Originally posted by Staz
Originally posted by josh2otter
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Here is a screenshot of the new D-positions depth chart in its current form.
http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd314/tpaterniti/DPositionsScreenshot.jpg
http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/ratenxs/formationdepthchart.jpg
Last edited Mar 19, 2009 08:56:41
I love this idea and I'm happy to see that it's on the test server being used. There appears to one major piece missing: SS.
Having the ability to select which SS to be in on a certain play out weighs every other option that would be given to us.
I suggest that Bort add SS to the custom D depth chart. That's all, doubt this will be seen and doubt it's important to anyone else.` Thanks for reading.
OTTER
Added from another thread
I think that's giving TOO much diversity to a defense. How often do you see the SS being subbed on a defense? Personally, I don't see it very often. John Lynch was a hard hitting SS, but was still out there on passing downs.
The LBs make sense, the DL makes sense, but DBs do not. Of course, I'm open to reasoning as to WHY the SS should be there. Don't just say "rushing and passing downs"...
Well without there being formations such as the 46, 4-4, 3-5, 5-3 etc. we have to create our own by moving moving the SS down to play as a LB. Now with my team this isn't a problem as our SS is build as a hard hitter, but I'm sure other teams with a coverage SS would rather sub in a LB when using those formations.
Originally posted by josh2otter
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Here is a screenshot of the new D-positions depth chart in its current form.
http://i221.photobucket.com/albums/dd314/tpaterniti/DPositionsScreenshot.jpg
http://i138.photobucket.com/albums/q262/ratenxs/formationdepthchart.jpg
Last edited Mar 19, 2009 08:56:41
I love this idea and I'm happy to see that it's on the test server being used. There appears to one major piece missing: SS.
Having the ability to select which SS to be in on a certain play out weighs every other option that would be given to us.
I suggest that Bort add SS to the custom D depth chart. That's all, doubt this will be seen and doubt it's important to anyone else.` Thanks for reading.
OTTER
Added from another thread
I think that's giving TOO much diversity to a defense. How often do you see the SS being subbed on a defense? Personally, I don't see it very often. John Lynch was a hard hitting SS, but was still out there on passing downs.
The LBs make sense, the DL makes sense, but DBs do not. Of course, I'm open to reasoning as to WHY the SS should be there. Don't just say "rushing and passing downs"...
Well without there being formations such as the 46, 4-4, 3-5, 5-3 etc. we have to create our own by moving moving the SS down to play as a LB. Now with my team this isn't a problem as our SS is build as a hard hitter, but I'm sure other teams with a coverage SS would rather sub in a LB when using those formations.