HB/FB Rule Discussion.

Discussion in 'TMFL' started by rushers24, Nov 22, 2010.

  1. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    I was wondering how everyone feels about being able to sub in your RB to the FB position? Every formation that has a RB/FB has this package where you can do this. It's called dual HB, or even dual HB swap. There is no official rule that says specifically that you can't do this, but the rules say that a RB can be subbed into the WR position on 4/5 WR sets.

    Obviously this would have to be monitored closely if this was allowed. Putting in a fast RB in at the FB position and throwing quick throws to the flats is a form of cheesing. But there are certain plays that have great routes for the FB, not to mention if you have a power running back and you want to use the dual HB for 3rd and 1 types of situations.

    Let me know how you feel. This is something that I've always done in certain situations. Going into your depth chart and subbing in your HB at FB should be forbidden, but if you use the packages like the game allows you then you should be able to do it in my opinion as long as it is not abused.
     
  2. sibellius

    sibellius Too legit to quit

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    666
    I'd been doing this occasionally already mainly to get Hightower some routes. I assumed the rules on subs meant just for the depth chart and didn't outlaw formation packages.
     
  3. capp34

    capp34 Say Hello to the Bad Guy!

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    2,321
    Only reason most people use that is to run them gay ass FB dives which is impossible to stop unless you sell out your while defense. I dont like them running routes out of the backfield is because RB/FBs have ''jerry rice hands'' they run perfect routes and never drop passes regardless of there ratings.
     
  4. yankeery25

    yankeery25 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,286
    i did this in past years of madden but feared it would be viewed as cheese. i run pretty much a west coast offense, so i love to throw to my backs. if i could put chris johnson and javon ringer out there at once, my offense would no doubt be better
     
  5. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    My running backs don't have Jerry Rice hands. Felix Jones drops the ball all the time. Especially if he gets hit while or after he tries to catch the ball.
     
  6. sibellius

    sibellius Too legit to quit

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2010
    Messages:
    666
    Same with Beanie Wells, he drops more than half the passes thrown to him. I only end up running that package maybe two or three times a game max and so far haven't experienced much success with it.
     
  7. ChickenOfTheSea

    ChickenOfTheSea TMFL Goat Herder

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,353
    For me its only abuse if you abuse it. Form subs used in moderation don't bother me. As for the WCO a true WCO uses a HB FB and a 2 WR +TE set. That is what allows it to disguise the Run/Pass. Its how Walsh designed it. It was only later that some 3 WR principles were added. however they used either a pro set split again with a HB and FB. or the I form with no TE. Pats spread O is not a WCO. they would be your prime example of a team using dual HBs but its almost always from the Gun. And in many cases its a Welker/TE/hybrid that motions out of the formation. vs staying in the backfield.

    Add me to the list of Guys who Backs have stone hands......
     
  8. kdpnutter

    kdpnutter Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,898
    I dont use both HB at all unless it is the 2 HB Shotgun formation where it naturally happens other than that I do not, I don't agree with it. Most teams have 3 HBs for a reason and a FB for a reason. Because what's to say using for example the Titans, you use Chris Johnson and next year draft a 95 Speed back, so your telling me I have now not only one 95+ speed back to watch but two now and there is no way my LBs would be able to cover both of them just wouldn't happen.

    I think it is only in the formations that have it other than that it should not be used.
     
  9. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914

    Well if you drafted a 95 speed back with intentions of using him as a fullback then yeah. That just doesn't make any sense to do that anyways. And if someone was using this the whole game then they would get called out on it. This would only be used a couple times a game, if that. On certain key situations, maybe a 3rd in short. A scenario would be.... on the last few 3rd and short attempts you were stopped short, so on the next one you decide to put in a power back using the dual hb package and run a FB five. The only question really is on the success rate of a play like this. If everyone feels like this type of play is unstoppable and unfair, and that the success rate would be to high... then it shouldn't be allowed. I personally have been stopped quite a few times running plays like that. And this goes back to when Barber was actually good and had 98 trucking. I converted more than I got stuffed, but there were times were I didn't convert.

    Then there's throwing to your HB out of the FB position. Most FB routes are to the flats, which you shouldn't be throwing to anyways unless it's your last read and a check down. But some play-books like mine have cool passing routes designed for the FB position. It would be nice if I could package my RB and run this play once a game if I so choose. My FB is pretty slow and the play doesn't work at all with using the normal FB.
     
  10. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    Im against this for really 3 reasons.

    1 - We don't know when the HB has been subbed in for the FB when we're calling defense. If this were NCAA, we would know, but this is Madden and all we get is either 1 or 2 RB's if I'm not mistaken.

    2 - A good HB at FB running a FB dive is too high of a percentage play in short yardage in my opinion.

    3 - A speedy HB at FB, like a speedy WR at TE, breaks the AI.

    Unless I see this put to a vote and a majority of people want this, the rule will stick. I encourage whoever to create a poll tho so we can actually put it to a vote.
     
  11. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914

    1. You have a point here. The defense doesn't know. But should the game really tell you? The game doesn't tell you where Randy Moss is going to line up before you call the play, or if you subbed in a fast receiver to play the slot.

    2. That's the million dollar question everyone needs to decide on. If I honestly felt that the success rate of that play was almost unstoppable then I wouldn't have brought this up. Maybe other teams can run it and convert everytime, but I can only speak for myself and I have been stopped plenty of times running that play.

    3. And you have proof of this? Putting a speed HB at FB and him burning a LB is not breaking the AI in man, it's just beating the defense. It's not breaking anything. By doing this doesn't mean your HB automatically gets open because the AI can't handle it. It's the same when running plays out of the normal HB positon. If your speed RB gets matched up one on one with a LB, then the success rate of him getting open is going to be very high. But if it's zone or is he's covered by a corner then it probably won't be open. It makes no difference whether the HB is running routes out of the HB or FB position.
     
  12. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    1. The game tells you in NCAA and yes it does make a difference.

    3. I'll start putting CJ in at FB and Randy Moss at TE and you tell me it doesn't break the AI.
     
  13. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914

    It won't. If I have a corner and a safety on Moss at the TE then it won't make any difference. He's still going to be Moss and beat double coverage from time to time. But naturally, TE's are covered by LB when your running 34 or 43. Doing something like that is way out of the question. They don't even do that in the NFL, besides there's no packages to sub in something like that.

    I wouldn't of had any problem at all with you subbing CJ in at FB for a few plays.
     
  14. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    If I recall CJ was your leading receiver anyways. So it doesn't matter to me where he's catching passes at whether he's lined up in the slot or at FB. He's a threat anywhere because of he's speed and it's my job to stop him regardless of where he's at on the field.
     
  15. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    I had the ball for less than 6 minutes time of possession - my TE was my leading receiver, lol.
     
  16. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    Lol I don't even know who your TE is.

    I like to see more people get in on this topic. Maybe we can have a vote. In the end I want what's best for the league. And if everyone is against this then so be it.

    My final stand is this. Calling a play and having a designed audible to make Moss lined up in at TE IS abusing the AI, but using the dual HB sub packages before you call your play is not. The game allows you to do this, and the NFL does this. The question would be is the success rate on running a FB dive. Try it out go to practice mode and do it and call a defense to jam the middle, maybe goal line and run this 20 times and see what happens. There are certain playbooks that have awesome routes and plays designed for the FB position. There are even FB screens that I've seen. I don't have one but they do exist and they are awesome to run. If your subbing in AP to FB and running screens and throws to the flats and FB dives on every possession then that's against the rules of not mixing up your play calling. This should be used like a WR reverse or a HB or WR screen. You pick your spots and you run it a couple times a game, thats it.
     
  17. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    Well said Rush, lets see what everyone else has to say.
     
  18. antcap24

    antcap24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,344
    My two cents...

    I think that the only time that a HB should be allowed to play the fullback position is if he has the characteristics of a fullback. Any rb with 85+ speed has no business being 1 yard off the line of scrimmage. You would not see it in real football. There are some Running backs in the NFL that are tweener back that double up as back up fullbacks and half backs. Tolbert from the Chargers lining up as either halfback or fullback to me is not cheese. Hillis was a FB before converting to HB and I wouldn't consider it cheese to see him line up as a fullback. In real life, the Falcons use Jason Snelling as a backup Fullback and 3rd string HB (before Norwood injury, now 2nd string) He should be able to play FB without it being cheese. These players are not speedster running backs creating mismatches and AI break downs. If you have a player on your team that fits that description I am sure you would not think twice about subbing him and feeling guilty about it. If you have to second guess if this is legit with this player, it most likely is not.

    If we can put a HB at FB, can we put a S at LB?

    Where do we draw the line?
     
  19. yankeery25

    yankeery25 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,286
    the only time i would even consider making this change is in the shotgun in a 2 back formation
    would it be legal to have javon ringer in instead of ahmad hall in the shotgun?
     
  20. antcap24

    antcap24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,344
    I am ok with the Shotgun formation because it happens in real life from time to time.
     
  21. Keller

    Keller The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Messages:
    13,939
    Capp nice first argument.

    Second argument, not so much because real teams do put their big HB's at FB from time to time as well.
     
  22. antcap24

    antcap24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,344
    My take on it is simply this...

    You know your team in real life. If the player you are subbing in is utlized as a FB from time to time, then I do not think it is cheese to put him as a FB. If not, then don't do it to have an advantage in a video game in crucial situations.

    Michael Turner has NEVER lined up as a FB since he has been a Falcon. He has the size of a BIG HB, but by all means I would think it was cheese to sub him in as a FB on a 3rd and 1 for a FB dive. Jason Snelling is a different story for the Falcons. He was a FB and HB at Virginia and was drafted as a FB a few years back.

    Should players that are big HBs like Steven Jackson, Brandon Jacobs, Jonathan Stewart, Mihael Bush, LaGarrette Blount, Michael Turner and the like... be able to play FB? IMO, No. They are not FBs, and have never been FBs.

    Now, I think on a Shotgun Formation I see it as a common thing to see two halfbacks in a split formation.
     
  23. yankeery25

    yankeery25 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    1,286
    Chris Johnson and Javon Ringer will now definitely share the field at the same time
     
  24. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    Either we can sub them in, or we can't. There's no in between. It wouldn't be fair to allow certain teams to use this sub package because they saw their team do it once or twice and not allow others. I have seen the Cowboys run all kinds of formations with their RB's. One being they had all three RB's in the backfield, and Felix in as FB. They have also put in Barber in as FB on several different occasions. Just because you have never seen Turner in as FB doesn't mean it couldn't happen this weekend, or that they are not allowed to do it or ever practiced it.

    If you are coming out on every 3rd and short and running a FB dive with Turner then you are going to be called out on it. For one you have to mix up your play calling. This is something every one should be entitled to use a couple times a game if they want. It happens in the NFL, and the game allows you to do it without confusing the AI and going to the depth chart. If my opponent puts in Turner in a key situation on 3rd and short and converts, I have no problem with that. But if he's coming and doing that every time in that situation, now I have a problem.
     
  25. rushers24

    rushers24 Walk On

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2010
    Messages:
    914
    And if I was a NFL head coach and I had Michael Turner on my team, there's no doubt I would put him in as FB on certain situations. Heck he's bigger than most Fullbacks. And if anything else it would be a great decoy to throwing the ball on short down situations.
     

Share This Page