How long has this play been missing from the playbook?
http://goallineblitz.com/images/plays/20.gif
Or am I missing something...
http://goallineblitz.com/images/plays/20.gif
Or am I missing something...
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > Missing Play?
Redass Ranch
offline
offline
never existed... believe it was one of those "suggested" from the late teen seasons
nakedpanic
offline
offline
Funny how the gif is still in the plays folder. It's the same play as flares, but the backs go opposite directions. I think this play was called FLATS.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by nakedpanic
Funny how the gif is still in the plays folder. It's the same play as flares, but the backs go opposite directions. I think this play was called FLATS.
Its not the same play. It is a completely different formation. But that play/formation never existed.
Funny how the gif is still in the plays folder. It's the same play as flares, but the backs go opposite directions. I think this play was called FLATS.
Its not the same play. It is a completely different formation. But that play/formation never existed.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
That's the one remaining formation I'd like to see added.
From an offense standpoint I was really looking forward to some of the formations catch was trying to implement purely for better use of rushing FB's. But from a defense standpoint it would really suck.
That's the one remaining formation I'd like to see added.
From an offense standpoint I was really looking forward to some of the formations catch was trying to implement purely for better use of rushing FB's. But from a defense standpoint it would really suck.
ateam1026
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
That's the one remaining formation I'd like to see added.
That's the one remaining formation I'd like to see added.
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
From an offense standpoint I was really looking forward to some of the formations catch was trying to implement purely for better use of rushing FB's. But from a defense standpoint it would really suck.
Yeah, you couldn't have those formations with multiple FBs. Whoever suggested that either hadn't DCed or did so badly.
From an offense standpoint I was really looking forward to some of the formations catch was trying to implement purely for better use of rushing FB's. But from a defense standpoint it would really suck.
Yeah, you couldn't have those formations with multiple FBs. Whoever suggested that either hadn't DCed or did so badly.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
Yeah, you couldn't have those formations with multiple FBs. Whoever suggested that either hadn't DCed or did so badly.
Wasn't a suggestion. Catch just asked me about what formations I would be interested in seeing and the only ones I wanted to see was a Shotgun with 2 HB's (coulda been a FB/HB) and pistol. But then after thinking more about the pistol I don't think it would be very entertaining without the option type stuff. The rest of the formations he just came to me and asked me to draw plays for.
Yeah, you couldn't have those formations with multiple FBs. Whoever suggested that either hadn't DCed or did so badly.
Wasn't a suggestion. Catch just asked me about what formations I would be interested in seeing and the only ones I wanted to see was a Shotgun with 2 HB's (coulda been a FB/HB) and pistol. But then after thinking more about the pistol I don't think it would be very entertaining without the option type stuff. The rest of the formations he just came to me and asked me to draw plays for.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
