Correlation between Madden and NCAA

[KOACHK]

Of course if you come out in an empty set, if you want to audible down to any other formation, it's best to use an empty set with a package that includes at least a HB and maybe a TE, or even a 2nd RB. Yeah, maybe someone can get away with having a WR at HB for a couple of plays, but the game eventually makes you pay for it with fumbles, and injury, or both. Just because the entire playbook is available to someone in a no huddle situation, doesn't mean every play is good for that particular situation. All I'm saying is that as long as a tactic is allowed within the rules of football, and there's no blatant game-breaking glitch associated with it, people should have the choice to use it for better or worse.

[Senator Palmer]

Okay, I get what you're saying there, but you said this in the other post...

Quote:

What I am saying and I think CR is too, is that no huddle audibles in Madden should be limited to the original plays formations/personnel. Teams should not be audibling into plays with different personnel packages, without that personnel being on the field.

This is the part I'm not getting, because no-huddle in real life has multiple formation options. And in the NFL teams there aren't a whole lot of personnel groupings that are limited by formation.

The Patriots can run a 2TE/2WR offense from under center, and the very next play Brady can get in the Gun and spread the field with those same TE's and 2 receivers and it will look like a 4 wide spread on TV.

In Madden playbooks right now there are multiple personnel packages that come with every formation. In 5 wide empty, you can do anything from base, to 4 wide, to 5 wide. So I don't see the need to limit playcalling based off of that. Even the extreme example of going from 5 wide spread to I-formation. As I pointed out in the previous post, if an adequate risk/reward system that you advocate was in place then that play should get stuffed if it's something like a dive play with a wide receiver as a fullback. Then you would be forced to call the game smarter. The answer isn't limiting what you can call, but punishing you for calling something dumb and/or unrealistic.

Quote:

You seem to be thinking that I saying teams can't don't utilize different personnel packages within various play formations but I am not. What I am saying is that teams have designed and practiced these plays for those personnel packages.

I'm having a slow day, and I''ve been trying to do three things at once, so forgive me here. But what does that have to do with Madden? As I said earlier, there are a multitude of personnel packages available in the playbook in every formation. Those two pics I posted are formations and personnel that are in the Falcons' Madden 12 playbook, they wouldn't be artificially created/exploited with a no-huddle audible.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by Senator Palmer

Okay, I get what you're saying there, but you said this in the other post... This is the part I'm not getting, because no-huddle in real life has multiple formation options. And in the NFL teams there aren't a whole lot of personnel groupings that are limited by formation. The Patriots can run a 2TE/2WR offense from under center, and the very next play Brady can get in the Gun and spread the field with those same TE's and 2 receivers and it will look like a 4 wide spread on TV. In Madden playbooks right now there are multiple personnel packages that come with every formation. In 5 wide empty, you can do anything from base, to 4 wide, to 5 wide. So I don't see the need to limit playcalling based off of that. Even the extreme example of going from 5 wide spread to I-formation. As I pointed out in the previous post, if an adequate risk/reward system that you advocate was in place then that play should get stuffed if it's something like a dive play with a wide receiver as a fullback. Then you would be forced to call the game smarter. The answer isn't limiting what you can call, but punishing you for calling something dumb and/or unrealistic. I'm having a slow day, and I''ve been trying to do three things at once, so forgive me here. But what does that have to do with Madden? As I said earlier, there are a multitude of personnel packages available in the playbook in every formation. Those two pics I posted are formations and personnel that are in the Falcons' Madden 12 playbook, they wouldn't be artificially created/exploited with a no-huddle audible.

In a nutshell, in Madden a User can audible at the LOS into any play, regardless of the personnel package associated with that play and that is not realistic.

In the NFL players learn/practice plays and their assignment/responsibility in those plays, with some players even knowing, but not practicing, their teammates assignments/responsibilities too. So having a player randomly audibled into either a play or a position they have not learned/practiced would not work for most part in the real NFL. However, in Madden it does and the simple way to fix this is to limit audibles to plays with the same personnel packages as currently on the field. This would represent players in Madden being limited to plays they have theoretically learned/practiced.

[Senator Palmer]

Quote:

In the NFL players learn/practice plays and their assignment/responsibility in those plays, with some players even knowing, but not practicing, their teammates assignments/responsibilities too. So having a player randomly audibled into either a play or a position they have not learned/practiced would not work for most part in the real NFL.

This is where the risk/reward comes in. As Koachk pointed out, if you put a WR in the backfield and hand him the ball, then you should pay for it with fumbles.

Quote:

However, in Madden it does and the simple way to fix this is to limit audibles to plays with the same personnel packages as currently on the field. This would represent players in Madden being limited to plays they have theoretically learned/practiced.

If that's the premise then there would be virtually no limits and we'd be back to the entire playbook being open -- or just about. Think 12 personnel for a minute. 2 TEs, 1 back. From that personnel grouping alone, I could run Ace formations. I could flex one of the TEs out and suddenly I'm in singleback Y trips. I could get in the shotgun from that and suddenly I'm in gun doubles. I could motion the halfback out to the 2 receiver side and I'm in trips, or motion him to the other side and I'm in 5 wide empty. Or from there I could put one of the TE's on the LOS, the other at fullback, get under center and I'm back in I formation.

^Now every one of those scenarios are real formations with 12 personnel that I have seen run in the NFL, and have seen successful plays come out of each. Here's a article on how the Patriots give multiple looks/formations from 12 personnel. http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...litz-6567.html

So, if you want to limit audibles, that's fine. We'll agree to disagree there. If you want users punished for putting virtual players in ridiculous positions, I'm right there with you. But hanging the premise that audibles should be limited because of the personnel on the field doesn't hold up, because real NFL offenses aren't limiting themselves in that way for the most part.

[Big FN Deal]

Anyway, the point is the current audible and no huddle system in Madden doesn't represent the planning and preparation that goes into a real NFL game, imo. So I think limiting the amount of ad libbing that can be done at the LOS and Users having to utilize preset personnel packages designated in the play, might help.

[Senator Palmer]

Okay, you're missing some points here that I'm trying to make, Big. I didn't say Madden has a risk/reward system. I said that implementing an adequate risk/reward system similar to what I've seen you advocate in other posts would be the better solution to discouraging foolishness, instead of limiting audibles.

Quote:

You keep saying real NFL teams do this but they don't. I real NFL team WILL NOT, audible to a 4WR play with 2WR 2TE on the field. They may audible to a 2WR 2TE play with the TE spread out though. In Madden audibling into a a 4WR play from a 2WR 2TE is not the same thing

^And right here, you're splitting hairs and getting too caught up on personnel. Teams run the same plays and same route concepts all the time from different formations and groupings. In other words, there is no such things as a 4WR play, generally speaking. An O.C. doesn't put together his offense and say, "this play is only for when I have 4 wide receivers on the field." They think mainly in concepts, and concepts, whether is be a smash concept, a mesh, or a stick can be run from a variety of formations irregardless of who is on the field, especially in today's NFL where skilled players are asked to do more than ever.

That's what I was trying to explain with my 12 personnel example. I gave you 6 different formations from the same personnel grouping, and every concept that the OC has on his sheet is very much available to him. Nothing Madden ball about that.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by Senator Palmer

Okay, you're missing some points here that I'm trying to make, Big. I didn't say Madden has a risk/reward system. I said that implementing an adequate risk/reward system similar to what I've seen you advocate in other posts would be the better solution to discouraging foolishness, instead of limiting audibles. ^And right here, you're splitting hairs and getting too caught up on personnel. Teams run the same plays and same route concepts all the time from different formations and groupings. In other words, there is no such things as a 4WR play, generally speaking. An O.C. doesn't put together his offense and say, "this play is only for when I have 4 wide receivers on the field." They think mainly in concepts, and concepts, whether is be a smash concept, a mesh, or a stick can be run from a variety of formations irregardless of who is on the field, especially in today's NFL where skilled players are asked to do more than ever. That's what I was trying to explain with my 12 personnel example. I gave you 6 different formations from the same personnel grouping, and every concept that the OC has on his sheet is very much available to him. Nothing Madden ball about that.

I am really not trying to split hairs so I will try to state this another way. This is a video of a trick play by the Redskins and I think anyone can understand the importance of having specific personnel in the right place for how this play is designed. Granted it is a trick play, not a traditional run or pass but it still clearly illustrates my point about the importance of the designed personnel packages for plays.

So in Madden, with this play in their playbook a User could audible from ANY other formation set and run this trick just as textbook as if the designed personnel package is doing it. Granted, having a player other than one that has some passing skill might be a challenge, which is debatable, but a WR audibled into the TE spot on that play in Madden would likely run that route better than Cooley as if he had ran that play a hundred times in practice.

That's not realistic, players are not interchangeable like that in plays in the NFL where you can just plug in any player or position anywhere and they run the play based on their skill sets.

I good example of this is Chad Ochocinco and Galloway in NE, where those talented guys where practicing/learning plays but still having trouble in their first year being where they needed to be in plays. So for Madden to have players capable of being in most plays and positions throughout the entire playbook, at the will of the User, is not realistic to the NFL.

The ideal fix would probably be something like HC09 had with players actually learning plays and having a penalty for being in plays they haven't learned well enough but the audible limitation is much easier. It is just a way of acknowledging the fact that NFL teams can not line up just any players into any play at any position, during a NFL game.

[RGiles36]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

Anyway, the point is the current audible and no huddle system in Madden doesn't represent the planning and preparation that goes into a real NFL game, imo.

That stretches beyond the audible and no huddle system IMO. Playcalling in general is not realistic when you think about it.

There's no one size fits all teams when it comes to gameplanning for the week, but from literature that I've read and picked apart, the offensive/defensive coordinators typically have 5-10 plays for each situation that they've practiced throughout the week. Ditto audibles.

The closest thing we have to that in Madden is gameplanning & Gameflow, but I imagine most people don't use it (I don't either). In that respect, I like to think that people like to pick and choose where they apply realism.

As the Madden franchise starts to set a firm foundation on all facets of the game, I'd like to see them expand on the gameplanning side of things. I would like the thrill of gameplanning for each franchise opponent, but I want a quick and intuitive way to do it (it's too clunky right now). If I'm going up against the Giants, I'd like a quick option that places a lot of 'quick passes' in my gameplan to counteract their pass rush. In the interest of saving precious time, I don't want to pick play-by-play-by-play what I want to do each week.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by rgiles36

That stretches beyond the audible and no huddle system IMO. Playcalling in general is not realistic when you think about it. There's no one size fits all teams when it comes to gameplanning for the week, but from literature that I've read and picked apart, the offensive/defensive coordinators typically have 5-10 plays for each situation that they've practiced throughout the week. Ditto audibles. The closest thing we have to that in Madden is gameplanning & Gameflow, but I imagine most people don't use it (I don't either). In that respect, I like to think that people like to pick and choose where they apply realism. As the Madden franchise starts to set a firm foundation on all facets of the game, I'd like to see them expand on the gameplanning side of things. I would like the thrill of gameplanning for each franchise opponent, but I want a quick and intuitive way to do it (it's too clunky right now). If I'm going up against the Giants, I'd like a quick option that places a lot of 'quick passes' in my gameplan to counteract their pass rush. In the interest of saving precious time, I don't want to pick play-by-play-by-play what I want to do each week.

I agree with the play calling not being realistic and I stated earlier about the sideline portion of no huddle not being the same in Madden as in real life. The point being, it would be great if the entire play system in Madden was applicably identical to the real NFL but it's not.

So looking at how the audible and no huddle system in Madden functions relative to the NFL system, I would like to see limitations placed on them in the game.

For example, the roster position requirements in Madden are unrealistic when compared directly to the NFL because in real life you can have any 53 players, regardless of position. However in Madden you are required to have a certain number of players at each position because the game is not programmed to regulate the flexibility afforded to real NFL rosters.

That's exactly what I am saying about audibles and no huddle in Madden in relation to play calling.

[Senator Palmer]

@Big - You are splitting hairs here, because you're example of that trick play is absolutely tied to personnel (I agree with that), but that doesn't really apply to the larger point I was talking about with offensive concepts. In the NFL, there aren't as many specialized, stand-alone plays that require specific personnel as you think.

Here's a breakdown of Bobby Petrino's shallow cross concept, and the different groupings and personnel it's run out of. There's nothing in that concept that stops a coach from keeping the same personnel on the field and running that concept from spread or two back set. When you're talking about receivers/TEs, they are very much used interchageably in today's offenses -- a TE is just as likely to get a slip screen thrown to him as a running back. So why should I be limited in my audibles if I want to go from 2 in the backfield to a spread formation with the same group? I've been to my share of NFL practices and TEs have to run the same route trees as the WRs.
http://smartfootball.com/passing/bob...and-protection

The example you gave of Chad "he'll always be Johnson to me" Ochocinco, is valid. It is true that certain positions (especially slot receiver) have nuances, but Chad struggled to get on the field not because he couldn't run the route tree, and not because he couldn't grasp certain plays, but because New England's offense is full of option-type routes where Chad has to actually read coverage and break his route based off of that. He never had to do that before. In Cincy, he played on one side of the formation at all times, and they tried to limit his option routes. Madden doesn't have offenses based off option routes -- it doesn't really represent how savvy a slot receiver has to be to find the hole in the zone and sit down. If it did have those nuances, then the penalty shouldn't be limiting the ability to call such a play at all. That's not realism. The penalty should be tied to the receiver's awareness and route running ability, so that if you audibled into a play with two option routes, and you've got a two rookies on the field with 49 awareness, then the play would fall apart because the two receivers are running into coverage.


Let me ask you a question, though, because you are getting beyond the audible system and into playcalling as a whole when you threw out the HC09 example? How limited are you willing to be, because nobody has to practice a play in Madden to get it to function properly in a play now game. But are you willing to have it so that Chad Johnson can never play in the slot if you take New England's playbook in Madden? Are you willing to have it so that no matter what package the user selects, Chad Johnson in Madden can only play on the weak side of the formation where he played in Cincinnati?

In a previous post you said this...

Quote:

I just thought about how utilizing QB AWR to effect how much adjusting each QB can do in NCAA/Madden at the LOS. So a low AWR QB would be stuck running the exact play called from the sideline/playcall screen, even if no huddling.

If this is how you feel and you believe that representing realism comes by way of limiting the user, then shouldn't you be willing to go a step farther and have it so that if you play with a low AWR QB, the CPU makes every offensive for the first 1-2 years of his career until his awareness is sufficient?