Does playing time affect player development?

[GMO]

Does playing time affect player development?

I presume it does i.e. the more playing time a player gets, the faster and better the player's development.
But I can't find any reference to it in Help.

Does anyone know of any reference to it in the Help file?

I know it makes sense that more playing times does affect development of the player but I was looking for confirmation someplace.

[Joe]

nobody knows

[MizzouRah]

There's no doubt about it.

[TitansGuru]

No question about it. Try playing some of those young offensive linemen and compare them to the ones you don't.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Absolutely. It's the biggest determing factor for development.

[Carman Bulldog]

I'm beginning to wonder if this is true for Quarterbacks, at least in the early years. I see some computer teams that have 65/65 QB's in their 6th/7th season who were 5th round picks. These guys didn't play at all in their first three years and then blossomed.

I've been trying to develop guys along these lines but, contrary to popular belief around here, it seems like playing the crap out of them is actually detrimental. Their current development is minimal and their future ratings drop as well.

With my next guy along these lines (usually something like a 20/60 guy post draft) instead of forcing the issue and playing him, I plan on getting a mentor (which I normally do anyways) and letting the guy hold the clipboard for a few seasons before he sees action and we will see if this helps.

[molson]

I always wondered there's only 3 degrees of playing time "starter, backup, inactive list", or if the game actually takes plays participated in into account. (Am I better off putting my rookie behind a borderline starter where he plays more than he would behind my All-Pro?)

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I believe it's number of plays that matter, not starter, backup, inactive designation.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

I'm beginning to wonder if this is true for Quarterbacks, at least in the early years. I see some computer teams that have 65/65 QB's in their 6th/7th season who were 5th round picks. These guys didn't play at all in their first three years and then blossomed.

I've been trying to develop guys along these lines but, contrary to popular belief around here, it seems like playing the crap out of them is actually detrimental. Their current development is minimal and their future ratings drop as well.

With my next guy along these lines (usually something like a 20/60 guy post draft) instead of forcing the issue and playing him, I plan on getting a mentor (which I normally do anyways) and letting the guy hold the clipboard for a few seasons before he sees action and we will see if this helps.

Interesting. I don't have any experience with this, but it would be cool if Jim had some kind of formula that involved hurting QBs who started too quickly (i.e. crumbling under the pressure).

[Carman Bulldog]

I think it could depend on the quality of the quarterback. If you have a 40/80 QB then obviously he could probably start without much of an effect, because, while he hasn't reached his potential, he is good enough to play.

For comparison's sake, if the guy is something like 10/80, I'm not sure that playing right away is helping his development.

However, this is just something that I've experienced over time and never really looked into thoroughly. However, I couldn't say whether this is programmed in (which would be very cool) or just coincidence.

[TitansGuru]

Originally Posted by Carman Bulldog

I think it could depend on the quality of the quarterback. If you have a 40/80 QB then obviously he could probably start without much of an effect, because, while he hasn't reached his potential, he is good enough to play.

For comparison's sake, if the guy is something like 10/80, I'm not sure that playing right away is helping his development.

However, this is just something that I've experienced over time and never really looked into thoroughly. However, I couldn't say whether this is programmed in (which would be very cool) or just coincidence.

Which would make the game all that more realistic. The more you delve into this game, the more you love it.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

I believe it's number of plays that matter, not starter, backup, inactive designation.

I am 100% certain that it was number of plays in FOF2K4, and I have little reason to believe that has changed.

[cuervo72]

Take it from Mr. Wacky-ass Preseason Gameplan.