NDL Forum

there are packages that have two running backs in the back field at the same time, are we a loud to use these packages. This has been bought up in a game or two. So please let me know what the ruling on this is.

From: http://www.onlinedynasty.net/forum/view ... ?f=4&t=124

SUBSTITUTIONS:
QB: QB. (Any player with a 70+ in THP may be a BACK-UP)
HB: HB
FB: FB (This should read just FB, but still says FB, HB)
WR: WR
TE: TE, FB
OL: OL
DL: DL
LB: LB, DL
CB: CB, S
S: S, CB, LB

--RBs will no longer be allowed to play FB regardless of their blocking numbers, packaging allows for two tailbacks to be on the field at the same time..
--No offensive players on Defense and vice versa.
--The #1 and #2 overall WRs must be used in the #1 and/or #2 positions. Placing a quality receiver down on your depth chart to take advantage of matchups is unacceptable.

PACKAGES:
With regards to the above three bulleted items there will now be a slight limitation of packages. ALL packages are available to use and are "fair game" with these 3 exceptions.
-- #1 WR CANNOT be moved into the slot. There are about a dozen offensive formations that allow you #1 WR to be moved to the slot. The ONLY defensive formation that allows you to move your #1 CB into the slot is nickel. This is not equitable and therefore not allowed.
-- CB 5 Wide - in the 5-wide sets there is a package that allows for a CB to line up at WR. In staying consistent with "no defensive players on offense" this package cannot be used.
-- *New for 09* WR at HB - in some sets the #1 WR can be subbed in as a HB...but not in the NDL. Smile


Basically, you can use any package in moderation with exception to the above 3. If you're running 2 RBs in the backfield all the time and you are doing it so you can throw to the FB in the flats 10 times a game, people are going to kill you on coaches reports and you'll suffer the consequences of your own decisions that way.

There are also a couple of teams with no FBs on their rosters, so you're forced into a TE or RB playing that position all game. This really changes things up, but people should be aware of that if they're playing a team in that circumstance.

This would have been a more interesting response if you were asking about how to give the create-a-players bigger packages.

dakshdar wrote:From: http://www.onlinedynasty.net/forum/view ... ?f=4&t=124

SUBSTITUTIONS:
QB: QB. (Any player with a 70+ in THP may be a BACK-UP)
HB: HB
FB: FB (This should read just FB, but still says FB, HB)
WR: WR
TE: TE, FB
OL: OL
DL: DL
LB: LB, DL
CB: CB, S
S: S, CB, LB

--RBs will no longer be allowed to play FB regardless of their blocking numbers, packaging allows for two tailbacks to be on the field at the same time..
--No offensive players on Defense and vice versa.
--The #1 and #2 overall WRs must be used in the #1 and/or #2 positions. Placing a quality receiver down on your depth chart to take advantage of matchups is unacceptable.

PACKAGES:
With regards to the above three bulleted items there will now be a slight limitation of packages. ALL packages are available to use and are "fair game" with these 3 exceptions.
-- #1 WR CANNOT be moved into the slot. There are about a dozen offensive formations that allow you #1 WR to be moved to the slot. The ONLY defensive formation that allows you to move your #1 CB into the slot is nickel. This is not equitable and therefore not allowed.
-- CB 5 Wide - in the 5-wide sets there is a package that allows for a CB to line up at WR. In staying consistent with "no defensive players on offense" this package cannot be used.
-- *New for 09* WR at HB - in some sets the #1 WR can be subbed in as a HB...but not in the NDL. Smile


Basically, you can use any package in moderation with exception to the above 3. If you're running 2 RBs in the backfield all the time and you are doing it so you can throw to the FB in the flats 10 times a game, people are going to kill you on coaches reports and you'll suffer the consequences of your own decisions that way.

There are also a couple of teams with no FBs on their rosters, so you're forced into a TE or RB playing that position all game. This really changes things up, but people should be aware of that if they're playing a team in that circumstance.

This would have been a more interesting response if you were asking about how to give the create-a-players bigger packages.

You'll never learn TFan

DRWebs wrote:You'll never learn TFan

Holy shit..thats twice now. and ive been busted on both......dont worry wont be the last.

I don't really care if someone wants to use two TB's in a split back formation i.e. Davis and Spiller or Wells and Saine but the key is "moderation". But if I see a TB at FB, I question it

ChampDizzle wrote:I don't really care if someone wants to use two TB's in a split back formation i.e. Davis and Spiller or Wells and Saine but the key is "moderation". But if I see a TB at FB, I question it

Yeah, I agree...When you start seeing Spiller and Davis together in the I-formation all the way downfield, I think we have a problem.

Glad I've never seen that before...oh wait

Only in the Wishbone and Flexbone, no packages.....as both runningbacks are required for those formations along with the fullback.

jesus christ are we all adults here? who cares about moderation.

you know what moderation sounds it...it sounds like "do it once or twice caus ei cant stop it. please run plays i can stop"

if someone wants to run 2 hbs in the I Form do it, the HB isnt gonna blockshit and makes it easier to tackle the ball carrier.

god, we strive for realism and people bitch and moan.

i pray for the day i face someone who runs all PA and no huddle on me. I would be so happy. makes it a lot funner and different, catching teams off guard.

if i come out in 5 wide and u go 4-3 why should i give a fuck about u? i should run no huddle and by the 3rd play your OLB is exhausted and my #5 WR is going for six.

this isnt directed at anyone in this thread or a threat, just an open opinion. i beg people i face to do this shit. Run with your qbs too please i will not penalize u i promise

using a HB at FB in I form is unrealistic.

nick wrote:jesus christ are we all adults here? who cares about moderation.

you know what moderation sounds it...it sounds like "do it once or twice caus ei cant stop it. please run plays i can stop"

if someone wants to run 2 hbs in the I Form do it, the HB isnt gonna blockshit and makes it easier to tackle the ball carrier.

god, we strive for realism and people bitch and moan.

i pray for the day i face someone who runs all PA and no huddle on me. I would be so happy. makes it a lot funner and different, catching teams off guard.

if i come out in 5 wide and u go 4-3 why should i give a fuck about u? i should run no huddle and by the 3rd play your OLB is exhausted and my #5 WR is going for six.

this isnt directed at anyone in this thread or a threat, just an open opinion. i beg people i face to do this shit. Run with your qbs too please i will not penalize u i promise

actually McFadden and Jones did it as well so it has happened. I meant to say for this game purposes and besides we can just let Spiller or any fast mofo run the Wildcat and all will be better!

thanks for all the replys and clearing this up.

gambit725 wrote:thanks for all the replys and clearing this up.

gambit725 wrote:thanks for all the replies and clearing this up.

there is obvious no hard rule for using the 2-HB set package...just don't put a HB in as a FB in your depth chart. Also, most guys don't like to see it in the "i-form"..(this isn't very realistic as this formation assumes a lead blocker opposed to a runner. But as a two back shotgun or flex/wish/power T/etc...they were made for 2-HBs. Everyone will have a difference of opinion on any of the gray issues not explicit in the rule book..just don't abuse things I think is the best advice I have been given. I ran option playbook all season with Navy, two HB's and a FB. I ran the shit out of that playbook and not one complaint..I think I averaged 6 passes per game and scored very well on scouting reports. I think I threw only twice all game in my bowl game. But I mixed it up and that's what most guys want to see. If you are putting a HB in the FB position and using him too much, most guys will get pissed, plain and simple. (luckily I had the best fullback in the NCAA )

I know from the Farm and Dr. Tom...moderation is key.

pounddarock wrote:

gambit725 wrote:thanks for all the replies and clearing this up.

there is obvious no hard rule for using the 2-HB set package...just don't put a HB in as a FB in your depth chart. Also, most guys don't like to see it in the "i-form"..(this isn't very realistic as this formation assumes a lead blocker opposed to a runner. But as a two back shotgun or flex/wish/power T/etc...they were made for 2-HBs. Everyone will have a difference of opinion on any of the gray issues not explicit in the rule book..just don't abuse things I think is the best advice I have been given. I ran option playbook all season with Navy, two HB's and a FB. I ran the shit out of that playbook and not one complaint..I think I averaged 6 passes per game and scored very well on scouting reports. I think I threw only twice all game in my bowl game. But I mixed it up and that's what most guys want to see. If you are putting a HB in the FB position and using him too much, most guys will get pissed, plain and simple. (luckily I had the best fullback in the NCAA )

I know from the Farm and Dr. Tom...moderation is key.

what he said

pounddarock wrote:

gambit725 wrote:thanks for all the replies and clearing this up.

there is obvious no hard rule for using the 2-HB set package...just don't put a HB in as a FB in your depth chart. Also, most guys don't like to see it in the "i-form"..(this isn't very realistic as this formation assumes a lead blocker opposed to a runner. But as a two back shotgun or flex/wish/power T/etc...they were made for 2-HBs. Everyone will have a difference of opinion on any of the gray issues not explicit in the rule book..just don't abuse things I think is the best advice I have been given. I ran option playbook all season with Navy, two HB's and a FB. I ran the shit out of that playbook and not one complaint..I think I averaged 6 passes per game and scored very well on scouting reports. I think I threw only twice all game in my bowl game. But I mixed it up and that's what most guys want to see. If you are putting a HB in the FB position and using him too much, most guys will get pissed, plain and simple. (luckily I had the best fullback in the NCAA )

I know from the Farm and Dr. Tom...moderation is key.

Well said.

im sure there is others, but i scrimed with auburn and there playbook has both running backs in shotgun.

buckeye76 wrote:im sure there is others, but i scrimed with auburn and there playbook has both running backs in shotgun.

that is not really an issue with having two RBs in shotgun. I form or a RB in a FB spot is what the biggest issue is. I have faced Brown/McGuffie and Wells/Saine and see no problems as long as both are RB's with one not in front of the other. Yes I hate to try and defend it but whatcha gonna do, use your weapons. It ain't trickin if ya got it.

ChampDizzle wrote:I don't really care if someone wants to use two TB's in a split back formation i.e. Davis and Spiller or Wells and Saine but the key is "moderation". But if I see a TB at FB, I question it

Or as if we have in Indiana's case, there isn't a fullback on the roster. I use my 3rd string HB, but you don't see me using him in the fullback position ) giving him a dive or anything like that. When I re-order the roster they actually put my 88 speed lb as the top fullback, but I move them out of there.

Quest4Gold wrote: Or as if we have in Indiana's case, there isn't a fullback on the roster.

There's a good reason for this...their playbook doesn't use a FB anywhere (not counting goal line). It's either ACE or SHOTGUN with only 1 HB or none. So using a different playbook kinda puts you in a good spot to use a fast HB or even a LB at FB..