Inside the SFA Coaches' Minds - Scheme to Players OR Players to Scheme

[Nittany Boiler]

by Nittany Boiler

 

A new weekly-ish feature to invoke some thoughts, insights and maybe roll some marbles inside the minds of the Sim Football Association coaches. With every act, remark, and success or failure under constant scrutiny from the media and fans, SFA coaches must be either crazy, competitive or both. There should be a general agreement that what is required is the ability to learn and evolve especially in the inaugural season. Who shall emerge as the preeminent minds in SFA?

 

Today's Topic:

Scheme to Players OR Players to Scheme

 

Recruiting has begun for Season 2 and the future. The makeup of the teams for Season 1 was determined through a snake-type draft with picks based upon assigned on strengths. From Developmental Diary #1: First, buckets were used to initially distribute players to teams for the first season. As such, a way was needed to make sure teams that were randomly assigned as "better" got better croots reliably without making landscape too bare for "lesser" teams. So the "bucket" method was used. There were 5 assigned buckets, each holding 25 teams (except #5, that one holds 30) for all 130 FBS teams. The buckets were ordered such that the top 25 teams from the semi-random list were in bucket 1, and the 26-50 teams were in bucket 2, etc.

 

Then a recruiting class of ~5000 players was generated. This is where the buckets came in. An order was developed that made sure that all teams in one bucket would pick players before any teams in the next bucket. It didn't just go bucket 1, bucket 2, bucket 3, etc. Something was needed that allowed for more granularity. Eventually, the following order for buckets was used : 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5. This means that each team got 4 picks within a "round" and each year had 6 rounds (resulting in 24 players a year for 96 players for initial teams).

 

No player assignments were made with regards to "Scheme". So how will it work inside the minds of the SFA coaches as they recruit the inaugural players for Season 2 and beyond? How will scheme to players OR players to schemes recruiting be used as a strategy in the future?

 

Scheme Players

 

Let's think about it, coaches. The Scheme combinations are literally endless as a myriad of traditional football strategies are mixed with the Archetypes of the different player positions.

 

Let's start broadly:

Offensive Emphasis, Defensive Emphasis

Offensive: Running Emphasis, Passing Emphasis

Power Running, Speed Running, Short/ West Coast Passing, Speed Passing, Vertical Passing Game, O-Line Strength

 

Defensive: 4-3 Base, 3-4 Base

D-Line Strength, Blitzing Defense, Speed Defense, Power Defense, Zone Defense, Man-to-Man Defense, Combo Defense

 

Many of these choices for Season 1 were dictated by the players on the your team's roster. Think of it as taking over a college team as new coach. Do you implement your preferred scheme immediately with the players that you have or do you recruit over the next few season to implement your scheme? If recruiting, what is the projected planning for timing for the transition of scheme - is it 1, 2, 3 or 4 seasons (at the most)? In this transition, what would the won loss record expectations and successes be? Or is a more fluid strategy best, fielding your best 24 players each season and adopting the best football scheme to fit them each year?

Could the hot seat be avoided and the fan base patient enough to see a multi season transition through?

 

Player Archetypes:

Offense

QB: Scrambler / Pocket / Balanced / Field General

RB: Speed / Power / Balanced / Receiving

FB: Blocking / Rushing / Receiving / Balanced

WR: Possession / Route Runner / Speed / Red Zone

TE: Receiving / Blocking / Vertical Threat

OT and OG: Pass Blocking / Run Blocking / Balanced

OC: Pass Blocking / Run Blocking / Balanced / Line Captain

 

Defense

DE: Speed Rusher / Run Stopper / Balanced

DT: Nose Tackle / Pass Rusher / Balanced

OLB: Pass Rush / Coverage / Speed / Run Stopper

ILB: Field General / Coverage / Speed / Run Stopper

CB: Man Coverage / Zone Coverage / Ball Hawk

FS and SS: Man Coverage / Zone Coverage / Ball Hawk / Run Stopper

 

Are you going speed LB or power LB?

 

 

The first observation that must be made is that player archetypes are not mutually exclusive. Each player archetype has strengths and weaknesses. Teams should be built to maximize the players strengths through scheme or through recruiting the player strengths that best fits the team or the player position groupings. It also determines the roster make-up - no need for 8 ILBs while running a 4-3 Defense or 8 DTs in a 3-4 Defense. Many teams will be adjusting their roster make-up and position group size as they determine their best scheme, at the very least on the defense side of the ball, over the next few seasons.

 

 

The defense side is more obvious and probably dictates a quicker coach commitment to scheme - 4-3 defense or a 4-3 defense. This most impacts the DT and ILB position recruiting for numbers and for best archetypes (Ex. DT Nose Tackle for 3-4 Defense). A defense commitment to Man vs. Zone impacts the secondary positions (CB, FS and SS).

 

On offense, the broader commitment to a run emphasis or pass emphasis impacts the Offensive Line and accentuates the skills players and their archetypes. Some teams will find little or no need for FBs or TEs but needing a stable of WRs or OTs for development.

 

Special teams

K / P: Power/ Accuracy/ Balanced

This is not even to mention the interesting argument of Kickers and Punters: Accuracy vs. Power vs. Balance. Which is best?

 

Backing up once more, we have found that recruiting is cut throat and the recruiting points are not enough to address all needs equally and to pursue stars at every position. I would expect many coaches making the conscience decisions to recruit offense first over defense or the opposite and then emphasizing or addressing weaknesses in particular position groups (upgrading QBs, Receivers, O-Lines, Secondaries and Special Teams) while diving deeper to select archetypes of particularly QBs, FBs, TEs, DT, and ILBs to fit the preferred scheme or going with the "Best player available" approach.

Discussion:

What works best for you? What are your plans for the scheme and recruiting interaction?

How did you determine your best 24 players for Season 1 and how did you determine your offensive and defensive schemes?

Are schemes an annual each season decision or a long term strategy?

"Inside the SFA Coaches' Minds" asks is this a planned step and deliberate coach thought in a season's strategy or let it flow as it happens?

Or is this overthinking the interaction of scheme and recruiting ?

What is your plan for this year's recruiting and next season's scheme?

 

Thank you for looking inside the minds of the SFA coaches!

 

Edited July 16, 2021 by Nittany Boiler

[kgreene829]

I got lucky that my generated players matched the scheme that I wanted to run so I was able to gameplan the way I wanted to and recruit the players that would fit the scheme I like without having to go through a transition. I feel like the concept of transitioning schemes is very interesting and is not something I thought about since I did not have to even think about changing schemes. It will be interesting to see how the next couple of seasons go and to see how much of a difference there is between teams shifting to a new scheme and teams making no changes to their general gameplan. I really like how these write-ups go into the different strategies that people can take. It really makes you aware that this game could be played in a million different ways and is also helping me define my strategy going forward. Great work I look forward to the next addition.