Am I the only EF coach who dislike this rule?

Some tournaments and leagues have a rule where you can use two figures on the defense of line. In other words, you do not have to cover all the blockers. Now you have blockers just running down the field and a LOT of guys coming from both sides of the 5 blockers.

Am I crying? If you feel this way, then you do not see my point. I am going to do a poll to get an idea what people think about this rule. My local league has this rule and I will have to play by it.

I have not played EF for over a year and I thought people where trying to put rules in to make this game as close to a real football game. I know we can never make it just like a real football game. But some rules we have helps.

Example, is how we turn our defense players at the WR, when the WR catches the ball. We do this, because these figures do not know to turn around and go after the figure with the ball.

I look at this the same way with my blockers. If no figure is in front or at the corner of my blocker, how does my blocker know to go block a LB or another player.

Yeah, you can put on ITZ dials and make them go side ways. But you are just guessing where to make your blockers go and hope they will block someone.

I never heard of a real football game just having TWO defensive of line men on the line. I heard of a Three - Four defense. That is cool to do.

This rule to me, does not seem to go in the dirrection of making this game like a real football game.

I know everyone has their own rules on playing this game. I am not trying to say who rules are better. This question is more focus on me finding out if I am the ONLY EF COACH that dislikes this rule.

Now for my poll question. Do you like, dislike or not sure about this rule?

[TVsCHACHI]

I thought under certain circumstances a defense may set up a 2-5-4, or even a 1-5-5 formation (see Professor LeBeau ).

TV, is your LB 5 - 10 yards back in FRONT of my blocker to run right at him? If so, then that is fine. But if your LB is no where behind your d-line and letting that blocker go, then that is wrong in my eyes.

Lets not let this get out of hand. Focuse more on covering all the players is all I am asking.

I know not everyone will agree on this rule. I am just keeping this simple to see what people think about NOT covering all the offense players.

Tony

Mr Michigan,

I agree, I don't like this rule. It's probably put in place to stop those pass happy teams?

Also, the Giants used a two man fron against the Bills in the Super Bowl

Wally

[FORU2HATE]

Sounds like you would need a stronger O-line. i see nothing wrong with the rule I dare someone to play a two man line in our league with front of the base tackling them LB better be like lighting comming around them corners or esle my rb is to the house

[mantaraydre]

MICH


It's not a rule it's part of football strategy, their are teams with def sets that run only 2 lineman. The patriots ran a def scheme with NO lineman !

look at some dime packages and notice who is on the field. remember defenses have schemes galore. In the nfl the def players can line up wherever they want on their side of the ball. All out blitz packages warrant dif personnel on the field at any given time. If you see just 2 run a trap or draw down the pike. One thing i push for is letting us play like the nfl, some rules force you to have running backs on off plays, WHY ? If i call a play with no backs in the backfield why cant i carry it out. IF THEY DO IT IN THE NFL TAKE OFF THE HANDCUFFS AND LETS US PLAY EF LIKE THEM !

THAT'S WHY I LOVE THE SEA WALL BRAWL RULES !!!!!!!!


BROADWAY-DRE

OK, real football has two D-Line men. But my point is about EF players knowing what to do when a player is not covering him.

Anyway, 6 people did the poll so far and 4 dislike and 2 like. Now I know that I am NOT the only person who dislikes this rule.

Thank you guys.

Tony