Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Bane
Is illegal


Nope. Trips Right is NOT illegal.

However... it would mean that the LOT was an eligible receiver, while either the TE or one of the WRs would end up becoming an interior lineman and would become ineligible -- and any passes to them would be illegal.

The formation itself, however, would not be illegal. It would be problematic though, of course, but it would also mean I could finally fulfill my dream of building a receiving OT.

Of course, this could be fixed by flipping the TE to the left side of the line, but then Trips Right would be nothing more than a mirror-image of Trips Left, so then what's the point? Might as well do mirror-image versions of every other formation too.

Trips Right means nothing more than 3 Receivers on the right side.


Most Trips formations come with no TE anyways, and usually come from an empty set.

Trips right could also be

WR--------------------LOT-G-C-G-ROT-TE------WR-------WR
-----------------------------------Q

----------------------------------RB


or


WR---WR-----------------LOT-G-C-G-ROT------WR-------WR---WR

----------------------------------------Q


or


WR-----------------------LOT-G-C-G-ROT-----------WR------WR-----WR

--------------------------------------Q--RB


So on and so forth.


Why you people feel the need to have a TE being the limiting factor for an actual formation is stupid.

Originally posted by Novus
Might as well do mirror-image versions of every other formation too.

As a DC, this is a nightmare proposal.

Originally posted by Uncle Si

Trips right could also be

WR--------------------LOT-G-C-G-ROT-TE------WR-------WR
-----------------------------------Q

----------------------------------RB


False. This is simply a singleback set.

I do agree. Trips does not rely on a TE. In GLB, though, it does. In GLB terms Trips Right could be created by flipping the TE to the left side. That could affect the Strong/Weak dynamic in the game which is what makes Trips Right hard to imagine in the current sim.

Originally posted by Uncle Si



WR---WR-----------------LOT-G-C-G-ROT------WR-------WR---WR

----------------------------------------Q



We already have this one.

Originally posted by Sugar Kapaa
There was a trips right too if I recall.

Maybe. I think Catch only said he was gonna pick a couple formations.

Originally posted by Novus
Nope. Trips Right is NOT illegal.

However... it would mean that the LOT was an eligible receiver, while either the TE or one of the WRs would end up becoming an interior lineman and would become ineligible -- and any passes to them would be illegal.

The formation itself, however, would not be illegal. It would be problematic though, of course, but it would also mean I could finally fulfill my dream of building a receiving OT.

Of course, this could be fixed by flipping the TE to the left side of the line, but then Trips Right would be nothing more than a mirror-image of Trips Left, so then what's the point? Might as well do mirror-image versions of every other formation too.

I don't get why you keep insisting about the OT receiver. The trips right is just a mirror to trips left. Which honestly I don't even find to be all that interesting in comparison to the other formations he was thinking about.

Originally posted by B1G
I thought 'Power I' was

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROG---------WR
----------------QB
-----------FB-FB
----------------HB

or

WR---------LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
-------------------------QB
-------------------------FB-FB
-------------------------HB


Can also be

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
----------------QB
----------------FB-FB
----------------HB

Which was what I made plays for.

Can we get some flexbone love? Could be done with 2TEs, 1TE/1WR, or 2 WRs, doesn't really matter.

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
---HB---------QB----------HB
----------------FB

Power I also can be this

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
----------------QB
----------------FB
----------------HB
----------------HB

Wing-T!

Originally posted by spindoctor02
Can we get some flexbone love? Could be done with 2TEs, 1TE/1WR, or 2 WRs, doesn't really matter.

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
---HB---------QB----------HB
----------------FB

I think the huge problem there is creating valid GLB rushing plays to those HB's.

Originally posted by joe
Power I also can be this

TE-LOT-LG-C-RG-ROT-TE
----------------QB
----------------FB
----------------HB
----------------HB





Isn't that Maryland formation?

Originally posted by bhall43
Isn't that Maryland formation?

or Stack-I

Originally posted by bhall43
Isn't that Maryland formation?

just another way to line up Power I with 2 HB and not 2 FB. Could split Ends out or not just have to be on the LOS is all but yall know that.

Hell there are tons of wacky formation this game should involve. Would get away from all the cookie cutter shit.. Just my opinion.