Discussion in 'Thread Archive' started by Archie Griffin, Jul 14, 2011.
What do you guys want to aim for? We waiting for Luv? Just want to get your thoughts.
I'd like to see a roster update that corrects MSU a little bit. We have a couple key guys that are negated by the roster issues. I'm hoping that will come over the weekend.
I've already stated what I'd like in the new roster set. My wr speed increased and the fr LBs added
But I can deal with it if we wanna start earlier
Luvs will be a good3-4 weeks away
I know we're all sensitive about the ratings and the rating changes. I'd like to propose that we handle this in an open forum where each guy propose changes to his own roster and each of the guys can vote to approve and disapprove the changes. To keep it simple, I would include Name, Number, Position, Year, Overall, Speed and Justification.
I would be happy to start with the rosters I have (gamingtailgate) if I could get the corrections for my team. If we can reach a consensus on team changes (represented by each user), we could all be happy and start sooner.
Would rather we just go with the name updated rosters. Besides in a few seasons it won't even matter. As I stated before I don't think we should be trying to adjust our own teams.
I respectfully disagree.
I think their should be some matter of trust here. We are a premier league where are focus is fun and realism over winning. I've already stated what I thought would be a good idea.
However, starting with simple name rosters I can deal with. I have very few fixes I'd like done. The other guys may be expecting bigger and better rating Changes.
Don't get me wrong I trust you guys and that's not the issue with me. The problem is we are all homers for our teams. If you are playing your favorite team in this dynasty I don't believe its possible to judge your team without bias.
I would like to have a roster set with the proper players moved or removed...
Just my preference... I can roll with the majority.
I'm not a fan of us proposing manual edits to our own teams. That opens up a LOT of loopholes, plus it also could start the whole "Well you let Big D raise his WR speed, so why can't I raise mine" type of issue. That would most definitely NOT be a good thing.
Furthermore I'm sure there are some guys on all of our teams who are OVERrated. So are we supposed to 'patrol' our own teams and downgrade people as well? We all know this won't happen.
I vote a strong NO on manual edits, and we should wait for a roster. I don't think we should wait 3-4 weeks, but maybe we wait until next weekend and re-evaluate then? That'll give us some time to get more familiar with the game too.
I jsu want correct players on my squad.
Clearly a polarizing topic. I'm happy to wait for a roster to come out that addresses my issues with the MSU roster. I think there are other ways to arrive at that outcome, but I respect the feelings of the other guys. If there are three options:
1. Wait for good rosters
2. Use what we have now
3. Figure out a way to may reasonable edits
I'd vote for 1 or 3.
I dont want to begin till they send a patch out that fixes the custom playbook issue.
And if you guys are in a huge rush then i say we do away with custom books all together....
Just to put it out there, these are the edits that I feel strongly about:
1. William Gholston moved to DE. He is the marquis recruit of the Mark Dantonio era. He was a 5-star recruit on Rivals and a 4-star recruit on ESPN. He got some playing time as a true freshman and is the clear starter as a true sophomore. I think he should be in the 82-85 range. He is currently a 71-overall MLB - a position that he has never played. He was an 80 in the '11 game.
2. Dion Sims added as TE. He was a 4-star TE on Rivals and a 3-star recruit on ESPN. Rivals lists his high school 40-time as a 4.5. He got good playing time as a true freshman and sat out his sophomore year due to some legal issues. He was reinstated this spring and is the #2 TE on a team that uses a lot of 2-TE formations. I think he should be an 80 overall. He is not currently on the roster. He was an 80 in the '11 game.
I have a few other ones, but those are mostly ones I can live without. The ones above seem more than fair (and supported by information from reputable sources) to me.
What's the issue with custom playbooks? They seem to work fine for me.
90 percent of the community is having this issue
Ouch - that's rough. That doesn't happen for me.
It is so bad i don't even bother practicing........i am bummed out till they fix it
I think there are a number of opinions here, and it's good to see differences expressed without any drama. That's a good sign.
Looks like a good time for an executive decision. Here are my thoughts:
I don't want to wait 3-4 weeks for Luv's set - just too long.
I do want accuracy, but I do not want guys editing their own rosters.
So, I suggest this - We give it a few days, and see where we are. Hopefully, a set pops up that is a revision of the set I now have, which just contains the names. If some of these edits look good, we'll roll with what we get. If there are still errors that will take away from the experience, we'll decide what to do then. If we tinker at all, I will do the tinkering, and only if I find good reason to do so.
More on that if it happens, and I don't think it will.
When looking to edit rosters, it's important to know that there is no foolproof system. For example, a good 40 time does not imply good top-end speed, but rather, it implies decent acceleration. Smaller guys tend to be quicker, but not necessarily faster at top speed. Freshmen, no matter how touted, typically don't have the same skills as coached up guys, so even the top recruits usually only have the athletic ability, and lag behind upperclassmen in skills.
For me, there are maybe two freshmen a year that should be rated out of the 70s - when I adjust younger guys, I tend to raise athletic ability (but not to the level of a senior - a really fast frosh might be 90-89 in speed/accel, which is about a mid-fours forty time, or if he's a 5'9" kid, it might be 88-92, for example) and drop skills, especially awareness. I also drop strength on young guys, and typically drop any skills associated with their position.
In past years, the overrating of young players has led to a year four or five in which these guys, unless they leave, are all rated 99. We over-value first year guys in a huge way. Any edits I am asked to make will reflect this opinion. Many young studs never pan out, yet ours always do. Look for a lot of young "studs" rated in the 68-72 range if I am asked to edit. If they start, this might change a bit, but likely only a few points.
Just letting folks know what to expect.
We need to sim a season and see what recruited freshman come out as ....apparently the freshman we have on our teams this year will be irrelevant because the recruited freshman come in several points higher
If that's true, then expect recruiting restrictions to attempt to regulate that. The 1-7-70 rule has done this pretty well in the past, so I think we'll be OK. You're right, though - we need to see the classes to have an idea what we're dealing with.
Separate names with a comma.