unsigned draft picks in fof2004

[yabanci]

I don't know if anyone else noticed this, but it's interesting in the new screenshots that Lester Goosey (DT) is drafted #10 in 2016 but is unsigned and then shows up to be drafted in the 2017 draft. That's a pretty cool feature.

http://www.solecismic.com/fofscreen/round.php

http://www.solecismic.com/fofscreen/draft.php

[Tasan]

Good pickup there. I find it funny though, that people are having to pour over the pics in such detail that this was spotted. This thing is going to sell like hotcakes.

[SackAttack]

Didn't the feature list already mention rookie holdouts and draft re-entry? I'm a little surprised that people are spending so much time on the screenshots that they're poring for information that's already available in the feature list. If they had paid attention, that is.

[rexallllsc]

Any way to toggle the inflation?

[yabanci]

Originally posted by SackAttack
Didn't the feature list already mention rookie holdouts and draft re-entry? I'm a little surprised that people are spending so much time on the screenshots that they're poring for information that's already available in the feature list. If they had paid attention, that is.

actually, it doesn't take much time or intelligence to see the same name on the two different screenshots.

[azjoe_02]

Originally posted by rexallllsc
Any way to toggle the inflation?

I don't think so....

[SackAttack]

I never mentioned the word intelligence, yabanci.

There's a difference between paying attention and being smart.

Plenty of smart people don't pay attention, and plenty of folks with middling intellect are sharper on the uptake than a lot of so-called 'geniuses.'

All I said was that holdouts were mentioned on the initial feature list, and that I'm a little surprised that people still needed to see the screenshots to realize it's in the game. That's all.

[Solecismic]

Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

Thanks for the info and I hope everything with the family is going alright.

[rexallllsc]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

Awesome. Thanks for the response.

[Bonegavel]

This is good. We had this discussion a few weeks ago, and the CAP-masters (ahem... Bucc...ahem) use the CAP in some sort of sick and twisted thingamajig, but I would prefer to keep things the same. Salaries are another way I rate players, and with it changing (i.e. increasing) it throws me for a loop.

[sianews]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

WooHoo! This may be the single most important addition to the same in years

[yabanci]

Originally posted by SackAttack
I never mentioned the word intelligence, yabanci.

There's a difference between paying attention and being smart.

Plenty of smart people don't pay attention, and plenty of folks with middling intellect are sharper on the uptake than a lot of so-called 'geniuses.'

All I said was that holdouts were mentioned on the initial feature list, and that I'm a little surprised that people still needed to see the screenshots to realize it's in the game. That's all.

Look, I don't know what your problem is, but what is the purpose of screenshots? Why do so many people ask for them? Why does Jim go through the trouble of posting screenshots when he could use the time to complete the game? After all, every feature shown in the screenshots is already mentioned in the feature list, right? So screenshots themselves are a complete waste of time, at least to those like you who "pay attention" right?

Actually -- and sorry to "surprise" you again -- that's not correct. You see, the purpose of screenshots to show the features as they are actually implemented in the game, whether or not those features have already been mentioned. Some of us find this interesting. Maybe you don't since you feel you already "know" everything from reading the feature list, but others of us like to actually see the features in the screenshots, even if we already have read the feature list.

The only reason I can see that you would pop up and criticize someone for making an on-topic post pointing out a screenshot showing one of the new features is that you are a jerk. Maybe you are proud of that. I find it rather pathetic.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

This will be great for historic leagues. You should be able to bring the salary cap along at a much more realistic rate than in FOF4.

[JeeberD]

Oh man, I can't wait for someone to start a historic league... *drools*

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by JeeberD
Oh man, I can't wait for someone to start a historic league... *drools*

You mean "an" historic league, don't you?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
You mean "an" historic league, don't you?

Get 'em K!

[detroit_fan]

Somebody got their buttons pushed? Yab, light'n up it's that "time" of the month for old sackattack.

[Maple Leafs]

For whatever it's worth, I've followed the feature lists and I knew about holdouts, but this is the first I've heard of holdouts actially re-entering the draft.

Should be pretty interesting to see how much higher (or lower) the holdouts go. I wonder, if you redraft a holdout back to your team, will you get the "past injustices" message?

[The Shadow]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Yes, you will be able to control inflation in FOF 2004.

Jim,

Thanks for the info, but could you define what you mean by "control" inflation? Does that mean that we can just toggle inflation on/off, or is it a slider bar, or we can actually set the inflation wherever we want?

Also, I assume that the minimum rookie/veteran salaries would vary depending on inflation too?

One last question - if there's no inflation, will players accept a flat, or even slightly decreasing salaries in their contracts?

[sabotai]

I hope the holdout until next season doesn't happen too much. How many times has it happened IRL?

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by The Shadow
Jim,

Thanks for the info, but could you define what you mean by "control" inflation? Does that mean that we can just toggle inflation on/off, or is it a slider bar, or we can actually set the inflation wherever we want?

Also, I assume that the minimum rookie/veteran salaries would vary depending on inflation too?

One last question - if there's no inflation, will players accept a flat, or even slightly decreasing salaries in their contracts?

Inflation, in FOF 2004, is controlled in the global options screen by what amounts to a slider. You may enter a range of numbers to increase or decrease the amount of inflation that your league will undergo. This may, if you choose, be set to zero, where the entire league will sit in financial stasis.

It appears that an adjustment to this factor on the global options screen takes effect for the next television contract. if you want a few years into a career (and into a TV contract) it will take a while to have effect. But, doing it right at the beginnign of your career will suffiice to set it to what you want.


Salaries for rookie and any players are pinned together and to the salary cap, so if you "turn off" inflation, the effect will be what you'd expect - everything stands still financially.


I have yet to try declining contract offers, but I think the game has a routine to guard against that, and I strongly suspect that stays in place. (But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

[cthomer5000]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I have yet to try declining contract offers, but I think the game has a routine to guard against that, and I strongly suspect that stays in place. (But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

The only plus of running a flat-cap league would be the ability to identify a truly monster contract offer 20 years down the line. You could also realistically determine who the highest paid player of all time was.

My guess is that 0% inflation would probably be an advantage to the human though, as we much more commonly sign deals with flat base pay. I'd imagine we'd see computer teams with a lot of dead cap space annually if inflation is set to 0.

[SackAttack]

Originally posted by detroit_fan
Somebody got their buttons pushed? Yab, light'n up it's that "time" of the month for old sackattack.

]

I dunno what you're talkin' about. I simply made a comment. Yabanci's the one who's gettin' all hot and bothered about it.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Inflation, in FOF 2004, is controlled in the global options screen by what amounts to a slider. You may enter a range of numbers to increase or decrease the amount of inflation that your league will undergo. This may, if you choose, be set to zero, where the entire league will sit in financial stasis.

It appears that an adjustment to this factor on the global options screen takes effect for the next television contract. if you want a few years into a career (and into a TV contract) it will take a while to have effect. But, doing it right at the beginnign of your career will suffiice to set it to what you want.


Salaries for rookie and any players are pinned together and to the salary cap, so if you "turn off" inflation, the effect will be what you'd expect - everything stands still financially.


I have yet to try declining contract offers, but I think the game has a routine to guard against that, and I strongly suspect that stays in place. (But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

I guess this would be a moot point if the game spent some effort emphasizing contracts. There should be a review screen with stats like:

The highest contract in the league now.
The highest bonus paid to a Rookie this year
The highest bonus overall
The Average Contract.

Info like that would add a bit to the "What the hell is a good contract these days?" sort of questions.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I have yet to try declining contract offers, but I think the game has a routine to guard against that, and I strongly suspect that stays in place. (But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

I'm not bright enough to understand exactly what insult was hurled here but I'm also not bright enough to understand your last point:

(But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

With static inflation, there is no re-adjustment for the real value of future dollars. A contract in 2003 is comparable to a contract in 2300 with static inflation. The average salary would remain constant. Nothing to adjust for.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by QuikSand
(But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

Excellent point. My concern about getting rid of inflation has always been missing the effect on long-term contracts. I'd MUCH rather just deal with the increasing dollar values than have decreasing-value contracts (which is really the only way I can think of to mirror the long-term cap effect of a flat contract, when given a universe with no cap increase.)

[cthomer5000]

Originally posted by Bonegavel
I guess this would be a moot point if the game spent some effort emphasizing contracts. There should be a review screen with stats like:

The highest contract in the league now.
The highest bonus paid to a Rookie this year
The highest bonus overall
The Average Contract.

Info like that would add a bit to the "What the hell is a good contract these days?" sort of questions.

I think an "all time money leader" list would be awesome. I'm sure it would be some QB who hung around for 18 years...so maybe a position-by-position breakdown could work.

[detroit_fan]

Trying to be funny Sacky, but I guess I wasn't sorry.

[The Shadow]

Originally posted by QuikSand
(But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

Thanks for the info on what inflation "control" will look like.

It's not a big deal if players won't accept a flat or slightly decreasing contract. I was just curious.

Originally posted by SkyDog
Excellent point. My concern about getting rid of inflation has always been missing the effect on long-term contracts. I'd MUCH rather just deal with the increasing dollar values than have decreasing-value contracts (which is really the only way I can think of to mirror the long-term cap effect of a flat contract, when given a universe with no cap increase.)

I agree. I also agree with cthomer5000 that with no inflation, human players might have a slight advantage. But, it would be nice to be able to compare player contracts throughout your entire career.

Possible Solution
On one of the stat pages, player cap cost can be displayed in current dollars as well as dollars adjusted to a certain year. It would be nice to be able to sort by position and by team too. Best of both worlds??

[JeeberD]

Originally posted by Ksyrup
You mean "an" historic league, don't you?

I was wondering who the person was going to be who said that...

[QuikSand]

As far as the human getting an "advantage" by this -- try to think this through. The FOF game has always processed everything in terms of a multiplier. The routine that generates a certain player's contract demands has always operated to generate a number that is something like 4.5. Then, the game takes that number, multiplies it by the current minimum salary, and comes up with the dollar amount that the player actually seeks. (FOF veterans have surely notices how frequently many player will request a certain salary that is a nice even multiple of either the rookie minimum or the veteran minimum)

There's no sudden problem for the computer if you decide to dump the inflation factor-- the computer will keep doing what it has always done, and will still generate that number of 4.5 for that player. Instead of it being multiplied by a different base each year, it will just be multiplied by the same base year after year. Therefore, no problem.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by QuikSand
There's no sudden problem for the computer if you decide to dump the inflation factor-- the computer will keep doing what it has always done, and will still generate that number of 4.5 for that player. Instead of it being multiplied by a different base each year, it will just be multiplied by the same base year after year. Therefore, no problem.

This is what i don't understand... how can this be bad? Contracts aren't very flexible to start. You can mess around with the numbers to a certain extent (some more than others), but the initial request is usually right around what they will accept, unless you want to give them more.

I guess my big question is, why is it bad to have salary ranges the same in year 50 as year 1?

[John Galt]

Won't eliminating inflation create a disruption in the normal market forces of the FOF universe? That is, signing bonuses are always pro-rated equally among the contract years (regardless of inflation). If contract amounts are constant (and I assume the cap is constant), then signing bonuses will eat up more of the cap in future years. Teams will have less "real" dollars in future years to spend and accelerated salary cap hits will hit harder.

In a true market, this wouldn't have an effect, but in FOFC, I wonder if it could lead to more unsigned high quality players.

[The Shadow]

John,

You've hit it on the nose. But if player contract demands are calculated from minimum salaries (like QS points out above), then contract demands should not include inflation, since min sal will not have inflation.

If you have no inflation, there's an impact to long term contracts, even if it's slight.

If you have inflation, it's difficult for most of us to "have a feel" on whether player contract demands are reasonable or ridiculous in future years. Also, for us stat fanatics, we can't find compare player salaries over our entire careers. (Highest cap by a single player, etc.)

Solution - play with inflation but have a stat page that converts all current dollars (w/ inflation) to normalized dollars (w/o inflation). Doesn't seem this will be very hard to do. Maybe on the next version or patch.

[Buccaneer]

Originally posted by QuikSand
Inflation, in FOF 2004, is controlled in the global options screen by what amounts to a slider. You may enter a range of numbers to increase or decrease the amount of inflation that your league will undergo. This may, if you choose, be set to zero, where the entire league will sit in financial stasis.

It appears that an adjustment to this factor on the global options screen takes effect for the next television contract. if you want a few years into a career (and into a TV contract) it will take a while to have effect. But, doing it right at the beginnign of your career will suffiice to set it to what you want.


Salaries for rookie and any players are pinned together and to the salary cap, so if you "turn off" inflation, the effect will be what you'd expect - everything stands still financially.


I have yet to try declining contract offers, but I think the game has a routine to guard against that, and I strongly suspect that stays in place. (But honestly now, wouldn't anyone sophisticated enough to think in terms of normalizing contract offers to re-adjust for the real value of future dollars also be sophisticated enough to handle a sim world that include inflation? Maybe that's just me, then.)

I LOVE options. I don't know which way would be best but it would be fun seeing the different results and strategies resulting from them.

[QuikSand]

I'm convinved that for strategic purposes, this is an absolute non-issue. You'll have some tiny effect because bonuses would become truly constant year-to-year in a no-inflation universe, rather than slightly declining in real terms. But that's gotta be a fractional margin on the FOF Richter scale, if anything.

I fail to understand the theories above that this (setting inflation to zero) is somehow going to send the AI teams for a loop.

[Bonegavel]

I still don't understand why people are talking about future this and future that, real dollars this iDollars that. If there is no inflation, and each contract signed ever year plays under the exact no inflation rules, it will allow one to more easily compare salary demands (as we do not have teams of CAP experts to guide us through the process).

E.g.,

Game set to ZERO inflation.

The top QB veteran in year 2003 signs a deal like this:

bonus 5mil

year1 1 mil
year2 2 mil
year3 3 mil
year4 4 mil

Now, this is just numbers thrown there, but it doesn't really matter. (I will slowly understand the baseline of salaries, as they will remain constant) Now, he is my QB and he is awesome. This is the contract he asked for, and I gave it to him.

Years go by and it is 2050. Finally, I have another QB that is very similar to QB2003 and he asks for a salary. It looks like this:

bonus 5.1mil

year1 1 mil
year2 2.1 mil
year3 2.9 mil
year4 4.5 mil

(the numbers are slightly different, but very similar)

I can look at that and say, "Yes, i know this is a salary commensurate with your skill. I like it and I will give it to you." I know, because inflation is zero, that this salary is in the ballpark.

With inflation, his salary request may look like this:

bonus 25 mil

year1 14 mil
year2 16 mil
year3 18 mil
year4 22 mil

That means nothing to me. Now, i have to start tracking all salaries for every year to see what this contract means. Is it the right amount for what I think he is worth? I have no idea because I don't have Bucc or a CAP staff to track this stuff for me.

Does this clear up the case I am trying to make?

[Bee]

Isn't all these points about the inflation moot since everyone will be able to play the way they want to? Bonegavel gets his salary cap that never changes and those wanting inflation can actually control how much it grows. I just find it somewhat amusing that everyone is trying to convince each other their way is best or there's going to be a flaw in the game without any of us having even seen how it works yet (other than Quiksand who says it's not a problem).

[Japherwaki]

Bonegavel -

I think everyone here understands the case you're making. Since you don't understand why people are talking about future this and future that, I'll explain what the others are saying.

Let's take a look at the contract you mentioned earlier.

Bonus 5M

Y1 1M
Y2 2M
Y3 3M
Y4 4M

What we're trying to say is that a contract like this is acceptable in the game now because of inflation. The 4 million that will be paid in year 4 is not worth as much as 4 million dollars would be in year 1, and will not take up as much of a percentage of the salary cap in year 4 as it would in year 1, because the cap will be larger in later years due to inflation. If the computer keeps playing the same way as it does with inflation, it will have too much money tied up under the cap in the players with large final years on their contracts. This will mean they will either have to release some of these players, or not sign some other players they want to, things that would not happen with inflation on.

Now, if the computer knows how to compensate for this with inflation off, then there won't be a problem. But at the same time, I know I won't be able to (nor would I want to) calculate the effects of inflation on the later years of a contract. I deal with inflation because I've been doing it ever since I started playing FOF. But that's wy I'll be playing with inflation on at it's normal levels, and other will be playing with it off.

Bee -

I think what is going on here is that some people are saying that they can play the game with no inflation and have the game play exactly the way they want it, and others are trying to point out that there could be some unwanted side effects if they turn it off. I don't think anyone is trying to convince anyone else that their way is better.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Bee
Isn't all these points about the inflation moot since everyone will be able to play the way they want to? Bonegavel gets his salary cap that never changes and those wanting inflation can actually control how much it grows. I just find it somewhat amusing that everyone is trying to convince each other their way is best or there's going to be a flaw in the game without any of us having even seen how it works yet (other than Quiksand who says it's not a problem).

No no no. What is making me crazy is that they are saying it won't work the way I am hoping! If it works the way I described it in my example, I am happy for me. I don't care what others do. Everyone is saying that it won't work this way and I don't know why.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Japherwaki
Bonegavel -

I think everyone here understands the case you're making. Since you don't understand why people are talking about future this and future that, I'll explain what the others are saying.

Let's take a look at the contract you mentioned earlier.

Bonus 5M

Y1 1M
Y2 2M
Y3 3M
Y4 4M

What we're trying to say is that a contract like this is acceptable in the game now because of inflation. The 4 million that will be paid in year 4 is not worth as much as 4 million dollars would be in year 1, and will not take up as much of a percentage of the salary cap in year 4 as it would in year 1, because the cap will be larger in later years due to inflation. If the computer keeps playing the same way as it does with inflation, it will have too much money tied up under the cap in the players with large final years on their contracts. This will mean they will either have to release some of these players, or not sign some other players they want to, things that would not happen with inflation on.

Now, if the computer knows how to compensate for this with inflation off, then there won't be a problem. But at the same time, I know I won't be able to (nor would I want to) calculate the effects of inflation on the later years of a contract. I deal with inflation because I've been doing it ever since I started playing FOF. But that's wy I'll be playing with inflation on at it's normal levels, and other will be playing with it off.

Bee -

I think what is going on here is that some people are saying that they can play the game with no inflation and have the game play exactly the way they want it, and others are trying to point out that there could be some unwanted side effects if they turn it off. I don't think anyone is trying to convince anyone else that their way is better.

AHHHHH! thank you. Finally a post my walnut sized brain can handle. Now... I... Understand. Thank you. Well explained (or, the beer I just had cleared my mind).

So, if I want MY method (sorry Bee, I'm being selfish and I only am talking about me here) will only work if initial contracts are worked a bit differently by the AI when requesting a salary -- knowing that the bloated later years won't have a salary cap increase to deal with it. God-diddly-damn, I think I get it now.

Damn, I'm dumb.

[Ben E Lou]

To me, here's the big question about the inflation being disabled: will the AI be able to offer contracts that don't increase in value over time? If not, this will end up being a pretty big advantage for the human.