In this thread = https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/forums/thread/1/1038?page=17#6237

Setherick said this which i think is a good idea to have the preview of the draft class prior to the year



Btw if it happens credit goes to Setherick Not me.

thanks
punisher

I would be in favor of this is there weren't so many "tankers".

This would just give more incentive for those people to tank if they new the upcoming draft would include John Elway (for example).

Then don't show Vol. (Needs to be hidden anyway or more random. I've started to draft like a blackjack player - low vol or double down on 90+ vol.)

This happens in the pros all the time. Tank for Luck for example.

I like the volatility being shown. It adds an interesting element to the draft and is actually more reflective an a "real life" draft, in my opinion.

I don't see how doing something to make it more likely that people will tank their season would be good for MFN.

I find tanking to be very distasteful, even if it does happen in real life. So much so that I am in favor of a true (non-weighted) draft "lottery" for all non-playoff teams, both in MFN and every real life sport.

Implement something like that here so that tanking isn't rewarded, and I'd be in favor of this idea.

Draft lotteries are actually bad for a sport because they don't foster a sense of competition or parity in a league the same way that a reverse-standing draft like the NFL has does.

I agree that tanking is disgraceful, but when done correctly, it can turn a team from an also-ran into a competitor (c.f. Indy's tank for Luck). If I know there is a 99 overall QB (by my weights) with low vol available, and I know I'm not going to make the playoffs anyway, I may consider playing all of my young players to get their play knowledge up for the next season even if it means I lose close to every game.

The bigger problem that MFN has is that most people cannot weight players correctly or they rely on the default/coaches weights, which are terrible after you get out of first round talent (the players ANYONE can weight). This means that you have too many teams that cannot develop a proper set of starters, let alone two deep or three deep. How many default weighted 60 SP RBs are starting out there because the owner thinks that the player is the best on his roster?

The other problem is that trading picks is still too easy. A 1-1 pick is worth 3000 trading points? That's about a quarter of what it should be since trading a 1-1 should be prohibitively expensive. It would also prevent some owners from swapping first round picks year-after-year-after-year-after-year for picks they know will be high first round picks.

I think playing young players when your out of the playoffs isn't really tanking....Tanking is having your players play out of position (LB kick field goals) ....or running every play for an entire game.

Oh, Christ, I would never tank like that. I would play my worst QB or not sign playable RBs, etc., though.

If this idea is to be implemented:

- Have the initial Draft "preview" not include an Overall (or Volatility) rating
- Instead, take 3 skills from each position (at random) that has relevance on their play at that position
- Use a descriptive term to tell how good (or bad) the player is at a skill (Below Avg, Average, Above Avg, etc)
- Have Volatility (and maybe Intelligence / Discipline) play an increased part in the final Draft class with 'final' stats... Or even if the player declares or not (players might stay in for last year(s) of school, players might declare early for money / nothing more to prove, etc.)

You have enough information to start targeting, but you really still don't know what you're getting... Or if you're getting them at all!

What would those be? We don't even know what those skills are for players who've been on our rosters for years.

It may end up showing you attributes like pass accuracy, strength or run/pass blocking when even those seemingly obvious skills aren't important anymore in terms of on-field performance.

Unless it gives you a preview of their speed, you're not going to see anything that will give you an indication of how they will perform in game. There is no more good/bad, just fast/slow with a whole lot of RNG thrown in.

Speed is a possibility, if it's important to the position.

As to the rest of it... I'm obviously not the one to address those concerns if they're there. But I would think there's some fundamental skills for each position that apply. Otherwise you'd have LBs under center, and wideouts manning the D-line.