Would there be a way of adding an easter egg to a player profile , something that only you (JDB) could See? Maybe have 3 per draft, that way it would draw interest right through the latter rounds. Just a thought.

The only other thing I kinda liked was having a scouting department but it would need to be applied carefully to avoid exploits . It was a bit harder before volatility was shown and making it move is nice, but having it based on coaches would be great. The pats are notorious for turning busts in to valuable contributors . But they are great player at player evaluations. So they seem to go hand and hand.

In 75 cypress and setherick seemed to pick out some nice late rounders....constantly like a belichek. A scouting department will make little difference there is volatility is shown. What about hiding the speed and strength/acceleration ratings, but allowing us to see combine scores .

A bit vague , but not all of the potential draftees go to the combine or participate in prodays. Add injury as a reason not to participate or some later drafted guys get real vague speed and strenght/acceleration rating scores and no combine numbers at all.

Also, The big schools that play bowl games will get better evaluations cause there are playing vs. Equal talent. Some of these guys playing for small schools it might be harder to get more accurate numbers in the technical area cause you won't see them play vs. Top tier players.

i my opinion i think players should be able to go up or down throughout a career based on vol so if a player doesn't hit off the bat teams will be more inclined to stick with them and hope they can improve as they get more mature. Too many times i see players bust or boom and it's so obvious how they will turn out. In real life players do have that incline or decline but there are many players who don't get it for a while and then the light turns on. I think in the case of later rounds the physical skills are just too low on a lot of them that they're not worth waiting on the other skills to develop. I don't want to see a ton more max speed or strength guys but maybe more guys in 70-85 range that if their positional attributes improve they can be productive. Heck in real life undrafted rookies hit just as much as some of the mid rounders so it's not out of the question.

I would probably stick with players longer if there was something, anything, I (or my coaches) could do to influence whether they go up or down (and how much).

It's too random for me to waste a roster spot on one of those scrubs.

IRL, every once in a while you will see undrafted players become very good, very quickly (Arian Foster). That will never happen in MFN because someone with skills low enough to go undrafted would take 10 years to improve enough to become a starter.

I would suggest position coaches be able to "fix" busts. I think if you tied vol into coaching you would have a more impactful game. I think players being uninfluencable kind of makes this a big problem. Having a player where the outcome is static kind of ruins it. In real life players don't do it on their own, they are very dependent on factors such as coaches, playing time, and other skilled players or veterans at the position.

There should be a cap for players speed, acceleration, strength. For example there is no league even high school in which a WR would have 15 speed, 5 strength sure, but not 15 speed. And there isn't going to be a OL with 15 strength, similarly 5 speed sure but not 15 strength. A player that bad wouldn't even be qualifying for the league.

I disagree on the point that was made that late round players should grow faster, the slow growth is perhaps too slow but slow growth is how late rounders in reality work, they have to train their skills a while before becoming starting caliber.

But even late rounders with coaching, and players to learn from, will become quality players in reality with very few absolute guaranteed failures.

Also it could be added that great players could drop early and be "damaged" or slowed progress from playing before they are ready with poor coaching. I'm thinking the David Carrs and Joey Harrington types. And the Alex Smith types who took a beating early but good coaching and a breather got him back on track to be a quality QB. You also see it in some of the recent lineman when thrown to the fire without a great coach you see them struggle early and it takes time for them to catch on.

In short I think you can best solve this issue by capping how low a players attribute can go, have coaching, playing time, and veteran players, determine growth and not have it static.

Players having guaranteed static stats they will reach is probably my biggest gripe with this game. To mirror reality every player even undrafted should be able to become an okay player (75) eventually in a good scenario but without that scenario high quality players could fail to live up to potential.

A 0 attribute rating does not mean a player has none of that attribute, just as a 100 rating does not mean a player is perfect at that attribute. Those numbers are relative to the other players in the league. So, a player with 0 speed is going to be one of the slowest in the league (not one of the slowest people on the planet).

I've always wondered some attributes are static. These guys are coming out of college and now play football as a full-time job. They can never get stronger, or quicker, or more intelligent (I'm assuming this is football intelligence), or improve their arm strength, etc.

I was more referring to that they have a set number they will reach no matter what, it is just hidden from the owner till they reach that stat.

I think it would be great if players could have some wiggle room in terms of their 'static' attributes (i.e. strength, speed, etc). This would reflect the challenges of inexact scouting, as well as the general benefits of entering into pro level conditioning programs. This could also be used to allow more 'late round booms' by allowing rare significant jumps in those attributes.

Bump

i like the idea of giving combine results instead of actual ratings to drafting teams. Even have it where you have a certain amount of players you can scout in detail and that would give you more info on them. I think it's too gotten so obvious who everyone wants because you have the ratings and now the vol to look at. Drafting can be a coin toss but it would be a lot easier in real life if teams had ratings like we do. Say you get a player at a certain weight and he has a 4.5 forty. Maybe his frame allows for him to get smaller and that 40 would get faster. Maybe the player doesn't have to discipline to lose weight and actually gains weight cause he's lazy. This is the kind of things that happen in real football. It would be a lot hard to evaluate players but it would be more realistic. Guys might fall in the draft and turn out better than you think cause you wouldn't know their actual ratings. The draft is one of the best parts of this game but there are so many options to make it even better.