This is what makes FOF2004 Great!

[rpommier]

My team was in a bit of a shambles... I'm finding it's more of a challenge to maintain a good team than just sucking 3-4 years and getting some top #1 picks to carry you for 10+ years.

I was just coming off a Three Peat for FOF Bowls and the immortal Martin Cox has retired. Take a look at this 7th round Mr. Irrelevant...




That is why this game is simply beyond compare! I was starting a high priced vet by the name of Tyrus Bruce in the interim, he had 'Mentor to QB', which is why I had him temporarily. I had Gus Sappia as a 3rd stringer just as a roster filler.

Well game 14 I notice in the gamelog Gus was starting! What the crap, is FOF AI trying to screw me? Is Tyrus Bruce out? No! This 7th Rounder has beat him out and is starting! Then he wins the FOF Bowl!

Awesome Jim, Thanks!

Roderick

[yabanci]

it's interesting because most people would only expect that kind of breakout from a high volitility player.

[rpommier]

Originally Posted by yabanci

it's interesting because most people would only expect that kind of breakout from a high volitility player.

And beyond that it totally blows away all of my rookie signing theories

So really the numbers are only a loose indication of potential... I wish I could remember how he looked as a rookie, but who pays any attention to 7th rounder?

All I can say is excellent though, I'm totally floored... Another indication he was something special is that after 3 years I got 2 trade offers from the AI. Both offers were for a decent backup and a 1st Rounder, that definitely had me suspicious and had me doing some of that crazy cap magic to keep this guy!

Roderick

[FBPro]

Awesome, hope I get so lucky.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by yabanci

it's interesting because most people would only expect that kind of breakout from a high volitility player.

Combine ratings?

[Barkeep49]

Sky Dog didn't your reasearch suggest that Volatility is really something we should always want to be low as players can breakout even with low volatility but that players were far more likely to drop in ratings with a high volatility? Or was that Jon with his dynasty?

[SegRat]

What kind of stats is this guy putting up, cause he is kind of dumb?

[Hurst2112]

Originally Posted by SegRat

What kind of stats is this guy putting up, cause he is kind of dumb?

Damn, I just noticed that. Pretty funny.

Guys like Ryan Leaf can have a future in football!

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Sky Dog didn't your reasearch suggest that Volatility is really something we should always want to be low as players can breakout even with low volatility but that players were far more likely to drop in ratings with a high volatility? Or was that Jon with his dynasty?

That must have been someone else. I do two saves per year: one right before the draft, and one at the end of the season. ("Falcons 2004 Predraft", "Falcons 2004 Postdraft", "Falcons 2005 Predraft", etc.) That way, when I observe a studly 6th-rounder, or a bust 1st-rounder, I can look back and try to seek if I can establish a pattern. The details can be find in the thread archived under "rookies/draft strategy", or something to that effect. Here are my impressions, based on what Jim has said, and on observing a bunch of boom and bust players, and looking back on their pre-draft player cards:

1. High-volatility players are more likely to break out or bust.
2. Volatility is NOT the only factor that plays into likelihood of break outs and busts. Combine ratings and current ratings are important as well, so that means that there are at least seven different factors to look at when evaluating a rookie (40,Bench,Agi,Sol,Vol,ratings,bars in important categories).
3. There is also an element of randomness: a low-volatility, great-ratings player can bust (although it seems to be far less likely). Playing the percentages seems to work well for me.

[hukarez]

Originally Posted by rpommier

I was starting a high priced vet by the name of Tyrus Bruce in the interim, he had 'Mentor to QB', which is why I had him temporarily.

I swear I've asked this question before when the game was initially released, but my "Search Forum" efforts brought me to this thread.

Does the skills of a Mentor play a factor in developing a young star? Such as, a player obviously in a decline, who still has the 'Mentor' tag...would that drastically affect another player's development as opposed to a player with the 'Mentor' tag, and still in his prime?

[rpommier]

Originally Posted by hukarez

I swear I've asked this question before when the game was initially released, but my "Search Forum" efforts brought me to this thread.

Does the skills of a Mentor play a factor in developing a young star? Such as, a player obviously in a decline, who still has the 'Mentor' tag...would that drastically affect another player's development as opposed to a player with the 'Mentor' tag, and still in his prime?

I only look for 'Mentor To' on a couple of positions, QB, RB, SS, CB, I seem to get the most bang for my buck on those positions. I think of the Mentors as 'Power-Ups'

That's what happend with Gus... In his second season he unseated the veteran that was mentoring him. By game 13 of the second season he was starting. This is with no regular season starts. I think the mentor even if the player is on the bench.

This is a really powerful trait if used correctly, you can really fill some roster position with some high quality players quickly.

Roderick

[hukarez]

Originally Posted by rpommier

I only look for 'Mentor To' on a couple of positions, QB, RB, SS, CB, I seem to get the most bang for my buck on those positions. I think of the Mentors as 'Power-Ups'

That's what happend with Gus... In his second season he unseated the veteran that was mentoring him. By game 13 of the second season he was starting. This is with no regular season starts. I think the mentor even if the player is on the bench.

This is a really powerful trait if used correctly, you can really fill some roster position with some high quality players quickly.

Roderick

Ah, but if a QB Mentor who's stats have decreased consideredly be any different than a QB Mentor who's still in his prime?

Say, for example, a QB Mentor rated at 40 (if there is such a thing?) versus a QB Mentor rated in his 60s? Which QB Mentor would be a much more bigger "power up"? Or is there really no difference?

[rpommier]

Good point... From a realistic point of view it sholdn't matter, since a player doesn't have to actually play to mentor a younger player...

In FOF I would hope Jim has modeled this in some way....

Roderick

[SegRat]

Would a mentor have the same impact if you had him on the inactive list, or would he need to be active?

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by SegRat

Would a mentor have the same impact if you had him on the inactive list, or would he need to be active?

i don't think he needs to be active. I think Shorty did some minor testing on this, and was pretty confident it didn't matter as long as that player was on the roster.