Which is why it's being tested and tuned in MFN-1 and not rolled out elsewhere...

I know this thread is all about the roster management by the auto-manager, but just had a look at the O&D plays from last game here in MFN1, the auto manager took over the gameplan completely, ignored rules and play selections/settings, set the levels for offense play type & personnel, and defense secondary/linebackers. Defensive Gameplan has been totally changed. Offensive GP is the same, settings are same ones used by program manager. And that is the same as what happened to my team in the Elite League, and so, it's not just happening in MFN-1, if Im the only one, then maybe its something that Im doing or whatever. It did not happen to my team in MFN-7. Those were the only teams/leagues where I had games played. It was easy to spot, in the Offense & Defense Plays the maximum number of plays O40 and D30 were selected, most were not choices that I would normally make.

I have promoted the idea of minimum active play selection and maximum play use per game, as opposed to the overuse penalty. Having the auto-manager/coach change the play or add active plays is fine by me, if it is universally applied to all teams in a league, where the League Admin can set those parameters, same as setting the injury level and other controls and similar to the auto roster controls. That includes overruling rules that end up violating the play use max limit. That I would like to see happen, but not where the auto-manager completely takes over the gameplan, no rules, and turns it into a RO game.

One thing for sure, there should be no cuts by auto manager due to all positions not being filled with enough players by position requirements, there should be at least one sim period after the warning box appears about roster errors to enable correction without the auto manager screwing the roster up as has been going on.
The game has enough data/stats to enable JDB to improve the auto managers ability to select better plays (not GL runs on first & ten) based on down and situation, evaluate players based on the same or similar weights that successful teams use, include player stats for those players who have them, positional need, age of the player, and competitive salary instead of signing a 10 year vet, with 60 or less speed to a contract at maximum salary and bonus. At lease it would make the program run teams more competitive and challenging, and they are the majority in all but a few of the leagues that are still left as compared to 2 years ago.

It released a WR and tried to sign a OL that had recently cut.
I have 52 players now.
Not sure why.

Same CB that I resigned from waivers got cut again for yet another rejected OL contract. My RB2 and 3 were deactivated for no reason. O-line and D-line were similarly messed with as far as activation/deactivation. Are you able to get more information on what is happening?

It would be helpful if the position attributes also included a column for the total potential (current/future) for the corresponding position. This would make it easier to find replacements when the AI Depth Chart alert is triggered.

I just released a new update that should show a warning in MFN-1 if your team is at risk of the AI doing anything to your roster, with a button to a popup that shows the details of what you're missing.

Any word on why my RB2, RB3, and LDE2 are being deactivated every game?

Let me know if it happens again without any warning banner

It's been trying to sign OL for me. It even cut 2 different WR from my team in it's attempt to sign an OL. Since I only had 52, I decided I would add an OL... because it must be really important for me to have another OL, right? So what's it do after I add an OL? It immediately drops a better OL on a game day with no warning.
Sigh.

Ai signing players is always an issue because there are numerous factors to consider, depth chart change now in particular, you've player matrix to consider et al.

I think a lot of issues people are reporting aso far revolve around O line.

2 are needed to be active on depth chart for each O line position. That means, to me, to avoid AI signing OL and making cuts elsewhere, you need enough OL on your roster, all activated, to be able to fill 2 spots on each O line position.

So the minimum I'd say is 6 - starter at each position, 1 backup OL covering all positions. Minimalistic and risky, injuries can kill you. Safe would be 10, 2 players for each position.

Now, where the criteria isn't met is the issue. You've not activated enough players, so you're 1 short on LG.

IMO this should be the way the algorithm works.

- Find depth chart violation
- Determine from the player matrix positions on your roster that can fill that spot( in LG case, any O linemen).
- If player matches position perfectly but not activated (only for injury status ok or probable), then activate and add to depth chart position. ( so you have a LG uninjured/probabxle, not activated, use them).
- Otherwise, from the pool of players found, backfill but do not use starters in other positions.
- If no players found on the roster capable of playing position, then AI needs to sign.

Now the signing part would be complex.

- Find player -how good should the player be? Superstar? Average? Cut fodder?
- Offer contract - go off requested bonus? Minimum wage?
- How long a contract - 1-6 years? Given it's a fill in where the owner hasn't addressed the issue, a 1 year deal seems reasonable.

Where your roster is below 53, then signing isn't an issue. Where it's on 53 (60 in pre-season) is where the trouble kicks in.

I'd say it needs to be along the lines of finding positions on your roster that are over-represented - if you need 6 CBs for example and have 11, that's candidate for a cut.

For each player in those over-represented positions, calculate based on a formulae involving user weights and salary considerations, cut the lowest ranked player identified based on that formula.

The alternative, of course, is to have a practice squad, meaning unless someone has gutted the roster, AI shouldn't have to make these signings/cuts. Sign 18 or however many is allowed, rank them in positional order, so if needed game can call up.

TL;DR version.

what JDB needs to consider to make this work is pretty complex, which is why we're seeing issues and is why it's not rolled out to all leagues.