy them........a WR might not even be able to get off the LOS if a LB jammed them up like they are allowed to do with TEs......so between that and getting steam-rolled by a LB or DL when in a blocking assignment, that is why you aren't seeing WRs lining up as TEs on the LOS. Now, at a wing position sometimes? Sure. But that isn't what you alluded to.

[TheRezyReb]

I use the sub in pistol y-trips, like to run the "trail" play. The te runs an angle around the slot.
I do understand what you are saying, if it is unrealistic I will not do it any longer. I wasnt doing it for a speed advantage, but more so because my te cant catch worth a crap... hahah more balls hit him in the head than he catches.

[gschwendt]

If no other reason than the fact that if you have 3WRs plus the WR lined up in the slot, even if the defense comes out in Dime, there's a good chance the LB will be assigned to the TE/WR while the CB is assigned to the HB. That itself is creating an unfair mismatch.

[hitman625]

The ace bunch pakage(for example) has a 3 wr set OR a 2 wr 1 te set,OR a 2wr fb set. The purpose of the spread O is to get the ball in your best player/s hands by putting them in diff positons all over the field, hence running backs linning up at wr(same as motioning to the line). Or wr motion options to wr's........ ect ect ect! My argument is that your te is a hybrid player - a reciever and a blocker.. depending on the offense being used i.e. power run, he's a blocker, pass heavy he's a reciever. I don't use the power run gm, I use a wide open pass attack mixed with screens and draws. I always want 3 or more wr's on the field, the te postion for me is a primary recieving position, one of my main targets, why not put a guy that has a better ability to catch the ball in that position?
I mean aftr all, isn't a te just an oversized wr? I'm willing to give up the better blocking for better receiving.

Lets put it this way, if you try to move most, if not all, WR's to a TE their OVR will drop to by 20-30 points.

[hitman625]

but to play devil's advocate, there have been numerous WR's who have been converted into TE's as well. Dustin Keller and Kellen Winslow II for example

[AustinWolv]

Yeah, but they don't play at a WR's weight, size, strength, and blocking skills anymore.

[TheRezyReb]

Lets put it this way, if you try to move most, if not all, WR's to a TE their OVR will drop to by 20-30 points.

I understand, it's not their overall I'm concerned with, hell it's not the blocking either, I'm wanting a reciever at that position! Duno, shaky ground I guess, I mean there is ace big = 2 wr 2 te wr texxxxte wr

ace tight = 4wr wrwrxxxxwrwr

Guess what I'm tryn to say is, that there are several variations of formations haha, if I use all the diff formations to accomplish basicly the samething, it's not cheese, but if I sub a guy it is?

[gigemaggs99]

I don't really understand the "unfair" part of it either.

Let's say I come out in an ACE Spread. There are 4 WR on the field and 0 TEs. The defense can see my personnel prior to choosing their defense. I have no clue why it's my fault if they don't user that knowledge.

I don't really know much about the TE/WR stuff, I run the RnS and don't even use a TE LOL so sorry if this is off topic.