What is SIM Play Calling?

[BezO]

I feel Madden needs to work on its playbooks so that we can call the same/similar plays from different formations. Not enough plays are duplicated. For example, every 2-back running play, going to the strong & weak side, should be in every 2-back formation.

Same for passing plays. Route combinations have to be duplicated in all similar formations.

There are only but so many run plays & route combinations. It's the formations & personnel that mixes it up... for most teams. Martz probably draws up a new play every possession.

[CRMosier_LM]

To go back on the subject...

(You know I despise the word Sim btw) my only playcalling issues with other users come abuses (normally ones I shut down but it does tend to get irritating to have to call the same defense every play to stop certain exploits...slant out being one of them).

If you look at the Colts they run a high low concept that many times results in both a vertical and horizontal stretch. This is one reason we need the ability to offensive formation shift at the LOS. Many teams run the same concepts all day just change the base formations.

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2

[LBzrule]

Gibs, this is the second "sim" thread I have seen you make. Not sure what the agenda is. My two cents. You will not find a consensus on what "sim" play calling or anything is. You might cite the Colts as an offense that is pretty basic and that is correct, although it is a bit more sophisticated than the quotes you showcase here. And to be fair Chris has another in depth article on his website written by Dan Gonzalez here: http://smartfootball.com/passing/how...e-passing-game


And even the article on the Colts offense indicates this in the diagrams. Some plays are basic like Slants. When you look at things like Levels, Three Verts, Smash, Anchor Mills, and Four Verts, all of these Passing Concepts are Tagged. Not just on the backside like Gonzalez mentions in his article but also on the front side. For the full article go here: http://smartfootball.com/offense/pey...-colts-offense

Thus, the thing I think can be said with just about every NFL offense, including the one you showcase here, that makes them different than what people do in Madden, particularly in the passing attack, is that most NFL passing games tag all of or a significant portion of the routes in their passing concepts on the front and or backside of the concept. So while the Colts only ran "4" plays (which we can see from the article is NOT true), you can bet your a$$ that many of of the routes in the passing concepts were tagged, which we can see is true. So when they ran a concept like Smash, which was one of their staples, it was never just Smash, it was The Multiple Smash, which is about tags and not just a basic play. So while it might be one passing concept, that play can look a host of different ways because of the tags and this is what Madden does NOT give you as they have decreased option routes in playbooks every year.

To be honest with you, I think if EA wants to create a very realistic passing game then their next step should be to increase option routes and people need to learn the passing game based on that. WR awareness needs to come into play too. But then you'd have people crying about stuff being too difficult because now you gotta know what your WR is going to do different vs different coverages and you gotta also know who you can rely on to run the correct route and who you need to ignore because he probably is not ready mentally and can cause you a lot of problems by running the wrong route. You know the whole notion of miscommunication between WR and QB. QB thought the WR was going to go here and WR thought the QB was going to throw there. I'd take a playbook that had basic passing concepts like Smash, Texans, Levels, Spot, Curl/Flat, Seal 2 on 1 Iso, Switch Read ect and just let me tag the hell out of the routes on these plays to my liking on the back side, front side or both.

If you are running 15-25 plays then I don't think people are gonna have an issue with that. I think people will have issue with HOW those plays are ran. That's always what it boils down to. I mean, and this is just me, I think motioning a WR to the A gap to run a dive play, I think is lame. If someone wants to do that then that's them. To me it just should not be that effective at all based on physics and position. I've never seen a WR as a lead blocker on an isolation play up the A gap in real life, and I highly doubt you will find a WR that would want to lead up the gut and block a Middle Linebacker. Even Hines Ward, arguably the best blocking WR of all time, never served as a lead blocker on an isolation play up the A gap. If someone can find that footage for me I'll retract the statement.

To Sum up:

1) Most NFL teams tag the back, front or both sides of their passing concepts. Thus while a team like the Colts only ran a hand full of concepts, because of the tags, those concepts were ran multiple ways and appeared as different plays.

2) It's not just about the play called it is also about how it is executed that causes people to use labels on gameplay styles. Sometimes in this case people indirectly target the other gamer when the game itself is the ultimate object of criticism as some things just should not be as effective as they are.

I would rather be very basic in the passing game like the Colts. And I think route tags could assists in that regard. I'm not sure EA is ready to go that route as they continue to diminish option routes every year.

[PGaither84]

I don't have anything against Gibs, and respect his opinion even if I disagree with him on a number of issues... but [and there's always a but] there was a conversation we had about a year ago that really bothered me and I talk about every so often with other people.

Gibs asked me a "simple question." He asked "it's 4th and long, the game is on the line, what do you call?" He was looking for my "money play" but I don't have a money play. I don't have a go to play. I was trying to explain that to him and he just couldn't [read WOULDN'T] understand that. There are too many factors. Personnel, what has and has not been working, the personnel of the defense, etc.

After a while of trying to explain that to him, he said to me "Why can't you just answer? It's a simple question. What would you call? Just pick a play." So, to humor him, I gave him a play... and I am not kidding you in the least... the next thing he types is "See, that's your money play." I wanted to reach through the computer and choke him.

So, yeah, I can't give LBzrule enough "thumbs up" or "likes" for that post.

[JerzeyReign]

A poster by the name of Dr.Death would be great at describing all the passing concept as he is very knowledgeable when it comes to the Run and Shoot -- an offense it seems teams take thing from every season.

After reading through this and then thinking back on some of Dr.D's posts -- the Colts run a variation of the R&S or at least use their principles in the passing game.

So in theory, I think EA would need to study the R&S a little bit more and adopt their principles if they want to really make the passing game realistic.

[Illustrator76]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

I don't have anything against Gibs, and respect his opinion even if I disagree with him on a number of issues... but [there's always a but] there was a conversation about a year ago that really bothered me and I talk about every so often with other people. Gibs asked me a "simple question." He asked "it's 4th and long, the game is on the line, what do you call?" He was looking for my "money play" but I don't have a money play. i don't have a go to play. I was trying to explain that to him and he just couldn't [read WOULDN'T] understand that. There are too many factors. Personnel, what has and has not been working, the personnel of the defense, etc. After a while of trying to email that to him, he said to me "Why can't you just answer? It's a simple question... what would you call? Just pick a play." So, to humor him, I gave him a play... and I am not kidding you in the least, the next thing he types is "See, that's your money play." I wanted to reach through the computer and choke him. So, yeah... I can't give LBzrule enough "thumbs up" or "like" for that post.

I agree with you 100%. I have been down this road of explaining this and many other things dealing with Madden to sgibs7 as well, but it just seems pointless. LBzrule mentioned the word "agenda" in his post, and I will flat out say that I feel there seems to be a clear "agenda" going on here in my opinion, and it is a waste of time to debate this subject any further (sgibs7 & freestyle guys are right and "sim-minded" guys are wrong). I have seen threads and comments posted about the same issues that we "spoke" about that he claimed to have a much clearer understanding on after our "conversation". I don't understand how all of the sudden that stuff has been "forgotten" and we are right back at square one again. I guess everyone is free to post what they want to, but as I said before, it just starts to look real funny to see the same topics being brought up that I thought had been hashed out already.

To each his own I guess, but I have already been fooled once, so I am personally not going down this road again.

[Big FN Deal]

To Illy, PG and others point, what is the desired end game to this thread Sgibs?

In my teenage years, my clique had something we called the "crazy test" that was loosely psychologically based. What we would do is walk up to people we knew and say with a serious tone that we really believe they are crazy. Those that had insecurities or self suspicion about being crazy, would act defensively, substantiating "crazy" failing the test but those secure in their mental health would usually take it in stride, passing the test, at least in our teenage opinion.

Now I state all that to say, I find it odd that anyone that feels that they play Madden in a reasonably realistic manner ie "sim", would need much outside validation. Whenever I try out for a "sim" league, I don't attempt to adhere to some rigid game play criteria created by others, I just try to play reasonably realistic and let it speak for itself. That doesn't mean that the way I play will fit or adhere to every leagues individual rule set but since I have a personal commitment to playing reasonably realistic, I can respect various rule sets designed with that intent.

Most people I have encountered that don't want to subscribe to playing "sim" is due to a personal desire of not wanting their game play limited, ie regulated. The issue. IMO, is that's what organized sports is all about, a group of competitors coming together and competing, within agreed on parameters.

I think mature gamers generally understand for the most part when a tactic or decision is reasonably realistic or not without needing some "sim" code of conduct. I think what some gamers like to do is get around other like minded gamers and justify unrealistic game play but psychologically desiring that validation from others, is failing the "sim" test, imo.

[bigsmallwood]

I think everybody seems to have a different opinion on what "sim" play calling is or isn't. I believe that if you have ever played any sport, then you know coaches and teams call plays that will help them win. There are no "special" rules that they abide by. Teams are supposed to exploit mismatches and call plays that will allow them to take advantage of the defense. If a team is weak against the run of course the other team is going to shove it down their throats etc etc. This is real football (or insert other sport).

It bothers me to continuously read about people saying how one should call plays...you call the plays that will help you win, not to try and be politically correct. Are there certain issues with Madden and exploitation? of course, but there is a way to stop each one in my personal opinion.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by bigsmallwood

I think everybody seems to have a different opinion on what "sim" play calling is or isn't. I believe that if you have ever played any sport, then you know coaches and teams call plays that will help them win. There are no "special" rules that they abide by. Teams are supposed to exploit mismatches and call plays that will allow them to take advantage of the defense. If a team is weak against the run of course the other team is going to shove it down their throats etc etc. This is real football (or insert other sport). It bothers me to continuously read about people saying how one should call plays...you call the plays that will help you win, not to try and be politically correct. Are there certain issues with Madden and exploitation? of course, but there is a way to stop each one in my personal opinion.

When talking about "sim", which I take to mean trying to simulate real life, ie be realistic, I don't see how the standard for play calling can simply be, "can it be stopped". Madden is a computer program with certain limitations that reasonably have to be considered when trying to achieve reasonably realistic game play in Madden, even when play calling.

Regulating realistic game play is as more about preventing, detouring issues than it is about reacting to them after the fact. If a particular play or play calling structure exploits the program, it should be prevented, not dictated by is there another potential flaw or something else in the program to counter it. Regulation should be the primary preventive counter to unrealistic tactics, not some reactionary in-game tactic.

[bigsmallwood]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

When talking about "sim", which I take to mean trying to simulate real life, ie be realistic, I don't see how the standard for play calling can simply be, "can it be stopped". Madden is a computer program with certain limitations that reasonably have to be considered when trying to achieve reasonably realistic game play in Madden, even when play calling. Regulating realistic game play is as more about preventing, detouring issues than it is about reacting to them after the fact. If a particular play or play calling structure exploits the program, it should be prevented, not dictated by is there another potential flaw or something else in the program to counter it. Regulation should be the primary preventive counter to unrealistic tactics, not some reactionary in-game tactic.

I guess I understand what you are saying...and I'm not here to disagree, but I'm trying to figure out why there is always a fuss over sim play calling...I've heard people complain about No huddle offenses...I'm like, didn't Jim Kelly and the Buffalo Bills perfect that? Was it cheesing? No...it was a realistic tactic. So help me out here you are talking about programming flaws within the game itself (the videogame) that are exploited? I'm just trying to find a medium/understanding so please don't blast me here