 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » Shotgun Sweep
Admin
This is a traditional running play out of shotgun, it is not pretending to be a pass. After taking the snap, the QB will either:
- Hand off to the Halfback;
- Pitch to the Slot Receiver or Flanker, who continues behind the QB to sweep top the opposite side he started on
- Keeps the ball himself.
The QB has a much greater chance of keeping the ball on this one than on other running plays; he should keep it a quarter to a third of the time. So putting this play into your plan means having some receivers and QB's that are good ball carriers. It has the potential for bigger gains but also big losses.
Chris
Shotgun Sweep
May 17, 2014 at 05:47PM View BBCode
I have added a new Shotgun Sweep play group. This one has some potential to be a bit of a wildcard.This is a traditional running play out of shotgun, it is not pretending to be a pass. After taking the snap, the QB will either:
- Hand off to the Halfback;
- Pitch to the Slot Receiver or Flanker, who continues behind the QB to sweep top the opposite side he started on
- Keeps the ball himself.
The QB has a much greater chance of keeping the ball on this one than on other running plays; he should keep it a quarter to a third of the time. So putting this play into your plan means having some receivers and QB's that are good ball carriers. It has the potential for bigger gains but also big losses.
Chris
dirtdevil
May 17, 2014 at 06:03PM View BBCode
I'd love some way, on all running plays, of rendering the QB and the FB ineligible to be selected as the ballcarrier.
dirtdevil
May 17, 2014 at 06:18PM View BBCode
one thing that would be nice to have with these new shotgun running plays is a shotgun playaction pass.
casperthegm
Play action from shotgun sounds cool too.
Regardless, I like this addition. Anything that adds depth and realism to the game is a big step in the right direction in my opinion.
[Edited on 5-17-2014 by casperthegm]
May 17, 2014 at 06:23PM View BBCode
Agree with both comments by dirt. Regarding the qb running, I worry about injury. Regarding FB running, they generally suck. Actually, if we took FB's out of the running equation I wonder if that would inadvertently bump up the yard per carry average for the league to a level higher than intended...Play action from shotgun sounds cool too.
Regardless, I like this addition. Anything that adds depth and realism to the game is a big step in the right direction in my opinion.
[Edited on 5-17-2014 by casperthegm]
Hodor
2. About QB keeping the ball, in real life teams do have wildcat qbs, so I'm guessing that once the formation "fixes" get into place we'll have the option of a Wildcat/sweep QB depth chart, right?
3. I like the draw play, the shotgun sweep and the mentioned shotgun play action... you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life.
I think it's abdurd to include those at the same time that you remove the other, but whatever that makes people happy.
May 17, 2014 at 07:06PM View BBCode
1. About FBs, I always aim for a high Carrying/ high run blocking guy, because I know he'll run the ball a lot.2. About QB keeping the ball, in real life teams do have wildcat qbs, so I'm guessing that once the formation "fixes" get into place we'll have the option of a Wildcat/sweep QB depth chart, right?
3. I like the draw play, the shotgun sweep and the mentioned shotgun play action... you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life.
I think it's abdurd to include those at the same time that you remove the other, but whatever that makes people happy.
dirtdevil
only until you ran it enough that they knew it wasn't always going to be a pass. then you'd be back to square one. the lazy owners would still get beat on it, but the good ones would adjust their personnel packages.
May 17, 2014 at 07:14PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hodor
you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life.
only until you ran it enough that they knew it wasn't always going to be a pass. then you'd be back to square one. the lazy owners would still get beat on it, but the good ones would adjust their personnel packages.
Hodor
[quote][i]Originally posted by Hodor[/i]
you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life. [/quote]
only until you ran it enough that they knew it wasn't always going to be a pass. then you'd be back to square one. the lazy owners would still get beat on it, but the good ones would adjust their personnel packages. [/quote]
Exactly.
I don't get why the "defense would key on it and make it useless" argument is considered a valid one.
May 17, 2014 at 07:38PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
[quote][i]Originally posted by dirtdevil[/i]
[quote][i]Originally posted by Hodor[/i]
you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life. [/quote]
only until you ran it enough that they knew it wasn't always going to be a pass. then you'd be back to square one. the lazy owners would still get beat on it, but the good ones would adjust their personnel packages. [/quote]
Exactly.
I don't get why the "defense would key on it and make it useless" argument is considered a valid one.
dirtdevil
it is, in point of fact, unrealistic with regards to how the professional game is played at this point in time, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
May 17, 2014 at 07:53PM View BBCode
because the knee-jerk reaction for someone who can't figure out how to counter a new idea is to complain that it's unrealistic and therefore shouldn't work? :saint:it is, in point of fact, unrealistic with regards to how the professional game is played at this point in time, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work.
shbo2
It is a valid argument because the game doesn't allow defensive play calls based on formation in the advanced strategy page. It is kind of silly for a team to only run when the QB is under center and only pass when the QB is under center and not be able to set up your game plan based on that. It is far too easy to run a successful offense when you consider that most of the top owners only run about 4 of the 12 available plays in their green zone strategy, middle & end run shotgun medium & long combined with some balance between run & pass is all you need along with a good line is all it takes to have a very good offense.
May 17, 2014 at 08:04PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hodor
Originally posted by dirtdevil
Originally posted by Hodor
you know what would be a perfect fit for those plays? The 2OL system. Trick the defense into keying on the pass and go for a run. It would work in real life.
only until you ran it enough that they knew it wasn't always going to be a pass. then you'd be back to square one. the lazy owners would still get beat on it, but the good ones would adjust their personnel packages.
Exactly.
I don't get why the "defense would key on it and make it useless" argument is considered a valid one.
It is a valid argument because the game doesn't allow defensive play calls based on formation in the advanced strategy page. It is kind of silly for a team to only run when the QB is under center and only pass when the QB is under center and not be able to set up your game plan based on that. It is far too easy to run a successful offense when you consider that most of the top owners only run about 4 of the 12 available plays in their green zone strategy, middle & end run shotgun medium & long combined with some balance between run & pass is all you need along with a good line is all it takes to have a very good offense.
Hodor
The defenses should have more control about keying on formations AND the offenses should have more options (like the draw and this sweep) so they can adjust to the defenses keying on them: harder to have a good offense, more strategy involved, a better game.
I don't agree that you only need 4 plays to have a powerfull offense, but that doesn't have anything to do with this issue.
Also, I just made a comment, not really interested in debating this topic again... the trigger has already been pulled, so there's no point in beating a dead horse.
May 17, 2014 at 08:37PM View BBCode
Good, you agree with me (except that somehow you still believe that that's a valid argument).The defenses should have more control about keying on formations AND the offenses should have more options (like the draw and this sweep) so they can adjust to the defenses keying on them: harder to have a good offense, more strategy involved, a better game.
I don't agree that you only need 4 plays to have a powerfull offense, but that doesn't have anything to do with this issue.
Also, I just made a comment, not really interested in debating this topic again... the trigger has already been pulled, so there's no point in beating a dead horse.
shbo2
May 17, 2014 at 08:47PM View BBCode
My point was it's a valid argument IF there are NO advanced options based on formation. Unless the point of the sim is simulate 7-7 drills which is looking like the case since it we are getting 3-4 new offensive plays, dialing down sack rates and adding nothing for the defense.
Admin
No triggers have been pulled, I haven't changed anything related to personnel packages yet.
Chris
May 17, 2014 at 09:04PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Hodor
Also, I just made a comment, not really interested in debating this topic again... the trigger has already been pulled, so there's no point in beating a dead horse.
No triggers have been pulled, I haven't changed anything related to personnel packages yet.
Chris
EdSales87
This and being able to say I want the QB or FB to be the main ball carrier, but I'm sure this won't be coming till the new engine or playbook comes out.
PS, love the idea of the new play!
[Edited on 5-18-2014 by EdSales87]
May 18, 2014 at 11:50AM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
I'd love some way, on all running plays, of rendering the QB and the FB ineligible to be selected as the ballcarrier.
This and being able to say I want the QB or FB to be the main ball carrier, but I'm sure this won't be coming till the new engine or playbook comes out.
PS, love the idea of the new play!
[Edited on 5-18-2014 by EdSales87]
RichNYC1
May 20, 2014 at 01:24AM View BBCode
Is this play actually available? I havent seen it once in any of my games.
blakjakshalak
May 20, 2014 at 01:31AM View BBCode
I was going to post the same thing, Rich. I've added it to my play book and haven't seen once.
dirtdevil
May 20, 2014 at 04:13AM View BBCode
all of my runs from shotgun also seem to be up the middle.
Admin
OK, I think I have this fixed.
Chris
May 20, 2014 at 05:38PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
all my shotgun runs are still going up the middle.
OK, I think I have this fixed.
Chris
dirtdevil
May 20, 2014 at 05:42PM View BBCode
ok, so everything after 1Q week 4 in zeta we should see it. i'll keep an eye out.
Admin
Chris
May 20, 2014 at 05:56PM View BBCode
I just saw a glitch with it that made it more successful than it should be in that first quarter; I've made a bit of an adjustment.Chris
dirtdevil
May 20, 2014 at 06:18PM View BBCode
so far we've run one for 6 yards. none in the second quarter. that's less than we "should' be running but it could simply be luck of the draw.Pages: 1