Rule Changes and Additions have been made!!

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:

Delmas26 wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:This rule, where I can agree that people can abused the playcall screen, is utter crap. It's extremely unbalanced. You're asking the Offense to keep what could be it's best pass catchers on the sideline simply to appease the defence's playcall screen. In DW league I have Desean Jax, Steve Smith(car) at wrs, Gonzo at TE and Spiller at rb. In 5 wide sets, which I run often, you're going to tell me I can't use Gonzo or Spill?

Or take my Tight-I formation, where I bring in a Tackle at te and put two tes at wideout. The result is kindof an adjusted goalline.

Or take my team in Cheddahs league, where I'm forced to play Dilliard over Tim Beckum at wr3. Beckum is like a 65 at TE yet aprx. a 75 at wr. That's a major disadvantage.

In the NFL, d-coordinators have someone watching the other teams subs. This tells him who is going to be in the game, NOT what formation or play type it is.

of course you are against the rule.... a guy who played TE's at WR1 and WR2 for certain formations...

You clearly are against these rules because it directly helps/effects you. Sorry to say that broh...but its the truth.

Anyone who plays a split WR formation...and puts TE1 and TE2 at WR and puts two tackles at TE's on each side....(BTW, thats not a different type of goaline formation) I've never seen that formation in real life...EVER. So, dont make an excuse. Especially when I confronted you about it...and called it cheese. You reply with..."it isnt against the rules...I dont care what your play-call screen says..blah blah" - You know what you are doing...and thats why you do it. Don't give us that load of BS..."Im not going to keep my best pass catchers on the bench to appease my opponent. Beckum isnt better than alot of the WRs...quit giving me that crud. Travis Beckum is never getting open on a starting NFL Cornerback like he does in Madden. Its UNSIM"

The formation in question is a tight-I formation with ONE tackle where the tight-end would be, and two TE's (I use Beckum and Hernandez in Chz league. Gonzo and Kliensasser[which should prove that I'm not trying to get an advantage in the passing game]). I do this NOT to screw with your play call screen, but to give myself a strategic advantage in the running game. Having WR's that tight in for a running play doesn't make too much sense.

Once again, along with Phantom and EZ and anyone else who is against this rule, I make this moves to gain a strategic advantage with the players on the field, not to mess with you fellas' precious little play call screens.

Im gonna go ahead and call BS on this one. If you use it as an advantage for the run game...you wouldnt use either of those TE(s) in RUN BLOCKING. You could use your other TE Garrett Mills and sign another one...because Hernandez and Beckum are awful blockers. You use it too screw with the play-calling screen...to help you run...and then you'll pass if you see the defender come out in something lame...because they are curious of the formation. I'll guarantee you get a lot of Goaline defenses against you...etc...and that's why you put Beckum and Hernandez in at WR. So You can quickly pass...against a !@#$ called defense.

Furthermore, your actions...period...are shady. Because when questioned about your subs...along with you dropping 11 guys into coverage multiple times...you responded with..."Its not against the rules...Cheddah said I could do it..." -

Wanna ask Cheddah again? Because thats not what he told me. You are using Cheddah's name and slandering it...with false facts. I'd be quite pissed if someone was saying I told them they could run some blatant cheese ball substitute tactics. Cheddah told me (In our game) that I couldnt drop 8 or 9 (forgot which) with a spy. Well, you dropped 9 into coverage...PLUS...two spys. That defense is A- hella lame B- hella cheese C- hella unrealistic - I'd think twice before lying next time...saying a commissioner told you that you could employ those tactics.

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:Short-yardage situations, goal line, late in the forth with a lead. Motioning the strong-side TE, assuming the D is in zone, can create a nice double-iso play. I run three or four running plays and one passing play out of this. Like I said before, it's really just an adjusted goalline formation.

BTW, the last 2 or 3 weeks the Jets used a 3rd tackle WITH Keller on the field. Not much difference.

Its not an adjusted Goal Line formation, and if you want a Goal line formation, there is a formation for that.

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:Short-yardage situations, goal line, late in the forth with a lead. Motioning the strong-side TE, assuming the D is in zone, can create a nice double-iso play. I run three or four running plays and one passing play out of this. Like I said before, it's really just an adjusted goalline formation.

BTW, the last 2 or 3 weeks the Jets used a 3rd tackle WITH Keller on the field. Not much difference.

Not much difference? they are all down-lineman...playing where lineman play...on the line of scrimmage. You are subbing 2 tackles on each side of the line...and then bringing in a tight end on each side. You are basically adding 2 players to each side of the line. The Jets do nothing close. I'd never seen an NFL team bring in a tackle eligible on each side of the line...and then play 2 tight ends...2-3 yards from each tackle. The Defense would jam in sooo tight...Madden makes this unpossible to replicate. NFL teams wouldnt do this...because its !@#$ offense.

I dont consider another tackle eligible along with the normal TE to be anywhere near what you do. Furthermore the extra tackle has to report eligible...giving the defense the idea of doing such. You give off the 2TE 2RB play call screen...which most people are going to think is 100% run. Goal-Line passing is much different then the formation you are playing. Your formation you can run any kind of passing plays/action. Typical Goal-Line offense is very limited in terms of passing. You using those 2 as comparison is far off.

In your world...I should/could run a Shotgun 4 Wide Tight...then....and substitute 2 Tackles in at WR on the inside and 2 TES on the outside...all within 3-4 yards of the actual tackles....right? Because thats almost identical to what your package looks like. Except the 2 inside Tackles are actually in a stance...instead of standing up. There is no difference in reality. You are using it to create an unfair advantage because the game has a faulty play call screen.

I guess we should all start using these tactics as help for our games....to level the playing field. Next time I play one of you guys...let me know ahead of time....so I can cheese you back...and we'll see how much you guys enjoy guessing the whole game whether I'm in shotgun 4 wide...or running a power running play.

Fr8trainShane wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:Short-yardage situations, goal line, late in the forth with a lead. Motioning the strong-side TE, assuming the D is in zone, can create a nice double-iso play. I run three or four running plays and one passing play out of this. Like I said before, it's really just an adjusted goalline formation.

BTW, the last 2 or 3 weeks the Jets used a 3rd tackle WITH Keller on the field. Not much difference.

Its not an adjusted Goal Line formation, and if you want a Goal line formation, there is a formation for that.

Its his version of the adjusted goal-line formation...its adjusted...because he really wants to throw out of that formation....and he's hoping you call goal-line defense against his adjusted cheese. Then, when he motions Best out...he has basically 3 WRs...against a goal-line defense.

Fun isnt it? Yeah, real fun...when its 6 points...and you cant audible in time...

Delmas26 wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:

Delmas26 wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:This rule, where I can agree that people can abused the playcall screen, is utter crap. It's extremely unbalanced. You're asking the Offense to keep what could be it's best pass catchers on the sideline simply to appease the defence's playcall screen. In DW league I have Desean Jax, Steve Smith(car) at wrs, Gonzo at TE and Spiller at rb. In 5 wide sets, which I run often, you're going to tell me I can't use Gonzo or Spill?

Or take my Tight-I formation, where I bring in a Tackle at te and put two tes at wideout. The result is kindof an adjusted goalline.

Or take my team in Cheddahs league, where I'm forced to play Dilliard over Tim Beckum at wr3. Beckum is like a 65 at TE yet aprx. a 75 at wr. That's a major disadvantage.

In the NFL, d-coordinators have someone watching the other teams subs. This tells him who is going to be in the game, NOT what formation or play type it is.

of course you are against the rule.... a guy who played TE's at WR1 and WR2 for certain formations...

You clearly are against these rules because it directly helps/effects you. Sorry to say that broh...but its the truth.

Anyone who plays a split WR formation...and puts TE1 and TE2 at WR and puts two tackles at TE's on each side....(BTW, thats not a different type of goaline formation) I've never seen that formation in real life...EVER. So, dont make an excuse. Especially when I confronted you about it...and called it cheese. You reply with..."it isnt against the rules...I dont care what your play-call screen says..blah blah" - You know what you are doing...and thats why you do it. Don't give us that load of BS..."Im not going to keep my best pass catchers on the bench to appease my opponent. Beckum isnt better than alot of the WRs...quit giving me that crud. Travis Beckum is never getting open on a starting NFL Cornerback like he does in Madden. Its UNSIM"

The formation in question is a tight-I formation with ONE tackle where the tight-end would be, and two TE's (I use Beckum and Hernandez in Chz league. Gonzo and Kliensasser[which should prove that I'm not trying to get an advantage in the passing game]). I do this NOT to screw with your play call screen, but to give myself a strategic advantage in the running game. Having WR's that tight in for a running play doesn't make too much sense.

Once again, along with Phantom and EZ and anyone else who is against this rule, I make this moves to gain a strategic advantage with the players on the field, not to mess with you fellas' precious little play call screens.

Im gonna go ahead and call BS on this one. If you use it as an advantage for the run game...you wouldnt use either of those TE(s) in RUN BLOCKING. You could use your other TE Garrett Mills and sign another one...because Hernandez and Beckum are awful blockers. You use it too screw with the play-calling screen...to help you run...and then you'll pass if you see the defender come out in something lame...because they are curious of the formation. I'll guarantee you get a lot of Goaline defenses against you...etc...and that's why you put Beckum and Hernandez in at WR. So You can quickly pass...against a !@#$ called defense.

Furthermore, your actions...period...are shady. Because when questioned about your subs...along with you dropping 11 guys into coverage multiple times...you responded with..."Its not against the rules...Cheddah said I could do it..." -

Wanna ask Cheddah again? Because thats not what he told me. You are using Cheddah's name and slandering it...with false facts. I'd be quite pissed if someone was saying I told them they could run some blatant cheese ball substitute tactics. Cheddah told me (In our game) that I couldnt drop 8 or 9 (forgot which) with a spy. Well, you dropped 9 into coverage...PLUS...two spys. That defense is A- hella lame B- hella cheese C- hella unrealistic - I'd think twice before lying next time...saying a commissioner told you that you could employ those tactics.

You wanna go back and review your messages Delmas?? Did I say anything about Cheddah in regards to that ONE play where I accidentally screwed up my linemen's audibles? OR DID I SAY CHEDDAH SAID THE TIGHT I FORMATION WAS COOL? I don't mind arguing what is cheese and what isn't, but if you're gunna get on here and lie and slander, then I'm going to disrespectfully drop out. AND WHEN DID I MOTION BEST OUT OF THAT FORMATION? I have never done that, not even once. The four plays I run out of that formation:

ISO
BACKSIDE B-GAP RUN
STRETCH
PA STRETCH

Delmas, seriously, go back and review the dozen or so messages you sent me, then come back on here and correct yourself.

Delmas26 wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:Short-yardage situations, goal line, late in the forth with a lead. Motioning the strong-side TE, assuming the D is in zone, can create a nice double-iso play. I run three or four running plays and one passing play out of this. Like I said before, it's really just an adjusted goalline formation.

BTW, the last 2 or 3 weeks the Jets used a 3rd tackle WITH Keller on the field. Not much difference.

Not much difference? they are all down-lineman...playing where lineman play...on the line of scrimmage. You are subbing 2 tackles on each side of the line...and then bringing in a tight end on each side. You are basically adding 2 players to each side of the line. The Jets do nothing close. I'd never seen an NFL team bring in a tackle eligible on each side of the line...and then play 2 tight ends...2-3 yards from each tackle. The Defense would jam in sooo tight...Madden makes this unpossible to replicate. NFL teams wouldnt do this...because its !@#$ offense.

I dont consider another tackle eligible along with the normal TE to be anywhere near what you do. Furthermore the extra tackle has to report eligible...giving the defense the idea of doing such. You give off the 2TE 2RB play call screen...which most people are going to think is 100% run. Goal-Line passing is much different then the formation you are playing. Your formation you can run any kind of passing plays/action. Typical Goal-Line offense is very limited in terms of passing. You using those 2 as comparison is far off.

In your world...I should/could run a Shotgun 4 Wide Tight...then....and substitute 2 Tackles in at WR on the inside and 2 TES on the outside...all within 3-4 yards of the actual tackles....right? Because thats almost identical to what your package looks like. Except the 2 inside Tackles are actually in a stance...instead of standing up. There is no difference in reality. You are using it to create an unfair advantage because the game has a faulty play call screen.

I guess we should all start using these tactics as help for our games....to level the playing field. Next time I play one of you guys...let me know ahead of time....so I can cheese you back...and we'll see how much you guys enjoy guessing the whole game whether I'm in shotgun 4 wide...or running a power running play.

Again, ONE TACKLE. If you're going to get on here and talk badly about me, get your facts right. It's the least you could do.

I will also day this. GREENERRR has complained A LOT about me. Yet NEVER, in all the times we've played (I've been doing this all along) has he complained about this matter.

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:

Delmas26 wrote:

BlaineTheMono19 wrote:Short-yardage situations, goal line, late in the forth with a lead. Motioning the strong-side TE, assuming the D is in zone, can create a nice double-iso play. I run three or four running plays and one passing play out of this. Like I said before, it's really just an adjusted goalline formation.

BTW, the last 2 or 3 weeks the Jets used a 3rd tackle WITH Keller on the field. Not much difference.

Not much difference? they are all down-lineman...playing where lineman play...on the line of scrimmage. You are subbing 2 tackles on each side of the line...and then bringing in a tight end on each side. You are basically adding 2 players to each side of the line. The Jets do nothing close. I'd never seen an NFL team bring in a tackle eligible on each side of the line...and then play 2 tight ends...2-3 yards from each tackle. The Defense would jam in sooo tight...Madden makes this unpossible to replicate. NFL teams wouldnt do this...because its !@#$ offense.

I dont consider another tackle eligible along with the normal TE to be anywhere near what you do. Furthermore the extra tackle has to report eligible...giving the defense the idea of doing such. You give off the 2TE 2RB play call screen...which most people are going to think is 100% run. Goal-Line passing is much different then the formation you are playing. Your formation you can run any kind of passing plays/action. Typical Goal-Line offense is very limited in terms of passing. You using those 2 as comparison is far off.

In your world...I should/could run a Shotgun 4 Wide Tight...then....and substitute 2 Tackles in at WR on the inside and 2 TES on the outside...all within 3-4 yards of the actual tackles....right? Because thats almost identical to what your package looks like. Except the 2 inside Tackles are actually in a stance...instead of standing up. There is no difference in reality. You are using it to create an unfair advantage because the game has a faulty play call screen.

I guess we should all start using these tactics as help for our games....to level the playing field. Next time I play one of you guys...let me know ahead of time....so I can cheese you back...and we'll see how much you guys enjoy guessing the whole game whether I'm in shotgun 4 wide...or running a power running play.

Again, ONE TACKLE. If you're going to get on here and talk badly about me, get your facts right. It's the least you could do.

FALSE, again....TWO TACKLES. You came out in a normal 2TE 2WR set...and subbed in 2 tackles at tight-end and 2 tight ends at wide receiver. Period, Point, Blank.

And, regardless of whatever you claimed Cheddah said.....

Cheddah said he didnt tell you that you could do any of it...

He said...he told you...NOT TOO...even though it wasnt a "RULE" -

Yes?

Alright, I'm done with your ignorant comments. Some guys on here have made some great points, but at this point it's getting to be a he said(me), she said(Delmas). To quote Vince Vaughn, "I know my truth."

Never have I ran a two-tight formation. I run with Washington Playbook, WHICH DOESNT EVEN HAVE A DOUBLE TIGHT-I SET. But whatever, Delmas, this will be my final post on here. Maybe add some more plays to your offense than the TWO passing plays you ran all game. But did I complain about that? Nope.

Make the rule, fellas, whatever. Just try not to cripple guys like EZ, Phantom, and myself who arn't trying to exploit anything with the game, just out players in a position to win.

When does MLB come out LMAO

Baseball sucks!

So we cant sub a te as wr#2 or in the slot?

if everybody drafted right and did there depth chart the right way there would be no problems