FOF 4.0c Grassy Knoll or Bug???

[Ben E Lou]

- Adjust the AI for determining starting players, trying to avoid more talented players sitting on the bench (this increases the importance of pre-training-camp position moves, which also have been adjusted).

Someone posted about an "obviously" better player being relegated to the bench while a lesser guy started. I had what I *thought* was a similar situation show up, but then some interesting things happened. Listen to the curious case of rookie RB's Corwin Tatum and Trent Bandt.

I'm doing a new Empty Cupboard career with the patch, importing the ol' Kentucky TCY career draft files. Corwin Tatum was the 2(1) pick in the first draft. Tatum ran for 1,312 yards and 13 TD's on 274 carries in his senior year at Nebraska. He was 1st Team All Big 12. Brandt was an undrafted free agent from Penn State. He had 858 yards on 178 carries, missing 4 games due injury, in his senior season. My scout is Avg. at RB's.

Tatum's key ratings as a rookie:
Breakaway: 32
Power Inside: 68
Third Down: 66/78
Hole Recognition: 52/82
Elusiveness: 60/83
Speed To Outside: 93
OVERALL: 40/54

Brandt's key ratings as a rookie:
Breakaway: 93
Power Inside: 32
Third Down: 17/19
Hole Recognition: 13/14
Elusiveness: 29/30
Speed To Outside: 28
OVERALL: 34/42

Clearly, with the exception of breakaway speed, Tatum outclasses Brandt, right??? Well, according to the AI suggestion for starters, wrong! It put Brandt in as my starting RB. Well, of course I prompty moved Tatum into the starting role. Now, here's where it gets interesting. In game one of the regular season, Tatum carried 13 times for 22 yards, and sustained a minor injury. Brandt came off the bernch and carried 16 times for 103 yards! With Tatum injured (but listed as probable), I decided that Brandt had earned himself a start. He went for over 100 yards again, and for 99 the following week. Well, suffice to say that Tatum never won his starting spot back. Brandt went on to rush for 1314 yards on 309 carries (4.2 ypc) and won Offensive Rookie Of The Year. Tatum carried 144 times for only 443 yards (3.0 ypc).

All of this leads to a few "grassy knoll" type questions:

Does the AI that determines starting lineups "know" that Tatum is a bust and/or that Brandt will break out?

Brandt is a near red-liner. Is he going to break out at year 5 or so?

Was this season just a pure fluke? (Note: After training camp in year 2, both players still look about like they did their rookie year, and the AI is still suggesting that Brandt should be the starter.)

Is this just a bug in the system AND a pure fluke that Brandt had such a good year?

If the AI can spot breakouts/busts before the player can, then I'd say this is a good thing to increase difficulty. The only suggestion I'd have for Jim is that the player's "recommend" button shouldn't take booms/busts into account. Let us figure it out by stats.

Thoughts?

[Bee]

Well in my case (I'm the one that posted about the issue before), the player wasn't a bust. The CB I had whom the computer didn't want to start ended up over the next 4 seasons with 7 ints, 10 ints, 7 ints, and 11 ints. He also is now almost a solid redliner in every category (except returns). The player the computer wanted to start was cut the following season and no one picked him up.

Since then, I've hit several more cases where the judgement of the computer picking starters can be questioned. I haven't been documenting them, but it's happening enough that I'm noticing it. I prefer playing the game with the computer suggesting a lineup and then I adjust it every week so I might be noticing this more than someone who sets their lineup and makes adjustments weekly (and doesn't get a recommendation from the computer).