Proposal: Overhaul Outdated Defensive Depth Chart and Positional System

Current Problem: EA’s Misaligned Defensive Depth Charts and Player Assignments

EA’s current system for defensive player roles and depth charts in Madden and College Football video games leads to frequent mismatches in player assignments, particularly in CPU-controlled teams. As a result:

1. Incorrect Player Assignments Based on Scheme: Teams running a 3-4 scheme often have defensive ends with 4-3 body types and skill sets that don’t fit the role of a 3-4 defensive end, leading to mismatched and ineffective rosters. Similarly, 4-3 linebackers are routinely misused as 3-4 outside linebackers, a position that requires a completely different skill set, such as pass-rushing abilities and strength.

2. Misplaced Interior Defensive Linemen: Defensive tackles (DTs) who are best suited for 3-technique roles (gap-penetrating linemen) are miscast as nose tackles in 3-4 defenses, where they lack the strength and size to occupy blockers and hold the line of scrimmage. Conversely, nose tackles with high strength and block shedding ratings are misplaced as 3-tech DTs, a role that requires quickness and pass-rushing skills.

3. Inaccurate Development Pathways and Player Acquisition: The current system does not differentiate between role-specific skill sets within the same position group. This results in players being developed ineffectively or signed by CPU teams that run schemes ill-suited to the players’ abilities.

These issues lead to underperforming players, unrealistic gameplay, and poor roster construction, disrupting both user experience and CPU management.

Proposed Solution: Implement a Position-Based Depth Chart Interface and Role-Specific Position Terminology

To solve these issues, EA should introduce a new depth chart and player management system that focuses on scheme-specific positions and role-based player assignments. This proposal includes:

1. Create a Position-Based Depth Chart Interface:

The new interface should include dedicated sections for each level of the defense (Defensive Line, Linebackers, Secondary) and allow for the assignment of players based on their scheme and role within the scheme. This would:

• Separate Defensive Line Positions by Role: Differentiate between 3-4 defensive ends (5-technique DEs) and 4-3 DEs to ensure that CPU teams correctly assign and sign players based on scheme needs.

• Support Hybrid and Versatile Players: Include hybrid roles like LB/DE and LB/Safety hybrids to allow for more flexibility, ensuring teams that run 4-2-5, 3-3-5, or 3-2-6 schemes can incorporate players that fit unique sub-package positions.

2. Introduce New Positional Terminology to Reflect Scheme Diversity:

To ensure that players are correctly aligned to their roles, new positional terms should be introduced and associated with each scheme:

• Defensive Line Positions:

• 0-Technique Nose Tackle (0T): Positioned head-up on the center in 3-4 defenses, the 0-technique NT is responsible for controlling both A-gaps and occupying blockers to allow linebackers to make plays. This role demands high strength, block shedding, and tackling abilities.

• 1-Technique Defensive Tackle (1T): Positioned in the A-gap between the center and guard, typically in 4-3 schemes, focusing on stopping the run and occupying blockers.

• 3-Technique Defensive Tackle (3T): Positioned on the outside shoulder of the guard, primarily responsible for penetrating the backfield and disrupting plays, common in 4-3 defenses.

• 5-Technique Defensive End (5T): Positioned on the outside shoulder of the tackle in 3-4 defenses, serving as an anchor against the run and setting the edge.

• 7/9-Technique Defensive End: Positioned outside the tight end, these players are pass-rush specialists in 4-3 schemes, focusing on beating the offensive tackle around the edge.

• Linebacker Roles:

• SAM (Strong-Side Linebacker): Aligned on the strong side of the formation, often responsible for setting the edge and covering the tight end.

• WILL (Weak-Side Linebacker): Aligned on the weak side, often used to chase plays down from behind, requiring speed and coverage ability.

• MIKE (Middle Linebacker): The field general of the defense, responsible for calling plays and filling gaps.

• EDGE (Pass-Rushing OLB/DE Hybrid): A hybrid role for 3-4 OLBs or pass-rushing specialists who line up on the edge. These players must not only rush the passer and play the run but also have the quickness and agility to drop into coverage on zone blitzes, making them unique compared to traditional DEs or pass-rushers.

• Secondary Positions:

• Boundary Cornerback (BCB): Aligned on the shorter side of the field, focusing on physicality and run support.

• Field Cornerback (FCB): Aligned on the wider side of the field, often left on an island in coverage.

• Nickelback (NB): Slot cornerback who covers the slot receiver or tight end, often requiring quickness and versatility.

• Dimeback (DB): Fourth cornerback in six-DB packages.

• Free Safety (FS): Responsible for deep coverage and often the last line of defense.

• Strong Safety (SS): Positioned closer to the line of scrimmage, focusing on run support and covering tight ends.

3. Scheme-Specific Depth Chart Titles:

The depth chart should automatically adjust positional titles based on the team’s defensive scheme, ensuring that players are always aligned with their roles:

• 4-3 Defense Example:

• Defensive Line: LDE, 3T, 1T, RDE

• Linebackers: SAM, MIKE, WILL

• Secondary: BCB, FCB, FS, SS

• 3-4 Defense Example:

• Defensive Line: LDE (5T), NT (0T), RDE (5T)

• Linebackers: LOLB (EDGE), LILB, RILB, ROLB (EDGE)

• Secondary: BCB, FCB, FS, SS

4. Role-Based Player Acquisition and Development:

The CPU and user should be able to sign and develop players based on specific attributes that fit their designated role:

• Defensive Line Development: A 3-4 defensive end should focus on strength and block shedding, while a 4-3 end should prioritize finesse and power moves.

• Linebacker Development: Pass-rushing outside linebackers should develop edge skills like pass-rushing moves and pursuit, while coverage-based linebackers should focus on coverage and tackling.

• EDGE Hybrid Development: Hybrid EDGE players should focus on a combination of pass-rushing skills and coverage skills. This means developing quickness, agility, and awareness so that they can effectively drop into zone coverage on blitz packages and handle covering short zones against backs and tight ends. This unique combination of pass-rush, run-stopping, and coverage abilities makes them versatile and distinct from traditional pass-rushers.

5. Improved Draft and Free Agent Acquisition Logic:

CPU-controlled teams would now draft and sign players based on scheme fit and positional needs, ensuring:

• Teams running a 3-4 scheme won’t sign undersized defensive ends with low strength ratings, as they don’t fit the archetype of a 5-tech DE.

• 4-3 teams avoid signing or drafting nose tackles with skill sets that don’t align with a 3-tech role, leading to better roster construction.

6. Ratings Penalties for Scheme Misalignment:

To reinforce scheme fit and ensure realistic player usage, a scheme fit ratings penalty system would be implemented. When a player’s attributes do not match the role required by a particular scheme, the following adjustments would occur:

• Dynamic Ratings Adjustment: Players misaligned with their role (e.g., a 4-3 DE in a 3-4 5-tech role) would receive a ratings penalty. This penalty could reduce their effective overall rating, making it clear to users and the CPU that the player is not being utilized optimally.

• Depth Chart Display Integration: Ratings displayed in the depth chart would show a modified overall rating based on scheme fit. For example, a player rated 85 overall as a 4-3 DE might display as 75 overall when slotted into a 3-4 DE role.

7. Free Agency and Draft Ratings Based on Scheme Fit:

To enhance roster construction for both users and CPU teams, player ratings in free agency and the draft would dynamically change based on the scheme the team is running. For example:

• A 275-lb finesse DE in free agency would show as a lower-rated option for a 3-4 team, while a 300+ lb DE with strength and block shedding would show as a higher-rated fit.

• Teams running a 4-3 would see pass-rush oriented OLBs rated higher than their 3-4 EDGE counterparts, as their attributes match the scheme better.

8. Enhanced Formation and Auto-Sub Capabilities:

Integrate a system similar to Madden’s formation subs, where players are assigned to specific roles based on down, distance, and offensive personnel. This would include:

• Set-Specific Depth Charts: Different depth charts for base defense, nickel packages, dime packages, and goal-line situations.

• Matchup-Based Auto-Subs: Auto-subs that can swap in hybrid players or bring in run-stoppers versus pass-rushers, depending on the game situation.

Conclusion: Realistic Roster Management and Gameplay

Implementing this proposal would provide:

• Improved CPU Roster Management: Teams will sign, draft, and develop players who fit their scheme, leading to more competitive CPU teams and realistic gameplay.

• More Realistic Gameplay and Player Roles: Players will be utilized in roles that suit their skill sets, ensuring that their strengths are maximized.

• Dynamic Player Ratings and Acquisition: Ratings would adjust based on scheme fit, and CPU teams will make smarter decisions when acquiring and using players.

This proposed overhaul would elevate Madden and College Football titles by providing greater realism in roster management and making defensive strategy more authentic and engaging for both users and CPU teams.