Besides higher volatility players the only early big bust were "smaller supposed faster players"

That's is how much we rely on the speed rating....you thought they would be 90 speed but they are 70. Does that make them bad? Yes cause the code favors speed. Simple as that. We don't gamble on oline....one of my targets J.Gray fell to the middle 4th. 100 speed was overlooked there.

It's the engine...not the draft....still I am in agreement that speed kills

I wish I did do that for this very reason. Wasn't expecting such a big surprise

The elite TEs falling are a sign of how often TEs are overlooked because they are non-factors unless you specifically build an offense around them. (But mostly I'm jealous that I missed the elite TEs because I needed secondary more.)


I was curious how big the range was on the players SP and AC. That would have scared me off on a DB in the first round.

Your right alot of TES were ignored .

Also, if speed didn't matter so much it wouldn't matter. One thing that was the same was that most of the fast small players were gone. Even with a range of 40 ....the 0 to 40 speed DBS were the only ones left.

We need fast player but I think we need technical rating to out weigh that overall effectiveness of static ratings . In 75 I let up a sack to 6 foot 234 pound DE with no pass rush skills. My QB has great mobility but that end beat my 77/100 pass block tackle in less that 2 seconds.

It's the same game with a smaller exploitable range. No body gambles on speed in the nfl.......they know the 40 time........it's the lack of technical skills with that speed it that what makes a player not effective . Here a 33 speed DB will get beat no matter the defense you put him in. If you target him enough.

This goes back to the range of speed is too large . There is no business of a 30 speed DB being here anyway. I would rather other rating matter even more. Same goes for strength .

In the elite leagues allocation there were 8 pages of 100 speed players....after 16 rounds at least half of them were already drafted. Most were defenders or skill positions .

For this reason, I'll most likely never make another 1st round pick (or even 1-4) as long as this feature is still around.

The "From Start" changes shown in the detail tab of the player card should use the pre-TC values (when they were still obfuscated).

If a player was 80/100 before TC, and 43/82 after, the card should show -18 as the change for their "future" rating, not +0 (for example).

Gaming the ratings post draft is the same reason they were obfuscated in the first place . The game code is the problem not how hard or easy it is to draft. This just shows how much we rely on the numbers/gaming and not actual football.

I have no idea what that means.

I want a league with real time combine scores . Ones actually performed by the individual entities themselves and timed in real time. That is all I need to build a contender .

No gm would be able to see the actual ratings until the player retires, in which then and only then you could see thier rating in thier prime .

Alot more focus would be on the code and how it may resemble real football. The range of skills to be successful would end up being better suited for a scale from 0 to 100. Not what we play now where most skills in order to win have a range of say 30 .

Like, Anyone below a 70 is a back up and will not be selected until the 4 th round. Unless of course there is a code flaw that allows these players to be successful .

Regarding players already on your roster, I don't understand why it makes sense for you to not know how fast/strong/accurate a player is until after they retire.

As for the draft pool, currently we have no way to actually "scout" players to get an idea of how we think they will play, other than the attribute scores. Now, even that is not an option.

We can't watch practice or even have a scrimmage. Even if we could it wouldn't tell us anything about a player because we don't know how much of what happened was based on the dice roll, or play knowledge, or the opponent, or fatigue, or because attributes that should matter don't, etc.

I know of lot of this game is based on random dice rolls (too much imo), but now one of the most important parts of building a good team has been given over to nearly complete luck.

IRL coaches/scouts can tell most of these things pretty easily.

"This guy is fast! I know because I have seen him run (or at least know his 40 time)."
There's no guessing about whether a player is fast or not. He is or he isn't.

"This guy is strong! I know because I've seen him lift weights, not to mention the way he pushes players all over the field on the game tape."
There's no guessing about this either. Strength doesn't make him a good/great player, but it's not subjective as to whether he is strong or not.

"This guy can't hold on to the ball. I know because he fumbles once out of every 10 times he touched the ball in college."
I've never understood why EVERYBODY comes into the league having to learn how to hold onto the ball.


I'm not opposed to changing the draft system in a way that would make it better, but in my opinion this is not it.

At least the old way you had a reasonable expectation of how you think a player might turn out if the dice rolls went in your favor. Those expectations might not be met, or they may be surpassed (volatility factor).

Now, you don't have enough information to even have a good expectation of what to hope for.

In addition, I think the whole purpose of this was to make it so that you would actually be able to find some good, starter quality players in the back end of the draft. I do not think that happened.

Instead of making all of the player attributes super random in the hope that people will be too scared to draft someone until round 5 or later, there should be more emphasis put on the chances a player might boom.

Maybe it would be as simple as adding code to say if a player is drafted in round 5 or later (or not drafted at all), the chances of him booming increase by X %.