Depth chart governance discussion

copied from discussion in Paydirt re WR at RB................

WRs at RB reduces the challenge of managing a roster, so does other things like the injury rate level. You could go with a roster of zero RBs, and all WRs for both positions and TE/FB. If you look at the avg's per carry, WRs with 80+ speed are just as good as RBs with same speed level. Not enough importantce, in the code/algorithm, is put on break tackle and ball carry vs speed. Until that happens, if it ever will, the only way to prevent abuse of WR at RB is to not allow it in the postion matrix and make roster management for RBs more of a simulation for those who prefer more of an NFL simulation. Conversion of WR to RB also does not happen very often in the NFL.
Google AI response: Converting a wide receiver to a running back in the NFL happens very rarely. Most permanent position switches occur in college or before entering the pros.

Not allowing more "rare" position conversions will place more importance on the draft, Early and Late FA periods, and trading, which in my opinion, is more of a simulation to RL NFL.

AI Overview Converting a tight end (TE) to an offensive lineman (OL) is very rare at the professional level. Most full-scale position switches happen during college or before a player enters the NFL. Doing so in the pros requires a massive body transformation—gaining 40 to 60+ pounds—while completely shifting from a pass-catching or hybrid skill mindset to interior line protection

Converting an offensive lineman (OL) to a tight end (TE) is extremely rare in the NFL. Most major position shifts happen during the college phase rather than at the professional level, and players almost always transition from tight end to offensive line (such as Jason Peters or Ben Bartch) rather than the reverse.


AI Overview
Permanent position conversions from tight end (TE) to fullback (FB) are rare in the modern NFL. Instead, teams frequently use tight ends temporarily as backfield blockers—often called "H-backs" or "sniffer" TEs—because most modern rosters do not employ a traditional, dedicated fullback

AI Overview Converting a cornerback (CB) to a safety (S) happens selectively rather than as a routine career path. While fans and analysts frequently suggest that aging cornerbacks move to safety when they lose speed, full mid-career or late-career position switches happen to only a small percentage of players.

AI Overview Converting a full-time cornerback (CB) to a linebacker (LB) is rare in the NFL because of a massive size gap. However, converting a safety (S) to a linebacker happens moderately often—usually as a part-time hybrid role to combat modern spread and pass-heavy offenses

So, there is the RL overview of position conversion in the NFL ..... VERY RARE, even when speed & weight are achievable. I watch a lot of NFL games on YT, and the use of a FB is minimal, if at all, the game has changed a lot since the days of Alstott and others.

AI Overview In today's NFL, a traditional fullback (FB) is used very rarely across the league as a whole, appearing on less than 5% to 10% of offensive snaps for most teams. While the dominant scheme relies on three wide receivers in 11 personnel, a select group of modern offenses still feature a specialist fullback or H-back heavily.

That means that the 2-1-2 and 2rb3wr is not used much, if at all, in current day NFL. I would like to see that incorporated into the MFN offense if possible.
Last edited 8/18/2026 10:58 pm

JDB wants a realistic simulation - that's my preference.

Some want an anything goes league.

That's perfectly fine.

What is needed is a system that facilitates league owners determining how they want the league to be rather than dogmatically giving a one size fits all approach - for one thing, it would damage the game long term to restrict the type of approach for owners.

Want a Smirt league? Go for it. Enable players to be selected wherever the matrix says.

IMO, as I keep saying, the matrix needs to cover only depth chart / override positioning. Nothing else.
Positional changes need to be decoupled, allow owner to try to change positons freely. Anything goes - BUT there needs to be code to guard the positionings. Convert CB to DE, hits 243 lbs and stops? Sorry mate, 33lbs underweight, can't play there.

Have that facility be toggled by league admin - want a league where you can have undersized CBs as DE? Go for it. League admins should be able to use matrix is allow CB at De but also have a toggle to remove weight restrictions.

The position change issue is also being addressed by the increase draft pool - more good players available, less need to convert.

Okay, so for those of us who want more simulation to RL NFL, I dont think the answer is loading the draft with more 80+rated players. That would reduce the chance for the teams with the worst records to improve their rosters versus the stronger rosters.

If you want more of a simulation to the RL NFL draft then here are the facts.......

AI Overview Overall NFL draft success varies significantly by round, with a first-round pick holding roughly a 60% to 65% chance of becoming a long-term starter, while the overall success rate for any drafted player dropping to a mere 15% to 30% depending on the definition of a "hit".

There it is, is that what we are currently experiencing? Seems so. Those who complain the most about the draft quality are the same who want total dominance, and we know who that is. They want their 1.32 pick to be just as good as the 1.1 to 1.10 right from the get go. Player success is not just based on their initial rating in the draft, there is also progress by positive and negative, same as RL. And that is not a simulation to the RL NFL. The way the draft is now is fine in my opinion and preference. Converting players? The facts of player conversion in the NFL have been previously posted in this thread. Very rare, other than CB to S or FS. You want a simulation? Match the statistics.

I dont see the answer being in sweetening the draft to accomodate the very few who dont care about a better simulation. The answer is making it more of a RL simulation, not that it will ever get near a full simulation, but at least closer than it is now, with less position and play selection exploitation. Draft a RB if you need one, or get one from FA or a trade, not convert a 90 speed WR with low ball carry and break tackle, who's average is higher than an 80 speed RB with 100/100 carry and break. RB averages are also dependent on OL blocking and play selection, but.... Im talking about the RB rotation, where the RB3 or 4 using WRs have higher averages than the 1 and 2. Thats not more of a simulation to RL NFL, again, look at the RL stats, they are the facts of what actually happens.

I agree about giving League Admins the controls for position placement and play selection/use to set up a league to either be more of a simulation or less, depending on preference and what the majority of team owners in their leagues want.

It means lower draft picks have a better chance of being a good player. It means the FA pool is larger. It reduces the need to convert players, something you want?


That's a lot of assumptions doing a lot of heavy lifting. You ignore the better draft, FA depth means less need for conversions.

You also ignore that most people's draft approach, pre increase in draft pool was "5th round onwards, just look for good speed and high volatility and hope you get lucky".


Again, more assumptions being made. You've defined an end goal and assumed that's the only issue needing dealing with. Things aren't going to be magically resolved with one game engine update. Increased draft pool helps other issues - some leagues I've struggled to find picks as high as the 4th round.

Sorry, Im not assuming anything, you are ignoring a basic fact. You either get closer to statistical and percentage reality of the NFL, or you dont. Does the current draft composition simulate RL NFL or not? How many players % wise make the roster who were 4th round thru 7th round picks?

According to NFL draft result data, the 4th round is the "cliff" round, where most of the players who make the 53 man rosters do so on special teams. 5th through 7th rounds are very unlikely to make the full time roster and many who do end up with a contract are on practice squads. That should also reduce the problem of imbalanced trades and should be reflected in more accurate trade meter values.

Additionally, a team owners ability to spot players who have more to offer than their default ratings is based on custom player weights. Does that get closer to an NFL simulation? I dont know, my guess is that it does not and I would like to see the default values improved or used exclusively for a more level playing field. Custom weights provide an advantage to experienced MFN owners vs new owners.

You're assuming people's motivations.
Neither you nor I have data on how many 4th rounders onwards are on people's rosters.
As I said, in some leagues I've struggled to find players even worth taking a punt on high vol in the 4th. 5-7 always been instant cut candidates for me.

We don't have practice squads. NFL draft to fill PS certainly rounds 6-7, with UDFAs. The previous smaller draft pools meant UDFAs were non-existent, deviating from NFL reality.

Custom player weights are there to allow owners to define how they see players fit into positions as they see them, not an absolute truth. Even custom weights are fundamentally flawed, simply don't model well enough. I look at player attributes a different way these days.

But I digress. If the default ratings were perfect, then there would be no need to even have custom weights. Tweaked a bit?Possibly. Still don't rely too much on them.

Assuming people's motivations? only on having more of a simulation vs not, which is a personal choice. You either want more of a simulation or you dont, to keep repeating myself.

QB, RB, and OL in the RL NFL draft vs the MFN draft. I dont use a high draft choice (rounds 1-4) on any of those positions, especially in leagues where WR is allowed at RB. I get all of those positions filled by FA or trade. I wont go into detail as to all of the why, but I will put up my winning % as credibility for doing so. The only picks I get higher than 1.25 or 25th in any round are due to trades. If I get a top ten in one of the first 3 rounds, the pick will not be QB,RB, or OL, other than if an exceptional rater falls to the 2nd or 3rd rounds, def not the first round.

If you want more of a RL NFL simulation, then get closer to matching the stats and percentages of what actually happens. Baseball was the easiest of the two sports to simulate, as it is more stat based and individual performance heavy, same for basketball. Football is a more difficult simulation, as you also have more factors affecting a players performance than just their attributes/ratings. So the best you can do is to get more of a simulation, not less. Example, OL trade meter values are highly overated and unbalanced, making it more difficult to trade for them and also exposing new or unaware MFN mgrs to unbalanced trades, such as as 1st round top 10 pick for a 2000 trade meter OL, regardless of age. Or a combination OL and pick totalling 2000 on the trade meter for a 2 yr 90 rated WR with 90+ speed. Those types of trades are usually benefiting the "sharks" whose teams are always in contention for the LC in all of the leagues that those owner participate in. That happens because the ratings and trade meter values do not always represent the true value of the player(s) involved.

How difficult is that to fix? I dont know, will leave that up to JDB to explain if he so choses to do so. My RBs on LC Denver are a good example of what is wrong with the player ratings and auto manager Matson is a "bona fide" RB, but acquired from FA after being released by the Eagles, which I would assume was a BIG mistake done by the AI auto manager due to some roster inadequacy. A horrible loss for the Eagles. Last season he gained over 1200 yds with a 5.8 avg and scored 17 TDs. RB2 Fisher has a default rating of 74, my weights have him at 82. He was a 2.7 pick by the Raiders, and was cut early last season, I picked him up off waivers. He performed at the same level as Matson, avging 5.6 ypc and scoring 10 TDs with half the attempts. RB 2/3, FB2 Flores was originally a 3.22 pick by Denver 4 seasons ago, he was cut by the auto manager, again not intentionally by the team owner, yours truly. Was able to re-sign him from early FA. 4.9 per carry and a very prolific kick/punt returner, due to his 96 break and 100 carry, not his speed (75). As long as WRs are allowed at RB, I will use them as subs but that was not a factor last season, as I wanted to get both RB1 and 2 more reps. I have much more extreme examples on other teams with RBs that have trade meter values less than 100 but are in top 20 for avg per carry. They also have a wide spread of default value to my rating by custom weights, usually an average of 15 rating points higher, mostly due to the speed attribute. Not needing to use a draft pick for a highly rated RB is not more of a simulation of the RL NFL.

So, the point of all that is, no high draft choices used, especially for a RB like Matson. Getting a RB like him only happens rarely when you luck out on a waiver claim or FA bid. But...... Fisher was right there with Matson, stat-wise, and he was what I would call a "normal" pick up, and all of my RBs across every team/league is the same category, obtained out of FA. That is not more of a simulation of RL NFL, it is less, and again, even moreso if WR is allowed at RB including conversion, which as been factually researched, is very, very rare in the NFL.

Interesting and very unnecessary ai moves.
As smooth as signings can be, they have been.
Set up. Two spins ago we lost a qb roster spot due to a trade and preseason game one spin is next up. We need to sign a qb and have him active for the spin to meet roster requirements. So I sign 2 qbs while having a bad feeling about the ai activating them. I did this in fear of missing out on the trade by letting time pass.

Result: The ai had signed and activated at will while cutting one of my actual fa acquisitions. On the bright side I am okay with the player and contract the ai did choose to select . But if possible When signing FAs there should be a toggle selection to allow for activating them right away to avoid this.

I'm in a similar situation right now. A QB got injured in preseason game #1, leaving a gap in the roster and a need at that position, so I made an offer to a free agent.
Now I'll see if AI steps in.