Vote: Adding very limited custom playbooks

Discussion in 'The Tradition' started by Hellisan, Oct 17, 2012.

?

Do you want to allow limited custom playbooks or continue with them off?

Poll closed Oct 24, 2012.
  1. YES

    66.7%
  2. NO

    33.3%
  1. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    You guys know how I feel about custom playbooks, or if you don't... I don't like them. Not for a league like ours.. I love the tradeoff of how the existing playbooks don't give you everything you want. It's fun looking for a new one, and I think it helps keep us a league where defense is a factor.

    However, it's a cool feature and a few of us have discussed turning custom playbooks on, and using the honor system, make very limited changes to our playbooks.

    The rules of it would work like this:

    • To existing playbook you can add ONE or TWO formations (depending upon what we vote on).
    • Limited to a total of 24 plays if we go with two formations, or 15 if we go with one
    • Absolutely no changes to existing formations
    • You can add on new formations if possible or if not, replace them.
    • If I find that anybody is abusing the system you're removed immediately.
    So please participate in our vote. I want 12 votes. Please VOTE yes or no to this idea, and then post in the thread and indicate 1) how many formations you want (1 form, 15 plays or 2 forms, 24 plays). Finally if you vote yes, indicate whether or not you are o.k. with us making the change this year. Again I want everybody to participate in this and if you feel strongly about it either way, please explain thoroughly your reasoning.

    Mogriffjr
    HotRod
    smlVICTORIES53
    Twister18
    jfosh
    Gravity
    mboda
    jms493
    MaxATX34
    NYJuggalo45
    bravejaf
     
  2. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    I voted yes. I dont feel very strongly one way or another, though. I like the "tradeoff" concept as well, but it would be cool to add a new formation or two to my playbook. I have 2 pistol sets, so I'd probably add one or two of those. Maybe 1 pistol and another run-friendly shotgun formation w/ good PA stuff.
     
  3. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I will put this down as a vote for two formations.

    I'm sure everybody will be excited about the run friendly shotgun look with play action.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. jfosh

    jfosh Super

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,636
    I like this idea... can we add more defensive formations to combat this addition to the offense side of the ball?
     
  5. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I vote yes, and I vote for 2 formation additions possible.

    I also vote that we implement it immediately and let people start making those small changes to their playbooks this year.

    Please note everybody, I am very serious about the fact that we don't change our existing stuff that was already in the playbooks. If anybody provides me with a replay of a play that isn't in one of your default formations or I see something in JMS' or Hotrod's games or on a replay... that's just the end of your involvement with the league. EVerybody will have to report what playbook they are using, and what formations they are adding, in the preseason.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    If it's possible to edit defensive playbooks, which I'm not positive about... You can edit those ... Just no predator shit or AI screwing shit.
     
  7. jms493

    jms493 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8,906
    Nope....I like the stock playbooks.
     
  8. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    How is aruba going? Are you guys having teh sex on the beach while sipping from coconuts?
     
  9. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I haven't decided what a winning percentage of the vote would be... With brave and jms already saying no, I think we would limit it to one new formation if implemented. Or possibly require a pretty handy win with the remaining votes.
     
  10. jms493

    jms493 Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    8,906
    Aruba is amazing....here is a day in Aruba for us. Quick workout in the AM....breakfast, then to the beach. Lunch and back to the beach.....dinner and drinks, rinse n repeat.
     
  11. bravejaf

    bravejaf Walk On

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    8,919
    I also voted no for same reason. Tough to monitor what formations are added.

    I would bar them in T3, except I'm not commish and some people would go ape shit.
     
  12. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I am pretty vigilant about monitoring people *... lol

    *understatement
     
  13. Mogriffjr

    Mogriffjr Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    5,164
    Featured Threads:
    2
    Yeah Helli is on top of shit. And I voted yes. 7 votes :)
     
  14. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    Juggs says he is voting no.

    So Twister is the only one that hasn't voted.
     
  15. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    I will vote yes but they need to be disclosed.
     
  16. HotRod

    HotRod You ain't bout dat life!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    6,115
    Featured Threads:
    1
    I think a good way to do this is to list the plays you are adding.

    You can find formations and playart here

    http://www.playbooks.ncaaplaybook.com/browse.php?id=27

    We can post the individual plays were are adding.

    [​IMG][​IMG]
     
  17. NYJuggalo45

    NYJuggalo45 Walk On

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,766
    who the fuck has time to do that lol
     
  18. HotRod

    HotRod You ain't bout dat life!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    6,115
    Featured Threads:
    1
    That took me 2 seconds
     
  19. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    [​IMG]




















    just kidding. I totally have time for that...
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2012
  20. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    Not sure what I will do with this. Twist told me last night he'd rather not, so I suspect that vote is a bit on the fence or slightly leaning toward doing it because he knows I want to try it... (Maybe I'm wrong Twist).

    I don't really like the idea of having to list every single play we added, but if that's what you guys want, maybe it will get put into the requirements if this is added.

    I'll continue to mull it over.
     
    Last edited: Oct 18, 2012
  21. MaxATX34

    MaxATX34 Texas Football

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,719
    Me neither. If we decide to implement this, I think just stating the added formations should suffice.
     
  22. HotRod

    HotRod You ain't bout dat life!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2009
    Messages:
    6,115
    Featured Threads:
    1
    I don't really care either way, it seems like it's not really a major addition for most. I like my playbook as is, wouldn't mind an additional formation.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Hellisan

    Hellisan Schemin 'em up

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2009
    Messages:
    10,590
    I think that's a pretty good point. There's nobody in our league clamoring for this. Nobody that "has to have it." You have 22 TD and 1 INT, I think your playbook is adequate. I wouldn't mind having a power I formation look in my playbook... But I picked a playbook that doesn't have it because I wanted to stop forcing it in a game that you can't force the run anymore. Since the vote really should have been 7-5 (not a ringing endorsement) and since this doesn't seem like a must-have for most folks, I'm leaning toward tabling it for now. Maybe it's something we can try when interest in the game is dying down in April or something.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  24. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    Sorry I was misunderstood. Formations is fine.
     
  25. Twister18

    Twister18 I aint got time to bleed!

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2009
    Messages:
    4,134
    You are! :p
     

Share This Page