Yet another very poor draft class.

I think that's about 4 in a row now.

Is this intentional?

I was curious about this as well, in NCAA we just had a draft that was so bad there was like 5 guys under 70 picked in the first round. Most of the talent was gone before the third round. It was beyond horrible lol. I was in here checking if something has changed with the draft talent?

It could eventually balance itself out as long as the trend continues.
We'll just get used to different numbers being the norm.
If there are strong draft classes mixed in, then I could see that being a problem.

Lowering the overall talent could be a good.
It can possibly make game-time strategy be an equalizer to a team just having the best players with little to no strategy.

Elite high 80's to 90's players should be rare. A 99 should never happen. In all my years I have never seen a perfect player. It will never happen. It's a human deal. Well at least until ai robots take over the world. We have another year or two for that. lol

I think it would be interesting to see a beta league start over fresh with an allocation draft.
Start with all rookies and no vets.
Then use this draft trend and our newest beta to see how it plays out.

Or you could even go further with a flat line.
Start all teams out with rookies. Give them all the same talent and skill ratings.
And then use this lower ratings draft trend from there on out.
It could be an interesting experiment.

It's fine if all the draft classes stink now? Just wait 10 seasons, then everyone's roster will stink?

That doesn't sound very fun to me.

If I have another crappy TC this season then I'm done. I may be done anyway. Changes like this combined with the "break/exploit the code" style of gameplay from many users has drained most of the fun out of this game for me.

exactly. It's all relative.

Every player being a 70 is no different than every player being a 99. They are equal to each other either way. Only difference is that the 70's player can improve. The 99 player is tapped out.

If a person sat in an all blue room his whole life. He would never know what red was.

I never said anything about every player being 99.

The draft is ruined if there are no longer any great players in it, and now the best you can hope for is that you get lucky with a "dice roll" and your first rounder slowly develops into a mediocre player.

The flaws in the code are going to be more pronounced now with the "code breaking" game planners not having much resistance since the other team won't have any good players to help make up the difference.

The games premise was not meant to handle a lot of high rated players. Pushing the numbers up only depressed the options in gamemplans . With elite players standing out above the rest of the pack would only encourage gameplans to stop that specific player and or allow special player to stand out when used properly within a gameplan .

A clear example is how popular allocations are....as they have a better distribution of talent. Allowing for better numerical results and competitive play .

Those drafts of 90 raTed players til the second round have been fazed out for several seasons already and most teams stacked with them either can't handle the contracts or the actual players are in the aging/ retirement process .

Four more seasons or so and everything will be normalized

Sorry. I didn't mean it literally. I was just tryin to paint a picture of what I was describing.

I'm right there with you on this. I have no desire running rosters with 70 rated players as the alpha males.

Still I am more disappointed In the lack of speed . It s gone already . ...rd four. Like I said no one should be slower than 50. And tying speed to only weight is just not right. Body mass index would stabilize the distribution of speed to real life physics for a more competitive game.