Fantasy World League Forum

First of all I understand you Paul, why you downgrade teh players almost every season, but you are not right in assuming that it is fair to everyone. I explain why:

teams with veteran players suffer more from it then younger build teams and this may be one reason why a 6 year QB
with best ratings is almost not tradeable because of age.

Every player older then (or with) 6 seasons will loose points at the start of each season !
Older players can get back fewer points in trainingcamps then younger players with the same points.

Now you downgrade additionaly all players that means that veteran player are reduced twice a year and also have less a chance to get these losses back. The result is that veteran players are worth a lot less and are not long usefull. If you had started the offensive downgrades earlier, then Bobby Phillips had most likely not played so long.

Also in example most of the time OLmen will not have their IN and DI raised in Training camp (other attributes are far more usefull) but with the reductions eachs eason, they will become worse in these areas each time. But as the key attributes also
are reduced the chance to raise them in the next TC is minimal.

Again I understand that there has to be taken some adjustements and I see no better way then you to do it, but still it IS hrting the teams differently and it does change the league in a way that may or may not be intended. These reductions do reduce the usefullness of veterans and is hurting teams that do plan to build their roster around older players that were trained over many season to reach a certain usefull level.

Well firstly i'm glad you realise that changes have to be done . Originally i never knew there was a historical problem with FBPro 97 and thats why some of the seasons (i think its mainly season 4-6) have some shocking statistics.

Season 4 ( http://www.fwl.org.uk/sseason4.htm#I1 ) is one of the worst, season high passing of 3,266 yards (just 4 QB's with over 3000 yards), no 1000 yard rushers, (mostly 3 and 2.* averages) and a handful of WR's with only 6 players with 80 catches or more

There is simply no other way.  I got David to make the changes (he has a long history of doing these leagues and runs one of his own) and in his words hes done the minimal to really make a change and not to upset everyone.

Before every training camp every player in the league has their potential set to 99 99 99 99 so i then let the computer choose who goes up and who goes down.  I havent got time to put an individual cap on each player but everyones potential is the most.

I cant really see what is so bad about the global changes.  Yes a veteran goes down twice lets say, once during t.camp and once after the global changes.  But his skills go down once naturally (because of his age) and the other change is global so basically no one gets an unfair advantage.  Yes that older players stats are worse but they would be worse whether they were originally 99 99 99 99 or 50 50 50 50 .  But because everyone else has gone down a fraction then hes no worse off.  Maybe its just me but i cant see the argument that much.

I have 8 veterans on my team with 9 or more years, on your team you have 3 so perhaps the changes will affect my team much more than others.  Some teams love to keep young players, i much prefer the older players who 'prove' they can play in the league. 

As for offensive linemen having their skills taken down then if people dont add anything on INT and DI then its their fault for it going down a bit each year.

As you know its so so difficult in doing this league as every other Sierra Front Page Sports football league on the web have these problems.  Many leagues do a large downgrade and then wait a few seasons.  I would prefer that but David i think did the right thing and just did a tiny change.

But i cant really see the main point, veterans will go down fractionally but they would whatever because of their age. If theyre a fraction slower because of the -2 on defense then thats not so bad as offensive players have been taken down -1 so if theyre a fraction slower pass rushing the QB the offensive linemen is a fraction slower blocking him.  To me its fair all round.

We have to slightly take down defenses than offenses as you know once a defense gets way too good then ball games end 6-3 and we have RB's with 5 yards on 20 carries which i cant have at all.

All of my players regressed on both offense and defense, regardless of age, and I have a very young team.  For instance, all of my WRs regressed in ACC, even though I assgned 25 points to ACC in TC.  I suppose that happened with every team, but I was surprised that my rookies, 1 and 2 year players (of which I have lots)  actually got worse. :'(

Well looking at your WR's...

Beginning of Season 12

A  WR3    85  Aiken, Sam               OK     1     93 88 88 77 88 86 78 75
A  WR1    88  Savoy, Phil                OK     7     92 90 87 64 89 87 88 79
A  WR4    82  Quinnie, Willie            OK     R     89 87 87 76 86 80 77 73
O  WR5    84  Taylor, Chris              OK     R     89 86 86 73 89 76 70 72
O  WR6    87  Haddad, Drew           OK     R     88 86 84 66 90 73 73 72

WR's ratings now..

A  WR1    85  Aiken, Sam               OK     2     94 87 88 80 87 86 79 75
A  WR2    88  Savoy, Phil                OK     8     91 88 85 71 86 87 89 78
O  WR3    82  Quinnie, Willie           OK     1     91 86 87 79 85 82 78 73
O  WR4    84  Taylor, Chris              OK     1     91 85 86 78 88 78 72 72
O  WR5    87  Haddad, Drew           OK     1     90 85 84 72 89 77 75 72

Their skills have increased on the whole specially as you think there was a global -1 on offense just done.  All their speed has increased but yes their AC hasnt really changed at all. 

Are you sure those weren't their number before season 12 training camp.  I copied and pasted my teams numbers onto an Excel spreadsheet before this last TC, and these were the numbers:

A  WR1    85  Aiken, Sam               OK     2     94 88 89 77 88 86 80 75
A  WR2    88  Savoy, Phil                OK     8     91 89 86 63 87 85 90 79
O  WR3    82  Quinnie, Willie            OK     1     90 87 88 76 86 80 79 73
O  WR4    84  Taylor, Chris               OK     1     90 86 87 73 89 76 72 72
O  WR5    87  Haddad, Drew             OK     1     89 86 85 66 90 73 75 72

According to that, speed remained the same for Aken and Savoy, ACC dropped for all WRs,  ST improved, becuase they were all very low to begin with, and endurance is up slightly.  The ACC is the one which surprised me.

No.1 overall pick Safety Hank Poteat had a miserable TC:
Before- S  Poteat, Hank             OK     R     80 85 82 81 83 81 60 78
After-   S  Poteat, Hank             OK     R     80 83 80 79 81 79 67 76
   
 

Paul,

sorry that I was not able to make the point clearer :-)

yes all players go down so a veteran has no disadvantage THIS season.
But the nexz he will go down once more naturally (thats okay) and again
the fix the league.

On top of that veterans do not get their points back as fast as normal players in training camp.
if a R and a 10 year veteran have 99 potential and 79 skill and you put in 25%
then the R should go up 3-4 points the veteran will only go up 1-2 points.

So he cannot recover the losses.

Therefore if you make additional downgradings then veterans are hurt more then young players.

I admit that I do not know any way to prevent that and still manage the overall league in a realistic
way. I just wanted to point out that by doing this you will in average shorten a players usefull
career by 1-2 seasons.

Regarding the possible changes:
well, there were so callled 'Kang-files'. A expreienced league owner had changed the rosters in a way
that it still maintained realistic statistics. This Mr Kang had the following solution:

make OL to supermen lets say 80 85 85 95 80 90 80 80
at the same time DL men slow, no better then 60 70 70  for SP, AC, AG
and keep it that way (so setting potentials for DL men at 65 75 75 for these attributes)

It will reduce sacks maybe a bit too strong, but will give a reasonable running game and
especially reasonable averages.

I think, Paul, if you explain this to the GMs all would agree that we have to do that and we could
repair the league in one big (maybe a bit hurting) stroke. But it would not feel like building a player
over a couple of training camps and then have them reduced globaly again and again.
Yes its equal for all, but its also simply that a SP 90 WR can do things better then a SP 80 WR
even if the DBs are reduced at the same rate.

Still I agree with you Paul, there has something to be done and I can understand very well why we
take the small stepps approach. I just think there could be a better way ;-)

Good idea about the offensive linemen thing, the thing i would hate is that suddenly say Season 14 all sacks are way down and we have 10 records for rushing, rushing td's, passing td's etc etc.  To me that would make the league very unrealistic.

I'll also get some advice from David and Jason as they know the game very well and as you know David runs his own league and has a lot of experience.

Its a shame the software does this, eg every few seasons you have to make changes or its 6-3 ball games week in week out.

I'm a firm believer in 'if a player can play in the FWL then play him whether hes a rookie or a 10 year pro'.  Some young stars just dont seem to play very well, whereas some 'oldies' play well whatever.  Thats what i love about the game, the exceptions like Itai ('Bad hands') and other such players.

I personally like to see what the players do on the field instead of solely just the players attributes etc.  Still upsets me looking at Jon Carter ! ;-)  10 sacks the previous year then didnt play at all the following year ! ;-)

Sadlly this is a problem for any league like this (defenses getting too good, have to be capped or changed etc).  Its difficult capping players as basically if all your offensive linemen reach the 'peak' then theres no point trading anyone on the o-line and you keep the same starters for 10 years till they retire.

I personally would love to try and get free agency to work in the FWL as trading is at such a low but then again the huge turnover of players every season would annoy people plus trying to work out figures etc would be tough !

So what is the problem, guys?

Take a look at last seasons results, take a look at "real" resutls and tell me: Do they fit or what? They fit! Football has become a defense-oriented game nowadays....

Ok, rushing-stats may be a bit concerning but if we reduce DL-ratings everything will be ok. don´t touch DBs though as we need to limit passing-success to a certain extend...........

Basically Mario, FBPro has some sort of major bug where defenses get way too good and take over the whole game.  If you look at that season i showed you, no 1000 yard rushers, a handful of passers getting over 3000 yards etc.

To me the fun is realism, 1000 yard rushers, 1000 yard receivers, great players on defense etc.  If i spend all my free time running a league where the highest points by a team in a game is 14 and most games are 6-3 with most running backs gaining 300 yards a season i would be totally bored.

As for 'real' results i dont think thats true.  Scoring in the NFL is at one of its highest ever.  Peyton Manning set a record for touchdown passes and theres many many more 1000 yard rushers and receivers than there were 20 years ago.  Every season now there are WR's with 100 or more catches whereas in the old days only Art Monk seemed to get over 100 catches.

Football is way more offense than defense.  At the end of the day if defenses took over the NFL ratings would drop.  Look at the Arena League, thats based on a lot of points being scored.  Theres no league out there focused mainly on defense or low scoring games.

We've done these slight global changes many times in the past and its always worked and people have enjoyed the FWL season so i think leave it as it is.  The software does have some crazy bugs and simulations at times , i've simmed games where a RB playing away has gained -21 yards.  That just isnt real

I apologize for asking this if it's already been discussed....

Assuming that the changes were made to curtail defense, why a -1 to offense?

Well David suggested we do a -1 to offense and -2 to defense so perhaps he can shed some light onto it.

As we all know the softwares rather strange, to get the right sort of stats, 100 yard rushers and 300 yard passers i think its tough to get. Stats so far in the two weeks dont seem bad at all, weird though Todd Bouman and Danny Wuerrfel 0 td's between them in 2 games each !