Something to make SP more challenging, perhaps.

[Ben E Lou]

Someone mentioned that increasing the cap room helps AI teams with roster management. Of course, the down side is that it helps the human player as well. In my current SP career, I'm using a 60-->90 cap range, along with a house rule where my players must be re-signed on the open market--no extensions. Well, in my most recent free agent stage (to be posted later today, probably), my THREE best players were all snatched up by AI teams, even though I offered them contracts higher than they requested. In all three cases, the AI offered even *more* per year than I had offered. I hadn't really been paying attention to how they were doing in building/keeping rosters, but seeing that happen led me to take a look, and those numbers were quite encouraging, too. Heading into the draft, AI teams are averaging 33 players per team, with nearly every team having a good amount of cap space available. The way things stand right now (and I'll report in again at the start of FA2, when some teams tend to blow up their rosters), all but three teams will have over the veteran exemption (currnetly $1.26M) per player available to spend in FA2. And it looks like there will be very few players availble in FA2 worth spending over the veteran minimum on. More in a bit...

[Ben E Lou]

OK. Begin FA2...

• 2 AI teams had to release solid players, but no stars. A 59/59 LDT and a 56/56 10th-year FS are the only released players rated above 44.
• After the first set of draftees are signed (remember, this is FA2-1), 13 teams have 40 or more players, and 26 have 30 or more. The lowest is a team with 23 players, but $42.76M to play with to sign the remaining 30.
• All four teams with under 30 players at this juncture have $30M or more in available cap room.
• The team with the most players under contract is Tampa Bay, with 54.

This is obviously just a single snapshot. Another, though, is to note that while I have the best league cohesion, (which is to be expected as it's a career where I'm not allowed to sign FAs, so my drafted players stick around a very long time,) several AI teams are right on my tail. It's not a case of 100-70-69-68-67 like I've seen in other SP careers. As far as cohesion goes...

PASSING: I'm fifth, at 91, with a 10th-year QB and starting receivers in years 5 and 6.
OFFENSIVE LINE: First, but it's 100-99-98-93-91-89-88-87-83-83 to round out the top ten. Not bad there at all.
DEFENSIVE FRONT: I do have a big lead here, but it's probably dorth nothing that I start five players in years 7-10 with the team. There actually is one AI team right on my tail: Houston's at 97. After them, it's 82-82-82-78-78-77-77-75. It's 2034, and Houston looks like it will start DEs who have been with the team since 2024 and 2025, respectively. That probably helps their cohesion a bit.
SECONDARY: 100-98-96-92-88-83-80-77-75-75. At first glance, this looks like it's probably best of all. My starting safeties are in years 10 and 11 with the team, and my nickel corner is in year 11 as well. The fact that four AI teams are even in that ballpark seems to bode well for this change making a nice impact on roster building.

I hadn't really been paying attention to the AI teams' rosters up to now, but I'll trying to notice if this is just a blip, or if this is an actual trend.

Also, if anyone out there has used this type of setting before and seen long-term results, please chime in here.

[yabanci]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Also, if anyone out there has used this type of setting before and seen long-term results, please chime in here.

if you mean playing with high salary cap increases, it's definitely true and something I've pointed out for a long time. The enemy of a single player career is a low cap increase. The AI teams handle themselves pretty well when not forced by lack of cap space to release players and renegotiate contracts (two things that only add fuel to the fire). I would eliminate the salary cap for AI teams altogether if I could (obviously restraining myself with house rules).

[MizzouRah]

So, a 60 -> 90 cap range is the setting to go with? I'm liking what I'm hearing here. I believe yabanci has always recommended a 60 -> 80 setting with his roster sets.

[Izulde]

I still use a 0 - 1 cap range. Sure it might make it less challenging, but I despise seeing the escalating salaries.

[cmp66]

What would be the effect of signing/resigning all player contracts to the players asking price at a minimum? Would that mitigate the effects on the human of the increased cap?

[ReiperXHC]

Another thing you can do to make it more challenging, Skydog, is create a player file with no players in it. It ends up creating a league of marginal rookies. A couple in the 50's and 60's but mostly average players.

The first 10 seasons or so are very all over the place, and odds are you won't see the super bowl for at least 5 or so. (well actually, you're Skydog, so I'd say you'll be there like 3 seasons) lol

Hey CMP66...didn't you come up with the head coach settings on Madden 07 to make the sim stats become more realistic? Got any for 08? heh

-Reip

[stevew]

Originally Posted by Izulde

I still use a 0 - 1 cap range. Sure it might make it less challenging, but I despise seeing the escalating salaries.

Yeah, figuring out how much salaries are with a 300m cap gives me a headache, so I usually do close to the same(0-1).