NDL Forum

So last season I ran a nearly all no-huddle spread option offense a la Oregon or Nevada to rave reviews. I was just informed however that this is an illegal style as per the rules. Any chance it can be reviewed?

Uuaww wrote:So last season I ran a nearly all no-huddle spread option offense a la Oregon or Nevada to rave reviews. I was just informed however that this is an illegal style as per the rules. Any chance it can be reviewed?

I did it almost all of the first two seasons of NCAA12. Tell you opponent up front that you're running no huddle. If they get bitchy, then I probably wouldn't use it. I didn't run into any coach last year that cared or wouldn't let me do it.

The only reason it is listed as illegal is because people felt it took advantage of the defense. Once they went to allowing full access to the playbooks in no huddle situations last year, it relieved that advantage and became more like "reality".

I'm of the opinion now that nothing other than winning by more than 35 is illegal unless you're doing something to exploit a deficiency in the game. If you're just using the the things the game offers and you're doing so with a great deal of variety and realism then it is fine in my book.

Uuaww wrote:So last season I ran a nearly all no-huddle spread option offense a la Oregon or Nevada to rave reviews. I was just informed however that this is an illegal style as per the rules. Any chance it can be reviewed?

I played you last night and had a blast vs this offense. I played Dak last year who ran the same offense. It was actually a breath of fresh air.

I know I only speak for myself but if we played you could run it against me anytime!

buckeye76 wrote:

Uuaww wrote:So last season I ran a nearly all no-huddle spread option offense a la Oregon or Nevada to rave reviews. I was just informed however that this is an illegal style as per the rules. Any chance it can be reviewed?

I played you last night and had a blast vs this offense. I played Dak last year who ran the same offense. It was actually a breath of fresh air.

I think that was an exact quote from my coaches review when I played Tulane.

No different than some running the play clock under 5 seconds every snap...

cougnix wrote:No different than some running the play clock under 5 seconds every snap...

Really?

The only thing accomplished in running the play clock under 5 seconds is wasting time in an effort to shorten the game to increase the odds of winning. It requires no skill, no thinking, and its sole objective is to win, which we shouldn't be about here.

cougnix wrote:No different than some running the play clock under 5 seconds every snap...

Running the playclock down under :05 every snap is a million bajillion times worse.

Lets try not to turn this thread into a big bitch session please. If someone your playing is running the clock under 5 secs everytime, pause the game and shoot them a message. If that dont work there are coaching reports.

We'll take a look at the no huddle rule.

shel311 wrote:

cougnix wrote:No different than some running the play clock under 5 seconds every snap...

Running the playclock down under :05 every snap is a million bajillion times worse.

agreed.

I don't see anything against it because the defense can choose any play. In Madden I'd be pissed cuz im stuck in the same everything.

I wanna scrim you so I can experience this.

dakshdar wrote: I'm of the opinion now that nothing other than winning by more than 35 is illegal unless you're doing something to exploit a deficiency in the game. If you're just using the the things the game offers and you're doing so with a great deal of variety and realism then it is fine in my book.

shel311 wrote:

cougnix wrote:No different than some running the play clock under 5 seconds every snap...

Running the playclock down under :05 every snap is a million bajillion times worse.

I do that often (not on purpose, mind you) and it is one of the top complaints I get in the reports. I don't think I get docked for it but I see a lot of "I wish he would snap the ball sooner" type of comments.

I run the clock down... when teams keep moving their defense.

Something I learned early on with NCAA... I won't hike the ball until the defense is done screwing around. With the way that the LBs like to waddle up to the gap between the linemen, it will distort the AI. If you wait, you magically block better.

wouldnt runnin no huddle and running the clock down be...complete opposites?

Would you guys have a problem with someone running this that isn't spread but could jump into shotgun? Keep in mind I would use legal players in their legal positions.

ReignOnU wrote:I run the clock down... when teams keep moving their defense.

Something I learned early on with NCAA... I won't hike the ball until the defense is done screwing around. With the way that the LBs like to waddle up to the gap between the linemen, it will distort the AI. If you wait, you magically block better.

This is 100% true. If you snap the ball when the defense is moving it completely screws up the blocking AI. I always wait until the defense is set before snapping.

Also, I have no problem with the no huddle as well. The more offensive variations the better imo.

packsyD22 wrote:Would you guys have a problem with someone running this that isn't spread but could jump into shotgun? Keep in mind I would use legal players in their legal positions.

I have no problem with it personally as long as the person isn't audibiling down. I love those offenses where you will see a TE with his hand in the dirt on one play then split out wide on the next.

razorback44 wrote:

packsyD22 wrote:Would you guys have a problem with someone running this that isn't spread but could jump into shotgun? Keep in mind I would use legal players in their legal positions.

I have no problem with it personally as long as the person isn't audibiling down. I love those offenses where you will see a TE with his hand in the dirt on one play then split out wide on the next.

You mean by directly aubibling right? There are formations that purposely have the TE split wide. Or are those formations banned? I need to review the rules apparently lol

Sorocco88 wrote:

razorback44 wrote:

packsyD22 wrote:Would you guys have a problem with someone running this that isn't spread but could jump into shotgun? Keep in mind I would use legal players in their legal positions.

I have no problem with it personally as long as the person isn't audibiling down. I love those offenses where you will see a TE with his hand in the dirt on one play then split out wide on the next.

You mean by directly aubibling right? There are formations that purposely have the TE split wide. Or are those formations banned? I need to review the rules apparently lol

Sorry what I meant was coming out in 4WR on your original play then no huddling and then audibiling down to a power formation like Ace Big so your WR's are at TE now.

razorback44 wrote:

Sorocco88 wrote:

razorback44 wrote:

packsyD22 wrote:Would you guys have a problem with someone running this that isn't spread but could jump into shotgun? Keep in mind I would use legal players in their legal positions.

I have no problem with it personally as long as the person isn't audibiling down. I love those offenses where you will see a TE with his hand in the dirt on one play then split out wide on the next.

You mean by directly aubibling right? There are formations that purposely have the TE split wide. Or are those formations banned? I need to review the rules apparently lol

Sorry what I meant was coming out in 4WR on your original play then no huddling and then audibiling down to a power formation like Ace Big so your WR's are at TE now.

OH! Yeah... that's super garbage.