CAG Madden 11 League 2 - Season 2! Week 10 Deadline Sat night. TEAMS OPEN!

Whee, I step away to beat up on the CPU in my offline franchise and things got hot.

Zurezo - I don't think it's any secret a lot of people in the league have had issues with the way you run your offense, so don't act like this is new information. I've been incredibly vocal in the other league about Wallace not being eligible for postseason awards because I think you go out of your way to get him the ball whenever possible. Last season he had more targets, catches, and yards than every other receiver on your team combined. A lot of the time that is on plays exactly like what ubernes is talking about, I don't need to take his word for it since I've seen it myself. Now granted, I don't actually think it's that hard to defend your scheme (no offense) and I've been pretty successful against you in the league, but I definitely see what he is saying.

No one is saying there's anything wrong with moving around a receiver, but I think you do it to excess. Even when you're not in that tight 4-WR formation I don't think I've ever recalled seeing Mike Wallace on the outside. I've yet to play you as the Texans, but if the same is true of AJ I think it does push the bounds of realism for this simple reason: He is not a slot receiver. The Texans don't use him that way, and if they did, people would cover him differently. Now of course you're welcome to use your personnel however you want, but I don't think it's unreasonable to think that your looks might be varied enough so that occasionally your top receiver is where NFL offenses play their top receiver. Playing your best wide receiver in the slot or on the inside of a bunch constantly to try to exploit matchups (which would NOT work in the NFL) is gimmicky, I'm sorry to agree with ubernes again.

And just so I don't seem like I'm biased here: ubernes, don't call people assholes.
 
Oh, we're discussing the tight 4-WR formation as well? Can I weigh in?

That formation is EXTREMELY exploitative and shouldn't be allowed.
 
^^ I actually agree with BIG AT, there are the most unbumpable routes out off this formation, i m in a league that limits its use because of this.

The first thing I think when I see this set constantly is :

I'm about to be Swindled !!!
 
Lol here I am...right on time. I actually don't have a lot to say on this topic since I haven't played Zurezo since season one I think, and I'm pretty sure I beat him...so I obviously couldn't have had TOO much of a problem with his playing style :) But anyways...

Zurezo seems skeptical about this whole "not being able to line up your #1 CB against their #1 WR" business, but I've had it happen to me once too. That being said, if Uber never indicated to Zurezo during the game that he was having that problem, then I don't think Zurezo can be held accountable for exploiting it without any knowledge of doing so. It seems like Uber already acknowledges that it wasn't Zurezo's fault for the way he played, but just has more of a problem with his attitude afterwords. I know tempers were high and things were said on both sides that probably borderline crossed the line. Zurezo is allowed to justify his actions when he's getting ganged up on like that, but I don't agree with his justification at all. He says there's nothing wrong with trying to move around your WR in order to get a LB or safety covering him, but like Uber mentioned time after time...there IS something wrong with that if you would ONLY see that happening in Madden because of its inherent faults.

Also, I'm assuming you might have tried doing this already...but it seems like it would help a lot if you just took control of one of the safeties defending the deep pass and just shadowed Johnson the whole game. When you come across a player like Zurezo who has a clear favorite target as a receiver, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard to shut him down if you shadow him all game...especially if he runs the same routes/formations.

And just slightly off-topic: I'm pretty sure I remember Zurezo saying something along the lines of "it's not like I'm running some clear exploits like placing Johnson at TE or using a RB as a WR" (he was nice enough to avoid using the phrase "pulling a MA" lol), but can I just get it cleared up one way or another if placing a good catching RB as a WR on the depth chart is an exploit? It makes zero sense to me whatsoever that it can be considered an exploit...but a good amount of people seem to disagree. Not that I do it anymore this season...but I still find nothing wrong with it.
 
Just to pad my above comment a bit, I've never played Zurezo so I don't know what he runs at all. I'm speaking in general rather than towards any individual.

But the 4 tight WR set is ridiculously broken and really has no place in the game.
 
Not a lot of my opponents have run the 4 tight WR set and I never have myself (maybe I've tried it every once in a while when I'm just trying to figure out new plays to use); but I've always found it at the very least extremely confusing to defend and just overall really chaotic (everyone's routes intertwining). I guess the defenders share that sentiment cause I think they usually struggle defending against it too lol. I've never considered that formation broken or anything, but I'm not the best judge on that since I haven't come across it too much. It is indeed extremely hard to defend against though.
 
[quote name='BigAT']Just to pad my above comment a bit, I've never played Zurezo so I don't know what he runs at all. I'm speaking in general rather than towards any individual.

But the 4 tight WR set is ridiculously broken and really has no place in the game.[/QUOTE]

Agreed
 
[quote name='BigAT']I'm surprised more of you haven't heard of rocketing catching. Rocket catching is when you manually take control of your wide receiver, undercut the route and then go to catch the ball by causing your WR to jump and "rocket" towards the ball, making it nearly impossible to defend.

This basically:
http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/60116502

A little hard to tell at that distance, but you get the idea.[/QUOTE]

I do user catch on occassion...
On the play above your LB was on top of my TE (who is 6'8" btw) so I was able to use that positioning to make the catch. It was more luck than anything as Pope drops that pass on the hit, 9 times out of 10.

I think user catching is an essential part of having good stick skills and imo the defense has the same opportunity for as long as they are in decent position. Which again, imo makes it fair and non-exploitative.
 
You know what? I just played Zurezo recently, and I don't have a damn clue who he had in what slot. Seemed like a fun and fair game to me, though.
 
I want to start off by saying that I have never heard of anyone having a problem with the defensive assignment feature. The only thing I can go off of is what people are saying in the forums and from personal experience. My experience with the defensive assignment tool has always been perfect and its always done what I wanted it to do, so I was a little shocked to hear that you were having a problem with it.

I have been in the league from the start (Madden 2011) and this is the first time that I have heard about 4 wide tight sets being broken. I have been running this offense since I came in the league and it just seems odd that now, 4 seasons in and its a problem. I understand people have had issues with how I run my offense, but those issues were more along the lines of throwing to Mike Wallace a lot, never once did anybody approach me and say that I’m using a broken formation. I don’t read any madden forums/websites, so outside any of the past glitches (rocketcatch & nano) I'm unaware of anything Im running to be "glitches". I would think if it was, it would have been brought to my attention a long time ago.

I have never been disrespectful to anybody in this league and enjoy playing with you guys, but when it goes from one person having a problem with the defensive assignment feature to another person saying that “a lot of people in the league have had an issue with how I run my offense” I can get a bit defensive about it, because it implies that I’m up to something.

I have played ubernes before and he beat me twice. In both of those games I was running the same offense that I’m currently running and had Mike Wallace in the slot, so why is running my offense like this a problem now?

ubernes - No need to call me an a-hole, it’s uncalled for. You never once sent me a XBL msg or text msg to let me know there was an issue. The first time I found anything about you not being able to match up your CB vs. AJ was after the game was over on the forums.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
iono about the formation issue as I was forced to sit in zone coverage the whole game to avoid the ridiculous separation on crossing routes, but I agree with MA. if you run man, you're gonna be forced to shadow whoever zurezo's favorite target is. I tried to give him different looks by using a line backer and safety. it worked in the second league but not so much in the first... I've watched mike wallace line up in the slot almost the entire game and have had issues with McKelvin sticking to him and that's what forced me into zones. I understand and sympathize with Ubernes.

However, I don't think it is an exploit so much as it is annoying as all hell. Zurezo, a lil variety in your offensive gamelan wouldn't hurt but there are ways to stop the gameplay in question
 
[quote name='RamesuThe1']I do user catch on occassion...
On the play above your LB was on top of my TE (who is 6'8" btw) so I was able to use that positioning to make the catch. It was more luck than anything as Pope drops that pass on the hit, 9 times out of 10.

I think user catching is an essential part of having good stick skills and imo the defense has the same opportunity for as long as they are in decent position. Which again, imo makes it fair and non-exploitative.[/QUOTE]

It's hard to imply given the lack of tone on the internet, but I'm not accusing you of anything or even saying you were necessarily in the wrong. I'm just looking for clarification on the topic because user catching, that is controlling the WR manually, (of any variety) is banned in the other league I play in, and for good reason IMHO.

Zurezo, out of curiosity what offensive playbook do you use?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't think we should ban user catching. I mean if someone starts rocket catching then, yeah ban that, but I don't see how user catching gives you an advantage at all because the defense can do it too.
 
[quote name='gbpackers94']I don't think we should ban user catching. I mean if someone starts rocket catching then, yeah ban that, but I don't see how user catching gives you an advantage at all because the defense can do it too.[/QUOTE]


hehe, if we ban user catching...there goes half the leagues Free Safety play.
 
[quote name='siradam134']hehe, if we ban user catching...there goes half the leagues Free Safety play.[/QUOTE]

It's meant to refer to manual control of wide receivers, not controlling players on the defensive side of the ball.
 
Bears - Vikings disconnect with the Bears leading 49-7 early in the 3rd quarter. It's giving me the option to count it, and since Azu seemed pretty frustrated before the disconnect I think I'm going to take it.

Believe it or not, the Bears were actually outgained on offense in this one. If you had the Bears D/ST on fantasy, you're enjoying yourself right now - 3 return TDs for Hester (2 kicks, 1 punt) and a pick six.
 
[quote name='Doomtime']That's a large enough lead to accept I'd say[/QUOTE]

Yeah, for sure. I'm just making sure he's cool with it.

Just an incredible game by the Bears special teams, needless to say. The league-leading D is actually going to improve its ranking.
 
Shit, it didn't count it for some reason even though I told it to... You suck EA.

So much for my special teams explosion. Guess I'll play the CPU..

Just so it's clear what happened, Devin Hester took every single ball he touched on special teams to the house. I've been waiting all season for him to do that, and now it won't count, lol
 
I couldn't believe it, I don't usually get angry about stuff like that actually happened but those plays drove me up the wall, it totally blew my mind.
 
[quote name='silentghost227']i see what you did there[/QUOTE]
orly.jpg
 
[quote name='ubernes']Folk!!!!![/QUOTE]

Come to papa.

Bears 76 - Vikings 7 (CPU)

Turns out the CPU Vikes couldn't do any better than Azu did. That scoreline is a little embarrassing, with 34 points in the 4th quarter, but I swear I wasn't trying to run it up there. Cutler only threw one pass in the 4th, on a 3rd and 15 or so which the CPU corner blitzed and Knox caught a 71 yard TD. Other than that the scores in the 4th were 2 FGs, a punt return, a pick six, and a fumble recovery for six.

Anyway Cutler threw 7 TDs (3 to Wayne, 2 to Heap, 1 each to Hester and Knox) and the Bears D allowed just over 200 yards and got 6 turnovers, including 2 sick picks by DRC who was targeted 9 times (2 picks, 7 pdfs, 0 catches). Not regretting that trade at all.

So yeah, this game happened. Everyone walked away healthy!
 
Remaining Games:

Ravens-Falcons
Bengals-Colts
Titans-Dolphins
Panthers-Bucs
Seahawks-Cardinals
Cowbows-Giants
Patriots-Steelers

Updates if you please..
 
Giants owner is away without his xbox. HE said he may return tonight \ tomorrow and we could try to set up a game tomorrow or Monday.
 
Panthers Bucs-Haven't heard from mog, sent him an xbox live message.

Seahawks-Cardinals- Haven't heard from him. I sent him one message. A Hard did as well.
 
[quote name='ubernes']Run up the score much, bv? :)[/QUOTE]

I guess you didn't bother to read my post, huh?

[quote name='MasterAwesome']Dominique! Pick-six machine!! I warned everyone.....he will take over the world and destroy us all :twisted:[/QUOTE]

He had two picks, but he didn't return either for TDs. The only pick six was Bowman.
 
[quote name='MasterAwesome']Lol whoops I read "two sick picks by DRC" as "two pick sixes" lol. I apologize to everyone...[/QUOTE]

Both of them were on deep bombs he caught by outrunning the guy he was covering, those are some of the hardest to return for 6 since not only are you deep downfield with your back to the endzone but the receiver will usually tackle you right away unless he fell down or something.
 
[quote name='bvharris']

...Bears 76 - Vikings 7 (CPU)

Turns out the CPU Vikes couldn't do any better than Azu did. That scoreline is a little embarrassing, with 34 points in the 4th quarter, but I swear I wasn't trying to run it up there. Cutler only threw one pass in the 4th, on a 3rd and 15 or so which the CPU corner blitzed and Knox caught a 71 yard TD. Other than that the scores in the 4th were 2 FGs, a punt return, a pick six, and a fumble recovery for six ...

Anyway Cutler threw 7 TDs ...[/QUOTE]

[quote name='ubernes']Run up the score much, bv? :)[/QUOTE]

[quote name='bvharris']I guess you didn't bother to read my post, huh?
[/QUOTE]

What I've gathered from this is that a 69 point difference can happen on accident. :roll:
 
[quote name='Darth0fTheDead']What I've gathered from this is that a 69 point difference can happen on accident. :roll:[/QUOTE]

If I'm playing the CPU usually I'll chuck it around and put up big stats in the first half and then dial it back and mostly run in the 2nd, which is what happened here. 5 of the Vikes' 6 turnovers came in the 4th quarter, plus a punt return TD, so it definitely got kind of crazy there. I think it's the first time I've ever scored in the 4th in a CPU league game. :D
 
I'm pretty sure Uber was joking with his post...and I don't see anything wrong with how BV played. I don't think people need to run out of bounds or go down after intercepting balls, I think it's fine to try and score with it even with under 2 minutes left in the game or with a huge lead . Same goes for special teams. I see a lot of people with pick sixes or returned fumbles with a minute left in the game (I'm sure I've done it myself). It would be a very honorable thing to do to run out of bounds or dive early after intercepting a ball with such a huge lead against a human opponent, but that's just being OVERLY respectable imo. And this was against a CPU opponent so no one's feelings would be hurt anyways. The pass with under 2 minutes left was definitely questionable but I doubt BV threw it with the intent to score and like he said it was 3rd and long so it isn't crazy to want to pass for the first and then try to run out the clock.
 
[quote name='MasterAwesome']The pass with under 2 minutes left was definitely questionable but I doubt BV threw it with the intent to score and like he said it was 3rd and long so it isn't crazy to want to pass for the first and then try to run out the clock.[/QUOTE]

Yeah it was 3rd and 15 and Knox was on a streak and the corner covering him blitzed without any real safety help. It was obviously going to be a TD, so I suppose I did have the intent to score in the moment, but I'm not polite enough to pass that throw up. :D

Edit: And yeah, obviously I know uber was joking around, but I just wanted to make sure it was clear that the score was kind of a fluke thing and the result of 5 4th quarter turnovers and a punt return, not me really keeping my foot to the gas.
 
[quote name='Doomtime']Panthers Bucs-Haven't heard from mog, sent him an xbox live message.

Seahawks-Cardinals- Haven't heard from him. I sent him one message. A Hard did as well.[/QUOTE]

sorry i'm available most of tommorrow.
 
[quote name='bvharris']If I'm playing the CPU usually I'll chuck it around and put up big stats in the first half and then dial it back and mostly run in the 2nd, which is what happened here. 5 of the Vikes' 6 turnovers came in the 4th quarter, plus a punt return TD, so it definitely got kind of crazy there. I think it's the first time I've ever scored in the 4th in a CPU league game. :D[/QUOTE]

Haha, I really wasn't commenting on you blowing them out but, you saying you weren't trying to run the score up on them and then list a pick 6, punt return, a 70-something pass, and a partridge in a pear tree. If I ever got to play the CPU I'd have fun too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top