TCY faf question/suggestions

[MacroGuru]

Quick question here.

I am noticing one thing, the players have their talent regardless if they suffer a major injury in college. Also, there are those who never played a down in college and still have talent. They are being shown sometimes as some of the top players.

What would you guys do for this?

I am thinking of going in and knocking some of their numbers down depending upon the injury which to me is a viable choice.

But where I am confused is for those who never played?

Looking for suggestions/observations and such..

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by MacroGuru

What would you guys do for this?

I would never, ever play with TCY imported rosters. *shurg*

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I would never, ever play with TCY imported rosters. *shurg*

Well see, I know there are two camps out about TCY imports. I am running TCY on this machine and exporting the rosters out and importing them in.

I ran the tests of TCY vs FOF generated rosters and the talent levels were equal consistently year after year. In fact I had more years that the FOF generated rosters were better than the TCY ones.

The other plus I am getting is that it is adding a bit more flavor to the league and history.

[shbrehob]

What league are you commenting on this from. I thin running TCY with a league is something really cool. It allows the GM's to follow the history of players through out their college careers and into the league. I think that tweeking their abilities after a college injuury would make sense.

[MacroGuru]

Originally Posted by shbrehob

What league are you commenting on this from. I thin running TCY with a league is something really cool. It allows the GM's to follow the history of players through out their college careers and into the league. I think that tweeking their abilities after a college injuury would make sense.

With serious testing and comparisons before making the decision, it is in the FLFL that we are doing this in.

I was really hesitant going into the league doing this, but after spending countless hours running comparisons it made for a no brainer for us, because of the added history and flavor it brings to the league. We just have to be careful that it doesn't drastically alter the league talent and that is one thing I watch carefully.

[bulletsponge]

arnt TCY roster imports to FOF have older players

[sovereignstar]

Originally Posted by shbrehob

What league are you commenting on this from. I thin running TCY with a league is something really cool. It allows the GM's to follow the history of players through out their college careers and into the league. I think that tweeking their abilities after a college injuury would make sense.

Trust me. You don't want to follow the TCY histories of the guys you've drafted.

"Oh sweet! My new stud RB I picked in the Top 10 was a four-year backup. I wonder why his teammate, who broke the single-season rushing mark last year, didn't even get picked."

[33sherman]

Playing with TCY-imported rosters can be great, and it can be frustrating. It works really well about 90% of the time, but the 10% of inexplicable imports can really bring you down.

I love TCY, so I can't resist importing them into FOF, but yeah, you get those crazy situations where a college benchwarmer gets imported as Joe Montana. If you could somehow keep the busts and get rid of the booms that would never happen (except once in a blue moon). I guess it is possible that a guy with talent could get overlooked for four years, but not to the degree that it happens going TCY-->FOF.

[DeltaWhiskey]

Willie Parker...Kurt Warner (sort of)...

[OldGiants]

Originally Posted by 33sherman

Playing with TCY-imported rosters can be great, and it can be frustrating. It works really well about 90% of the time, but the 10% of inexplicable imports can really bring you down.

I love TCY, so I can't resist importing them into FOF, but yeah, you get those crazy situations where a college benchwarmer gets imported as Joe Montana. If you could somehow keep the busts and get rid of the booms that would never happen (except once in a blue moon). I guess it is possible that a guy with talent could get overlooked for four years, but not to the degree that it happens going TCY-->FOF.

Well the big issue for me is that you can't look at the TCY data of the draft class becasue that gives everything away. By that I mean, the 'gems' are all revealed in the TCY data. A 'yellow' senior is a great player and if he lasts until the fifth round because of the scouting mask, he's the guy to take. No doubts there.

[Sgran]

The TCY imports simply give you different players. My feeling is that a league that uses them should have everyone share what they know off the bat. For example, that you are not going to ever be able to draft a tight end who has big play ability. I actually like it that TCY files give you more decent QBs.

[Ben E Lou]

I moved FOF2K7 and TCY over to my new machine yesterday evening, and out of my own curiosity, I imported TCY draft classes until the league was entirely free from the original player file, and was 100% TCY imports. (So yes, this was done with TCY installed.) In this sim, I turned injuries up to 225, which knocks the talent level down over time. (More injuries = more talent hits.) I can safely conclude that the talent inflation problem is worse than I had even thought, actually. A few data points:

• The league has 30 quarterbacks rated above 60. And there are another 17 rated between 55 and 60.
• 25 RBs are 60 or higher, with another 9 between 55 and 59.
• 74 WRs are rated 50 or higher.

Compare these numbers to the WOOF (FOF2K7 only), and it becomes clear that using TCY drafts completely alters the games landscape:

• 11 QBs rated above 60, 8 between 55 and 60.
• 10 RBs who are 60 or higher, 3 between 55 and 60. Fewer than half the teams have a 55+ RB
• 39 WRs are rated 50 or higher.

So in a TCY drafted league, roughly have of the teams should have a backup rated 55+. In a FOF2K7-only talent league, a little over half the teams have a *starter* rated that highly. Every single team in the league has quality players with depth in the TCY leagues on both sides of the ball. This is of course leading to inflated offensive production, even with AI game plans. The league-wide passer rating has been as high as 88.9, and hasn't been below 84.5 in the 10+ years since the TCY guys essentially took over. I cannot imagine the kind of numbers that human game plans would put up with this talent. AI QBs have records of 128.3 rating and 47 TDs. It's fairly safe to say that a savvy human-run team ought to be able to turn in a 135 rating and 60 TDs in a fully mature TCY-only league. For example, I'm looking right now at an AI QB who threw 45 TDs in a year and only threw 475 passes.

And of course, this post hasn't even mentioned the TE issue, the #1 pick who was a four-year backup issue, and the WR big-play receiving issue. (In case you didn't realize it, it is laughably easy to pick up a WR with very high big-play receiving. Sorting by BPR in this league, the top 25 WRs all have 95 or better in that category. WOOF only has 5 WRs who are above 90. Even IHOF with its inflated FOF2K4 talent only has 10 90+ guys.) Getting Downfield is also way-high (25 guys 92 or better vs. 7 90 or better in WOOF vs. 8 90 or better in IHOF.) I'm sure there are other skills that are very skewed like that as well, but those two being skewed that badly would make it very easy to design a custom offense and acquire top-tier players to run it. My 60-TD estimate may be a little low, actually. I might fool with this some in SP tonight just as a curiosity.

[marcmoustache]

Is there a problem in having a league wide increased talent level? Is IHOF any worse then the GEFL, because the GEFL rosters are very poor outside of the top 10% of players?

[Ben E Lou]

Define "worse."

Here are my two problems with league-wide increased talent levels:

1. It inflates offensive production, particularly passing. Yes, that's even if both offensive and defensive talent is inflated. If you don't believe me, use players.csv to create a league with nothing but "9" players across the board, and run it for even one season. League-wide QB ratings (with Rex game plans, even) will be in the 90s. I suspect that if we did a league like that with human game plans, the league-wide rating would top 100.

2. It makes decision making regarding talent acquisition less meaningful, and in some cases nearly meaningless. In the example above of the QBs, why bother to invest money or draft picks in a 65/65 QB to throw to your two 65/65 receivers when you can grab a 55/55 one in free agency who will perform nearly the same?

3. It skews FOF more and more toward being a "game plan" sim versus a "GM" sim. If every team has 22 starters rated 55 and up, and most teams have 22 starters rated 60-75, who's going to win? The guy with the best game plan, that's who. Again, put enough talent in the league, and it causes all of the roster management aspects of the league to be less and less meaningful, since everyone will be able to assemble a solid roster without much effort, strategy, or expertise.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by marcmoustache

Is there a problem in having a league wide increased talent level? Is IHOF any worse then the GEFL, because the GEFL rosters are very poor outside of the top 10% of players?

I'm pretty sure that the GEFL uses draft files made by nilodor which were modeled after suggested roster file percentages in the Solecismic Roster File Creator Help File.

Thus, GEFL draft classes are pretty balanced (at least moreso than IHOF) and pretty close to what the game was intended to model.

EDIT: Actually, GEFL Draft Classes are actually "better" than suggested FOF percentages because there is a lot more roster filler in our draft classes". Thus, there is even less offensive talent in the GEFL than in normal FOF2K7 leagues. However, the downside to this is that there is a much bigger difference from superstars to the rest of the class (if that's really a bad thing).