Two suggestions here.
1. More defensive plays with 3-0-3 and 3-1-3 alignments for the defensive line. As of right now every 3-4, 3-3-5, 3-2-6, and nickel formation uses more of an old school 4-0-4 alignment - two 0 tech NTs and two 4 tech DEs, head up on the OTs. My suggestion is to add a handful of plays to all formations with odd fronts with 3-0-3 and/or 3-1-3 alignments. That is, a 0 tech or even a 1 tech NT, but then two 3 techs, rather than two 4 techs. Two guys on the outside shoulder of the guards, rather than head-up against the tackles. This is a very common front in college football and has found its way into the NFL in recent seasons. Basically, take the interior defensive lineman from what you already have in the 5-2 formation, but then rather than sticking two DEs right up against the outside shoulders of their respective OTs, pull them a bit out and make them OLBs. If you'd like to just add plays with that alignment and label them "3-0-3 front" or "3-1-3 front", that'd be awesome. You could also add an entire formation or even a few formations. The 3-4 version of this is called the Double Eagle, and then the sub packages can just get "Tite" thrown at the end. So like, Nickel 3-2-6 Tite would be a traditional nickel 3-2-6 formation, but with a 3-0-3 or 3-1-3 front instead of the more traditional 4-0-4 or even 5-0-5 front.
Here's a visual example of a play out of the double eagle base formation, if it helps: https://i.imgur.com/cyLusjX.png
Alright, and my second suggestion is...
2. To add "Big" variants of sub-package defenses. Big Nickel (with 3 safeties and 2 CBs instead of the other way around), and Big Dime (3 & 3) are both extremely common ways to defend spread offenses in college, and are also rising in popularity in the NFL with the rise of spread offenses. This one is even simpler - simply add a second SS to the field in place of a 3rd (or 4th) CB. There are probably easier ways to work around this one by just using creative game planning and out of position players, but it'd be much more useful if it just existed without having to try and find a work-around to make it happen.
I hope I'm not repeating anything that's already been suggested recently, but I didn't see this in the NGTH and nothing about either of these things is on the first page, so if it's already been suggested it wasn't recently.
1. More defensive plays with 3-0-3 and 3-1-3 alignments for the defensive line. As of right now every 3-4, 3-3-5, 3-2-6, and nickel formation uses more of an old school 4-0-4 alignment - two 0 tech NTs and two 4 tech DEs, head up on the OTs. My suggestion is to add a handful of plays to all formations with odd fronts with 3-0-3 and/or 3-1-3 alignments. That is, a 0 tech or even a 1 tech NT, but then two 3 techs, rather than two 4 techs. Two guys on the outside shoulder of the guards, rather than head-up against the tackles. This is a very common front in college football and has found its way into the NFL in recent seasons. Basically, take the interior defensive lineman from what you already have in the 5-2 formation, but then rather than sticking two DEs right up against the outside shoulders of their respective OTs, pull them a bit out and make them OLBs. If you'd like to just add plays with that alignment and label them "3-0-3 front" or "3-1-3 front", that'd be awesome. You could also add an entire formation or even a few formations. The 3-4 version of this is called the Double Eagle, and then the sub packages can just get "Tite" thrown at the end. So like, Nickel 3-2-6 Tite would be a traditional nickel 3-2-6 formation, but with a 3-0-3 or 3-1-3 front instead of the more traditional 4-0-4 or even 5-0-5 front.
Here's a visual example of a play out of the double eagle base formation, if it helps: https://i.imgur.com/cyLusjX.png
Alright, and my second suggestion is...
2. To add "Big" variants of sub-package defenses. Big Nickel (with 3 safeties and 2 CBs instead of the other way around), and Big Dime (3 & 3) are both extremely common ways to defend spread offenses in college, and are also rising in popularity in the NFL with the rise of spread offenses. This one is even simpler - simply add a second SS to the field in place of a 3rd (or 4th) CB. There are probably easier ways to work around this one by just using creative game planning and out of position players, but it'd be much more useful if it just existed without having to try and find a work-around to make it happen.
I hope I'm not repeating anything that's already been suggested recently, but I didn't see this in the NGTH and nothing about either of these things is on the first page, so if it's already been suggested it wasn't recently.
