One of the fundamental coaching philosophy choices involves the decision to employ multiple formations in game play. I like having a run and pass formation on offense along with a run and pass formation on defense. In doing so, we lose some attribute growth on individual position play as practice time is employed on formations at 20 units each, for a total of 80 units.

The two alternatives to this are a) going with single formations or possibly devoting fewer practice units on each formation. I have found that in order to reach formation IQ of 70 for juniors and 80 for seniors, you really need 20 units at each formation.

There are many coaches who do just fine using one offensive formation. For those people, is the player attribute growth significant with the additional 40 minutes allocated to strength, conditioning and what not? I would be curious to look at player growth in one formation as opposed to two. Anyone have any significant data?

One formation on offense and defense is more than enough. Yes, the 40 minutes of individual practice growth is significant. I don't know one great coach that uses more than one offense and one defense.

How important is formation IQ? I played a long time ago, and feel like it didn't make that big a difference.

D1-Very Important (Talent Gaps are the smallest)
D1AA-Important
D2-Kind of Important
D3-Not as Important

At all levels talent trumps FormIQ but at D1A it's the hardest to get as big of a talent gap.

GPA is also a heavy factor in formation IQ now.

I will never get accustomed to seeing teams pass the ball 75 times for 650 yards out the wishbone. 400 yards receiving out of the backfield. I like for results and outcomes to remain somewhat realistic and this is not realistic.