So normally my teams CBs play medium coverage. Today we were matched against the best team in the league that we had no chance to beat so I decided to try close coverage. To my suprise my CB only gave up two catches(one to a WR 6 levels higher and another to a WR 11 levels higher). He didnt even get beat deep on them. Would you guys suggest that all CBs play this way? Or do you have to be really fast for it to work?(my cb has 52 speed). Post your ideas here
xyakks
offline
offline
I always play it close. Not much of an interception threat but I shut down my man most weeks.
Circles
offline
offline
Close/aggressive is the way to go. I rarely give up catches and have alot of ints this season. Super vision helps alot with picks. I only have about 50 speed too btw.
wickster33
offline
offline
I've heard that close is better for shutting down a receiver while medium is better for getting interceptions
brock86
offline
offline
Close/Aggressive is where it's at now. Though if the AI changes go through for next season, you'll want to vary between Close and Medium distances, depending on the opposition.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
Tothehouse
offline
offline
Originally posted by brock86
Close/Aggressive is where it's at now. Though if the AI changes go through for next season, you'll want to vary between Close and Medium distances, depending on the opposition.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
What if you had exceptionally high vision and closing speed? Even if you were man to man on medium I would think you could make up ground quickly for PD's and possibly INTs.
Close/Aggressive is where it's at now. Though if the AI changes go through for next season, you'll want to vary between Close and Medium distances, depending on the opposition.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
What if you had exceptionally high vision and closing speed? Even if you were man to man on medium I would think you could make up ground quickly for PD's and possibly INTs.
Originally posted by Tothehouse
Originally posted by brock86
Close/Aggressive is where it's at now. Though if the AI changes go through for next season, you'll want to vary between Close and Medium distances, depending on the opposition.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
What if you had exceptionally high vision and closing speed? Even if you were man to man on medium I would think you could make up ground quickly for PD's and possibly INTs.
Too much of a gamble...why not play close coverage and stick to your man the whole time?
Originally posted by brock86
Close/Aggressive is where it's at now. Though if the AI changes go through for next season, you'll want to vary between Close and Medium distances, depending on the opposition.
Medium does have some advantages. It's better against running plays - you're further back and thus a lot less likely to get blocked by the WR. It's great against long passes too, when you've got plenty of time to see it coming and close the distance. But if you use it against a team who throws a lot of ~10 yarders, you'll get absolutely destroyed.
What if you had exceptionally high vision and closing speed? Even if you were man to man on medium I would think you could make up ground quickly for PD's and possibly INTs.
Too much of a gamble...why not play close coverage and stick to your man the whole time?
Ahrens858
offline
offline
I played close last game and gave up 0 catches, of course WR was 3 lvls lower then me lol
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
