Posted by WardoYT on 3/4/2019 10:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by drichar138 on 3/4/2019 2:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by robinsmd on 3/3/2019 5:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bathtubhippo on 3/3/2019 4:58:00 PM (view original):
motion/press as long as I can run 11- or even 12-deep. it's less effective with every walk-on.

I think that’s probably the biggest problem with FCP. In the current recruiting environment, it is very hard to get quality players without taking walk ons.

This is the reason I have switched (almost) all of my press teams to press/zone. When my teams are 11 or 12 deep, I run press. When we have more than 1 walk on, we run the press/zone and if I have 3 or more walk ons I play exclusively zone.

My UNC team in Smith is the only team I have that practices exclusively zone. All of the rest practice zone and press.

Its better to just stick to zone entrielly. Better results.

Thanks for the tip Wardo. I have won two D1 National Championships in HD 3.0 with the press/zone combo and one D1 National Championship in HD 3.0 with my team that plays strictly zone.

Do players learn an offense/defense quicker when playing it in games vs. just practicing it? For example, when switching a team to a new offense/defense, obviously you will switch the practice minutes to the new O/D, however do you typically leave the O/D played in games for that season as the old O/D since the IQ ratings will be much higher? This is what I've done in the past, but have never really thought about if I'm missing out on more IQ boost by not initially playing that O/D in games.

Posted by robinsmd on 3/7/2019 9:23:00 AM (view original):
Do players learn an offense/defense quicker when playing it in games vs. just practicing it? For example, when switching a team to a new offense/defense, obviously you will switch the practice minutes to the new O/D, however do you typically leave the O/D played in games for that season as the old O/D since the IQ ratings will be much higher? This is what I've done in the past, but have never really thought about if I'm missing out on more IQ boost by not initially playing that O/D in games.

it is all practice time based. playing time is not a factor.

Posted by drichar138 on 3/7/2019 10:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robinsmd on 3/7/2019 9:23:00 AM (view original):
Do players learn an offense/defense quicker when playing it in games vs. just practicing it? For example, when switching a team to a new offense/defense, obviously you will switch the practice minutes to the new O/D, however do you typically leave the O/D played in games for that season as the old O/D since the IQ ratings will be much higher? This is what I've done in the past, but have never really thought about if I'm missing out on more IQ boost by not initially playing that O/D in games.

it is all practice time based. playing time is not a factor.

for some reason, i don't think this is correct, but my memory is fuzzy. i suspect if you run triangle all season, practicing 0 minutes of it, all your F players who play will end the year D-. i think there's something goofy about it, something like it comes from playing against teams who play triangle, not your playing of triangle, or something dumb like that. long story short, i feel like we saw players go from F to D- without practice and there was some explanation for it that i don't recall. it was basically negligible though.

im curious, why is FB off the list for man and zone? frankly, with press getting shafted by the random nature of recruiting and with folks moving away from it, FB should a big deal right now. most championship caliber teams playing man would gain a leg up on the competition with FB, as truly elite man defense teams are almost always best paired with FB.

if i was going to come back, i'd probably give FB/zone another try. teams were too deep for me to be really successful with it in d1 in terms of championships (but getting 1-2 seeds was easy), but i could see the potential. the zone makes it easy to cope with recruiting misses which should be a huge benefit right now, and fastbreak helps offset (about half way) the ceiling placed on how great zone teams can be (zone can't utilize superior depth). and really, zone is only handicapped in top 10 play or so, and more like top 3 if you pair it with FB, so its perfectly suitable for most folks.

truly, fb/zone should be a hot ticket right now - with so many man teams, there has to be an over-prioritization on ath/def type players. there was before all the recruiting changes, its got to be a bloodbath for those types now, right? with fb/zone, you can turn that to your advantage, using speed at guard and sb for bigs to half-way offset having a little bit lower ath/def, and then being able to really power up your offense, rebounding, and passing/ball handling. what you'll gain in those other categories will more than make up for the hit on defense. anybody but serious national championship contenders, where defense is of the utmost importance and where zone will fail to utilize the superior depth, would be well served by fb/zone - once they got the hang of it - and i think it should be viable for championship play with the new recruiting as well.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/8/2019 12:14:00 AM (view original):
im curious, why is FB off the list for man and zone? frankly, with press getting shafted by the random nature of recruiting and with folks moving away from it, FB should a big deal right now. most championship caliber teams playing man would gain a leg up on the competition with FB, as truly elite man defense teams are almost always best paired with FB.

if i was going to come back, i'd probably give FB/zone another try. teams were too deep for me to be really successful with it in d1 in terms of championships (but getting 1-2 seeds was easy), but i could see the potential. the zone makes it easy to cope with recruiting misses which should be a huge benefit right now, and fastbreak helps offset (about half way) the ceiling placed on how great zone teams can be (zone can't utilize superior depth). and really, zone is only handicapped in top 10 play or so, and more like top 3 if you pair it with FB, so its perfectly suitable for most folks.

truly, fb/zone should be a hot ticket right now - with so many man teams, there has to be an over-prioritization on ath/def type players. there was before all the recruiting changes, its got to be a bloodbath for those types now, right? with fb/zone, you can turn that to your advantage, using speed at guard and sb for bigs to half-way offset having a little bit lower ath/def, and then being able to really power up your offense, rebounding, and passing/ball handling. what you'll gain in those other categories will more than make up for the hit on defense. anybody but serious national championship contenders, where defense is of the utmost importance and where zone will fail to utilize the superior depth, would be well served by fb/zone - once they got the hang of it - and i think it should be viable for championship play with the new recruiting as well.

What about Triangle and Zone?

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/8/2019 12:14:00 AM (view original):
im curious, why is FB off the list for man and zone? frankly, with press getting shafted by the random nature of recruiting and with folks moving away from it, FB should a big deal right now. most championship caliber teams playing man would gain a leg up on the competition with FB, as truly elite man defense teams are almost always best paired with FB.

if i was going to come back, i'd probably give FB/zone another try. teams were too deep for me to be really successful with it in d1 in terms of championships (but getting 1-2 seeds was easy), but i could see the potential. the zone makes it easy to cope with recruiting misses which should be a huge benefit right now, and fastbreak helps offset (about half way) the ceiling placed on how great zone teams can be (zone can't utilize superior depth). and really, zone is only handicapped in top 10 play or so, and more like top 3 if you pair it with FB, so its perfectly suitable for most folks.

truly, fb/zone should be a hot ticket right now - with so many man teams, there has to be an over-prioritization on ath/def type players. there was before all the recruiting changes, its got to be a bloodbath for those types now, right? with fb/zone, you can turn that to your advantage, using speed at guard and sb for bigs to half-way offset having a little bit lower ath/def, and then being able to really power up your offense, rebounding, and passing/ball handling. what you'll gain in those other categories will more than make up for the hit on defense. anybody but serious national championship contenders, where defense is of the utmost importance and where zone will fail to utilize the superior depth, would be well served by fb/zone - once they got the hang of it - and i think it should be viable for championship play with the new recruiting as well.

The poll stops you at 10, and there are 12 basic pairs (leaving combo defenses aside) so I had to leave a couple off. I suspect Triangle-press and FB-man are more common than than FB-zone. I hoped to capture them with the “other” category, but so far no one has named them.

I’m surprised at how low flex-zone and flex overall is.

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/8/2019 12:14:00 AM (view original):
im curious, why is FB off the list for man and zone? frankly, with press getting shafted by the random nature of recruiting and with folks moving away from it, FB should a big deal right now. most championship caliber teams playing man would gain a leg up on the competition with FB, as truly elite man defense teams are almost always best paired with FB.

if i was going to come back, i'd probably give FB/zone another try. teams were too deep for me to be really successful with it in d1 in terms of championships (but getting 1-2 seeds was easy), but i could see the potential. the zone makes it easy to cope with recruiting misses which should be a huge benefit right now, and fastbreak helps offset (about half way) the ceiling placed on how great zone teams can be (zone can't utilize superior depth). and really, zone is only handicapped in top 10 play or so, and more like top 3 if you pair it with FB, so its perfectly suitable for most folks.

truly, fb/zone should be a hot ticket right now - with so many man teams, there has to be an over-prioritization on ath/def type players. there was before all the recruiting changes, its got to be a bloodbath for those types now, right? with fb/zone, you can turn that to your advantage, using speed at guard and sb for bigs to half-way offset having a little bit lower ath/def, and then being able to really power up your offense, rebounding, and passing/ball handling. what you'll gain in those other categories will more than make up for the hit on defense. anybody but serious national championship contenders, where defense is of the utmost importance and where zone will fail to utilize the superior depth, would be well served by fb/zone - once they got the hang of it - and i think it should be viable for championship play with the new recruiting as well.

"Random nature of recruiting"? What do you mean?

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/7/2019 11:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by drichar138 on 3/7/2019 10:19:00 AM (view original):

Posted by robinsmd on 3/7/2019 9:23:00 AM (view original):
Do players learn an offense/defense quicker when playing it in games vs. just practicing it? For example, when switching a team to a new offense/defense, obviously you will switch the practice minutes to the new O/D, however do you typically leave the O/D played in games for that season as the old O/D since the IQ ratings will be much higher? This is what I've done in the past, but have never really thought about if I'm missing out on more IQ boost by not initially playing that O/D in games.

it is all practice time based. playing time is not a factor.

for some reason, i don't think this is correct, but my memory is fuzzy. i suspect if you run triangle all season, practicing 0 minutes of it, all your F players who play will end the year D-. i think there's something goofy about it, something like it comes from playing against teams who play triangle, not your playing of triangle, or something dumb like that. long story short, i feel like we saw players go from F to D- without practice and there was some explanation for it that i don't recall. it was basically negligible though.

No, this is a glitch,bug, whatever, that Seble couldn't explain. But it had no correlation to the teams you were playing against.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/8/2019 7:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by gillispie1 on 3/8/2019 12:14:00 AM (view original):
im curious, why is FB off the list for man and zone? frankly, with press getting shafted by the random nature of recruiting and with folks moving away from it, FB should a big deal right now. most championship caliber teams playing man would gain a leg up on the competition with FB, as truly elite man defense teams are almost always best paired with FB.

if i was going to come back, i'd probably give FB/zone another try. teams were too deep for me to be really successful with it in d1 in terms of championships (but getting 1-2 seeds was easy), but i could see the potential. the zone makes it easy to cope with recruiting misses which should be a huge benefit right now, and fastbreak helps offset (about half way) the ceiling placed on how great zone teams can be (zone can't utilize superior depth). and really, zone is only handicapped in top 10 play or so, and more like top 3 if you pair it with FB, so its perfectly suitable for most folks.

truly, fb/zone should be a hot ticket right now - with so many man teams, there has to be an over-prioritization on ath/def type players. there was before all the recruiting changes, its got to be a bloodbath for those types now, right? with fb/zone, you can turn that to your advantage, using speed at guard and sb for bigs to half-way offset having a little bit lower ath/def, and then being able to really power up your offense, rebounding, and passing/ball handling. what you'll gain in those other categories will more than make up for the hit on defense. anybody but serious national championship contenders, where defense is of the utmost importance and where zone will fail to utilize the superior depth, would be well served by fb/zone - once they got the hang of it - and i think it should be viable for championship play with the new recruiting as well.

The poll stops you at 10, and there are 12 basic pairs (leaving combo defenses aside) so I had to leave a couple off. I suspect Triangle-press and FB-man are more common than than FB-zone. I hoped to capture them with the “other” category, but so far no one has named them.

I’m surprised at how low flex-zone and flex overall is.

Two of my four teams are running flex/zone. It is my current year's experiment.

I add the HCP, but the Flex-3-2 combo is my clear favorite to coach right now.