What I'm really after with this is preventing 40-60 pass attempts per game being the norm. The penalty slowly starts at pass #20 and hits its max at pass #40 and beyond.

But maybe the penalty is more of a hack than a real solution. Maybe the focus should be more on balanced play calling, which would be item #2 above. If fatigue is tied more toward hits (I like the 'toughness' attribute suggestion, by the way), and the OL starts to fail as teams get out of balance on the play types, would that solve this without having to fatigue the QB's arm if he's overused?

Definitely did not affect Bledsoe: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/199411130nwe.htm

Or Brady in the Super Bowl: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201702050atl.htm

QB fatigue really pisses me off because it seems the only reason JDB set it up the way he did is to compensate for the fact that DBs don't cover. At least that's what I got out of the post on coverage the other night. If QBs didn't fatigue, or fatigued like they should, owners could just throw deep every down with no consequence because DBs ****.

The fix here is fixing coverage.

There shouldn't be any difference between a QB's 1st, 20th or 40th pass attempts, as far as his fatigue is concerned.

Because QB's in MFN never run the ball, they probably shouldn't fatigue at all.

The OL shouldn't fatigue as quickly as they do now either.

I agree with Seth's comment above.
The fix is to make it so pass coverage works, not imposing some artificial penalty on the QB or OL.

It's bad enough already that the QB seems to fall apart anytime a defender crosses the line of scrimmage.

I agree with what was said about fixing the coverage. If coverage was better, I think more teams would run the ball more.

Here is another issue I have, and I'm curious if anyone else has the same problem. Nothing would please me more than to run a balanced attack, but currently, every time I try this strategy, my running back gets injured at 15 carries (give or take 1 or 2). The injury is always 3+ games. I've tried using depth chart more, lowering fatigue, even carrying 5 RB's. Nothing has worked, when the RB hits 15 carries, they are hurt. Therefore, my gameplan is to pass the ball at least 2:1 to save injury to the RB.

My concern with these changes would be a decimated backfield because we would be forced to run more or suffer from bad QB performance later in the game.

Everthing sounds like a hack, Change how fatigue effects all players .Only Penalize smaller players more and larger players less(based mostly on how they travel and the rest in between snaps) .

In addition , Look into fatigue penalizing shorter players a bit more and taller guys a bit less along with strength being modified to the side of the shorter players receiving bonuses. Based on weight of course .

Everyone has great points here. I just don't think qbs are to blame for pass heavy systems , they make poor reads.

Moreover , the biggest difference maker would be to scale everyone's actual speed to replicate the speeds differences in reallife. Not only are our guys too slow in general . ...the whole scale is to large. The slowest guy can't run a nine second 40 yard dash and truly compete .

Fixing that will fix a lot of stuff . No dbs under 80 speed..... using the new speed system . Cause imagine if you made 40 times for the players . ....based off how fast they move on the feild (under the default speed and clock) some guys would run 4.7 and some a 7.7 sec 40 yrd dash. I see a pass heavy system with a bunch of high rated wrs running 4.7s and 4.8s , should have no problem getting open vs, man coverage while facing DBS who run 5.2 fourties or slower. Cause that is the difference in fourty times for a 95+ speed wr and a 80 speed DB.

Putting low speed caps on positions , how slow he could be makes me think everyone should have over 50 speed minimum . Thus , making fatigue penalties less important , cause player are still fast even if they are getting tired. The same changes will drive importance of technical ratings cause athletically player are more equal...just like real life.

But like I said shorter guys are more explosive and fatigue quicker and the leaner,players generally have better endurance but can't get that same leverage . There are exceptions to the rule, but those guys are first rounders or hall of famers In the nfl.

I don't want every player to be so "cookie cutter".

Just because player A is smaller or lighter than player B does not mean he is faster / stronger / weaker, etc. than player B. It doesn't mean he should / shouldn't fatigue faster either.

It is possible for a player to be taller and heavier and still be faster.
It is possible for a player to be taller and lighter and still be stronger.

When it comes to the physical attributes, every player should be unique, and their rating should be universal (EX: If a player's strength is 90, he is stronger than every other player in the league with a strength rating lower than 90).

I hope MFN is not going to end up where there is a generic formula based on height / weight / "frame" that determines a player's speed / acceleration / strength / fatigue rate / etc.

It already is cookie cutter, and what I described would let you see true strength . Perhaps JDB should let us see that . Even though I don't think it works the same . So that might be impossible .

To Ray's point, everything is cookie cutter. It's how I know that when I draft that all 100 TE that I want to turn into a RB, he'll be a great RB if I camp him at WR for two years to get his weight down.

I want the attributes to be absolute when compared to another player (90 str > 80 str, 90 spd > 80 spd, etc.).
I don't want the attributes tied solely to someone's height / weight. I think there should be some variance between the players, even players at the same position.

Example: It's reasonable to think that player A will get slower if he gains a bunch of weight. It is not reasonable to think player A is slower than player B simply because he weighs more or is taller (assuming all other measurables were equal).

Has anything changed about QB play or fatigue? I've seen some schizophrenic QB lines in MFN-1 and 87, and I want to know if what I'm seeing is just general MFN wackiness or some new and different form of MFN wackiness.