Free Agency Bug?

[chinaski]

Im noticing a large amount of great players going unsigned during the free agent bidding period, then signing for the league minimum once the bidding period has ended. Once the 2nd bidding period was over, i had over 35 60+ rated players sitting there waiting for the league minimum.

Once the season started, Buffalo signed a 78/78 rated DE - who was asking for 77 million over 6 years during the FA bidding period, for the league minimum. They also signed a 70/70 RB and 68/68 RB for the league minimum. During the bidding period, all these players were recieving bids, yet they went unsigned.

Anyone else notice something funky goin on?

[Ben E Lou]

Whoa. Confirmed. This is at the end of the 20-stage process:

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/fof/freeagents.jpg

I noticed that several teams signed *NO* free agents, despite having the cap room to do so. Is this the "high-risk" fix manifesting itself?

[wig]

Thank god I didn't update yet

[MizzouRah]

SHeeeet! NO! I guess my poll will have more time now. :) I'm not proceeding onto 2009 until Jim sees this. Ack! I thought I was done reshacking, moving logos, etc.. :(


Todd

[korme]

I was downloading 5.0d at 94% and promptly canceled that sucker.

[Dutch]

Chinaski - the FOFC's most helpful poster with less than 100 posts. Most knowledgable FOFC'er with less than 100 posts. Best Bug Finder with less than 100 posts. Biggest pain in Jim's ass with less than 100 posts.

Keep up the good work!

[chinaski]

lol! thanks!

[Eaglesfan27]

Stop posting "thanks" posts. Otherwise you will promptly lose your all of your awards ;)

[amdaily]

I believe this problem can be directly tied to the unrealistic salaries demanded by, and paid to, the leagues elite players. Here are the number of players and their positions making over $10 million in my current league with the salary cap at $75 million (26 in total):

QB - 6
WR - 3
OL - 8
DL - 6
LB - 2
CB -1

Here are the number of players in the NFL counting for $10 million or more against the teams cap as according to http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playersbyposition.aspx?pos=3&order=CapValue+desc:

QB - 1
DL - 1

Some teams will have upwards of $25 million tied up in 2 players. No wonder they can't go out and pay a "Good" player $4 million a season in FA. A Tackle in my league is counting $22 million against the cap!

Even if you look at current salary (including the full signing bonus, so this isn't a cap number, just an interesting statistical comparison) only 11 NFL players take home more than $10 million. http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/top25.aspx?year=2002

The salary demands of elite FOF players needs heavily moderated, and then the second tier stars should be signed by default in the 20 step process with that spare cap room. Anyone else see another reason for this besides salary demands?

[Easy Mac]

I guess Jim was right that changing the Free Agency model from ver. C might have some serious reprucussions.

At least he warned us.

[amdaily]

I guess Jim was right that changing the Free Agency model from ver. C might have some serious reprucussions.

At least he warned us.
Even before the new patches alot of talented players signed for the minimum the following preseason. So I doubt this is the sole cause, although it may be responsible for a small portion. I see the salaries as the much larger culprit.

[Easy Mac]

I've only got 6 players left at the end of free agency with a rating higher than 60, and one is out the entire next season. The highest salary demand of these players are $4 million for the first year of the contract.

At the beginning of Free Agency, only 5 players are asking for over $15 in any one year of their contract, only 1 over $20 (QB).

Of the players currently contracted prior to FA, 135 are making over $10 million for the season (cap cost). 29 are making over $20 million. 5 over $30 million and 1 over $40 million. (the higher numbers are included in over $10 million)

The current salary cap in my league is $184 million. In comparison, $10 million is 1/18th of the salary cap. Compared to a $72 million cap, that would mean 135 players would be making at least $4. 29 would be making $8 million. 5 would be making $12 million, and 1 would be making $16 million. Now, I think the first 2 numbers are probably normal, maybe the 5 players making $30 million is a bit high. And for the last one, Manning/McNabb may make that soon.

I'm at the end of 2020 btw.

[Fritz]

Do I see the Hooligan light up there in the clouds?

This is a job for .... ah, fuck it.

[wig]

At least you guys didn't lose a 3rd round draft pick for being $60,000 over the cap

[amdaily]

I still have the cap set at $75 million. In week 1 of FA, The top 6 rated players all want $10 million/year contracts. How can the league maintain stability when 6 players want $10 million/year contracts every offseason. The NFL has only 2 at a time!

At the end of FA, 3 are still demanding $10 million. Upon looking through the transaction screen post FA, 11 players signed deals that will pay them $10 this year or in a season to come. Keep in mind that this is in addition to the 26 players that currently are making $10 million league wide. Also keep in mind the NFL has only 2 $10 million players at a time.

I see this as accounting for roughly half the league having less than $8 million in cap room left after FA (still have to sign rookies), so they effectivly cannot sign anyone. The other half of the league has the cap room too go after some of these "good" rated players that are sitting idle on the market. Perhaps the AI needs adjusted to be more agressive in FA. If that were done, and the salaries of elite players came down, I think we'd be sitting pretty in regards to this issue.

Also, at the end of the 8 step FA period, 15 teams still have more than $6 million in cap room while all these "good" FA's continue to sit on the market. I don't see how that can be tied to the roster management changes made in the "c" and "d" patches. The free agent AI simply needs to be more agressive.

[Rhone Ranger]

I believe this problem can be directly tied to the unrealistic salaries demanded by, and paid to, the leagues elite players. Here are the number of players and their positions making over $10 million in my current league with the salary cap at $75 million (26 in total):

QB - 6
WR - 3
OL - 8
DL - 6
LB - 2
CB -1

Here are the number of players in the NFL counting for $10 million or more against the teams cap as according to http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/playersbyposition.aspx?pos=3&order=CapValue+desc:

QB - 1
DL - 1

Some teams will have upwards of $25 million tied up in 2 players. No wonder they can't go out and pay a "Good" player $4 million a season in FA. A Tackle in my league is counting $22 million against the cap!

Even if you look at current salary (including the full signing bonus, so this isn't a cap number, just an interesting statistical comparison) only 11 NFL players take home more than $10 million. http://asp.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/salaries/top25.aspx?year=2002

The salary demands of elite FOF players needs heavily moderated, and then the second tier stars should be signed by default in the 20 step process with that spare cap room. Anyone else see another reason for this besides salary demands?

I agree with this. In fact, it's this behavior that I've been able to exploit the most in beating the AI. Specifically:

1. When one of my players asks for a ridiculous salary I either franchise him (permanently - see below) or cut him.

2. In FA I generally ignore the top-rated player(s) and go for the guys who are rated just a few points less, but who ask for far less money.

As a result, I end up with a team of (starting) players almost all of whom are rated at least 50, with many in the 60, 70 and even 80 ranges, and all comfortably under the salary cap.

I just won four super bowls in a row with this team (on the hardest game level) so my feeling is that something is a little too easy. :)

I know that in real-life football, it's all about weighing salary versus talent, and that often choosing the "second best but better value" player is the right choice. But FOF appears to take this to an extreme degree. In my experience with FOF, the elite players are almost never worth the crazy money they ask for, while the "next best" players are a steal of a deal, often playing for a couple million bucks while the elite players - who are only a few points better in the ratings - ask for five or eight times that amount. And the AI gets suckered into it really easily.

Just for fun I often continue to watch the careers of FAs I let go because they asked for insane money, and in 90% of the cases their stats after leaving my team are thoroughly average, despite the player earning umpteen gazillion dollars. I think the AI just goes bonkers and doesn't judge value very well when signing FAs, and this makes it too easy for a human player to "clean up" with all the "next best" players at an unrealistically low bargain rate.

In the real NFL, it does seem that there's always an idiot team who pays any price for the most suspect of overhyped free agents. So I don't question that sometimes a guy should get crazy money even when he doesn't deserve it. But it seems like the AI does this for all its teams. It would be nice if the AI maybe overpaid players on some franchises, but was "smarter" with others, more cautious about overpaying. This would lead to overpriced guys sometimes getting their big paycheck, but other times having to drop their asking price by a lot (just like in real life) and the second-tier guys generally being more highly valued than they currently are in FOF.

On a related note, does anyone else agree that the new logic for players getting angry with a team when franchised (and therefore refusing to sign a long-term deal) is backwards?

I say this because it promotes a bizarre behavior. Say I franchise a player, only to find that he's now angry with me and refuses to sign a long term deal. What do I do? In fact, what is my only real choice now? To franchise him every year of course! By refusing to sign with me, he leaves me no choice but to continue franchising him year after year, which (one would assume) is what he's trying to avoid. The players makes far less money over his career than he would if he just signed, yet he's my captive audience. This is clearly not in the best interest of the player.

Also, it would be nice to have a data field for a player indicating whether they're willing to sign contracts with you. It's annoying to spend time poring over the details of a deal, only to then see "Due to complaints...". If there was a line saying "This guy won't sign with you" on the player record, it would save time.

[Easy Mac]

The team of average to above average players pretty much describes the Patriots.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

On a related note, does anyone else agree that the new logic for players getting angry with a team when franchised (and therefore refusing to sign a long-term deal) is backwards?

I say this because it promotes a bizarre behavior. Say I franchise a player, only to find that he's now angry with me and refuses to sign a long term deal. What do I do? In fact, what is my only real choice now? To franchise him every year of course! By refusing to sign with me, he leaves me no choice but to continue franchising him year after year, which (one would assume) is what he's trying to avoid. The players makes far less money over his career than he would if he just signed, yet he's my captive audience. This is clearly not in the best interest of the player.


See Orlando Pace and Walter Jones in real life. Jones, especially has cost himself some serious money over the last couple of years.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

The team of average to above average players pretty much describes the Patriots.

F*^%$#^K You! :D

[Easy Mac]

I don't know, maybe my league is an anomoly. I re-ran free agency, and there is only 1 player rated above 60 who is left. No one is asking for anything over $10 million.

After free agency, here are the cap numbers:
Team Cap Room Draft Picks Big Need 2nd Need 3rd Need
**Cleveland $79,120,000 $7,840,000 Resrv ILB Start DE Start QB
Pittsburgh $33,490,000 $13,440,000 Start RB Start DT Start ILB
Minnesota $31,380,000 $13,440,000 Start RB Resrv RB Resrv T
Cincinnati $30,810,000 $7,840,000 Start ILB Start TE Start T
Kansas City $29,860,000 $10,080,000 Start G Start FB Resrv ILB
Denver $29,150,000 $10,080,000 Start DT Start C Start WR
Houston $29,100,000 $9,520,000 Start WR Start ILB Resrv ILB
Tampa Bay $27,810,000 $8,960,000 Start TE Resrv ILB Resrv WR
Green Bay $26,180,000 $7,840,000 Start OLB Resrv T Resrv OLB
Philadelphia $25,900,000 $8,400,000 Start G Resrv G Resrv OLB
Miami $25,830,000 $9,520,000 Start G Resrv S Start ILB
Chicago $25,780,000 $7,840,000 Start S Resrv S Start CB
Carolina $24,740,000 $7,840,000 Start QB Start FB Start G
New York J $24,700,000 $11,200,000 Resrv DT Start C Start WR
Washington $24,670,000 $7,840,000 Resrv WR Start DT Start ILB
San Francisco $24,180,000 $11,200,000 Start DT Start C Resrv DT
Seattle $23,680,000 $8,400,000 Start TE Start DT Start G
New England $23,280,000 $10,080,000 Start DT Start RB Start QB
Dallas $23,020,000 $9,520,000 Start DT Start ILB Start WR
Indianapolis $22,720,000 $13,440,000 Start DE Start DT Resrv ILB
Buffalo $22,410,000 $7,840,000 Resrv G Start WR Start CB
New Orleans $22,250,000 $7,840,000 Start ILB Start FB Resrv ILB
Tennessee $22,130,000 $8,400,000 Start T Start S Start WR
St. Louis $21,230,000 $8,400,000 Start T Resrv T Resrv OLB
San Diego $21,160,000 $7,280,000 Start G Resrv ILB Start DT
Detroit $21,030,000 $7,280,000 Start C Resrv T Resrv DT
Jacksonville $20,060,000 $10,080,000 Start DT Start TE Start WR
Atlanta $19,380,000 $7,280,000 Start G Start ILB Start DT
Oakland $19,050,000 $7,840,000 Start CB Resrv ILB Start ILB
New York G $14,820,000 $7,840,000 Start ILB Start QB Start WR
Arizona $13,550,000 $9,520,000 Start WR Start G Resrv WR
Baltimore $10,070,000 $7,840,000 Start DE Resrv T Resrv DE


Cleveland is me, and since I quickly did FA, I didn't do anything.

[SackAttack]

I say this because it promotes a bizarre behavior. Say I franchise a player, only to find that he's now angry with me and refuses to sign a long term deal. What do I do? In fact, what is my only real choice now? To franchise him every year of course! By refusing to sign with me, he leaves me no choice but to continue franchising him year after year, which (one would assume) is what he's trying to avoid. The players makes far less money over his career than he would if he just signed, yet he's my captive audience. This is clearly not in the best interest of the player.

I'd like to see FOF ultimately model the method, even if only superficially, that the NFL uses with franchised players. That is, other teams can sign them, but the team who slapped the player with the tag has the right to match any offer, or else opt to let him leave and receive compensation in the form of draft picks.

'Course, I'd imagine it might become necessary to code that in such a way that only starting players can be hit with the tag. Otherwise there'd be too much incentive to draft a kid, groom him, and then hit him with the tag just as he's ready to break out, all for the sake of getting a couple draft choices back for him.

Just my two cents.

[FBPro]

I'm not seeing this issue, I've got a couple of injured played in the 50's and the highest rated uninjured is in the 40's. This is at the end of the pre-season this career was begun w/ 5.0c and undated to 5.0d last night.

[RPI-Fan]

I think the problem is that these players aren't signed in late free agency. Teams are snapping them up after training camp for chump change, but not when they should be, during the 8 or 20 step stages.

[Easy Mac]

After year 1: 4 players already making $10 million. 6 players asking for $10 in a year at some point during the contract.

After FA round 20: 2 players average $10 a year with their contract. 0 players rated >60 are left.

After Year 2: (Note: I won the championship despite going 8-8 and quicksimming). 9 players already are making $10 million. 5 asking for $10 million in a year, only 2 before the 6th year.

After FA round 20: 4 players left >60 (2 in 70's, 1 in 80's). 1 is a very high priced QB, 1 is a Kicker, 2 are safeties asking for under $2 million.

After extra FA round: same 4 players still available, but I now see one of the safeties was out for over half a year.

More to check on when I return from church.

[Peregrine]

Started a new game, quicksimmed through free agency. After 20 round FA step, there are 2 90s (!) 1 80 4 70s, and 9 60s available. Some are expensive (the best LDE in the league is demanding the highest salary for example) but none of them seem to be demanding outrageous salaries.

Nobody is making ten million that I could tell, or asking for it. All of the teams have good cap room left after the 20 round step.

[yabanci]

Are the wierd things coming up in leagues generated from a third-party utility or from the default/nfl player file?

[Ben E Lou]

Are the wierd things coming up in leagues generated from a third-party utility or from the default/nfl player file?Mine was third-party. Could this be the issue?

[Easy Mac]

I remember Jim saying 3rd party things may not work right with 5.0c I think, so maybe.

[Ben E Lou]

I remember Jim saying 3rd party things may not work right with 5.0c I think, so maybe.{Firing up 5.0d with default rosters on the desktop for some quick-simming}

[Easy Mac]

dola,I've run all of my "tests" using the default player file and the real player name file.

[Buccaneer]

I remember Jim saying 3rd party things may not work right with 5.0c I think, so maybe.
This includes Fido's?

[Easy Mac]

Yeah, Fido's doesn't work for me anymore. It can't read the players or box scores or stats.

[amdaily]

This includes Fido's?
I think he was mainly referring to HeavyReign's fictional player generator.

[amdaily]

Dola,

Same thing is happening with the default file.

HR's utility may, or may not, skew the stats in a leagues first decade, but it wouldn't affect this issue.

Just prior to training camp my FA screen looks like this:

http://s92878788.onlinehome.us/problem4.gif

UPDATE:

In seasons 2008 - 2010 from this league, $10 million per year players increased from 6 to 20 thus leaving multiple "Excellent" rated players onthe FA market going into camp. I suspect it will only get worse as I advance into the future.

[Easy Mac]

Just pulling things out of the changlist that may have affected (e?) FA:

43) Contracts with very heavy backloading no longer given as much consideration by players.

22) Force teams to resign a higher percentage of their free agents and raise the AI threshold for releasing players.

6) Place players released during the free agency stages into the pool of players available for bid by other teams.

Just a note, I am definitely not seeing # 22. My team in every test was the only team to have more than 25 players on my roster at the start of FA. If anything it has gotten worse.

[Ben E Lou]

Hmmmm...A very different experience for me with default rosters....

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/fof/freeagents2.jpg

[amdaily]

I'd say #22 say it has made a slight difference.

Previously, after clicking "Begin free agency, all teams would dump all but 13-19 players and thus the "roster" attribute on the "franchise value" screen would be 0 for 22-25 teams. Now it's only a 0 for 15-19 teams :).

[amdaily]

What year Skydog?

[Easy Mac]

SD, Not sure if you have or not, but sim ahead 3 or 4 years. I noticed it starts to creep in around then. Bot not 17 years ahead

[amdaily]

We'll, I don't know about anyone else, but right after clicking "begin free agency," teams are still excessively cutting players down to the point where the roster screen looks like this :( :

http://s92878788.onlinehome.us/problem5.gif


It recovers by the time training camp rolls around, but there is no player continunity in the league.

And Easy Mac - I'm now up to 2014 and the FA problem only has only worsened. The entire first page of free agents screen is filled with "Excellent" and "Very Good players" and the number of $10 million per year players has risen to 21. It's obvious there is a correlation.

[Easy Mac]

Did you turn off inflation?

[Ben E Lou]

Easy:

Something came up and I wasn't able to run any tests. Are you saying that the problem goes away after a few years?

[RealDeal]

I'm not sure exactly what has caused the problem but team cohesion is plummeting and there are ridiculously good FA's available after late free agency is over.

[Easy Mac]

Easy:

Something came up and I wasn't able to run any tests. Are you saying that the problem goes away after a few years?
I know I've played another 2 years of my current dynasty that was advanced about 16 years (2020 and 2021). I didn't notice the problems in that dynasty, but it was started way back on patch A, though that shouldn't matter.

However, in another test I ran I first noticed it after season three, but not again until season 6. Then I just quit. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, its just an every year end of the world thing. Its still not right, but I normally can't afford the guys anyway (I'm normally right against the cap after re-signing my guys), so I've never noticed it, nor really care because of how I play the game.

[RealDeal]

Also, I think this is something from patch C, and not patch d.

[RealDeal]

triple dola. My apologies. I think the problem is that certain top tier players, particularly QB's, are asking for contracts that are too high as a percentage of the cap. Their demands are MUCH higher after patch C. After signing these contracts, the AI is then forced to cut tons of guys to get under the cap. I'm also noting a lot more teams losing 3rd round pciks due to cap violations.

It's funny because "normal" players seem to be asking for about the same.

[amdaily]

Easy,

It was off, but I just simmed though 5 years with it set at 30 and the roster screen looks the same as above prior to FA. In first 2 years after raising it, the post-8 step market looked better, but within 5 years it was again crowded once those $10 million/year players started demanding $12 million a year.

Regardless of inflation, the elite players simply demand to large a percentage of the salary cap (refer to the NFL numbers I posted earlier) and thus have to leave alot of average players on the FA market.


RealDeal,

Cohesion plummets because teams are still releasing to many players and not resigning enough. Prior to FA it looks like most teams carry between 17-22 - still not close to NFL standards.

I realize that this is an tough feature to program. If the AI doesn't release players to fill more glaring holes, the game becomes to easy for the player to win. But if they release to many, the AI is penalized in the cohesion arena, not to mention that the game itself longer resembles an accurate NFL sim.

After further research, Patch fix #22 does not appear to have went far enough.


SkyDog,

The problem worsens for me as time goes on. Look at this photo of a team that has 42% of it's cap space invested in the outrageous demands of 2 elite players - http://s92878788.onlinehome.us/problem6.gif. If elite salaries were decreased to real life standards, this team could then sign some of those "good" players in FA and not have to start 9 rookies.

[Easy Mac]

I dunno, I've always had QB's asking for far too much money. =Before patch I'd see QB's routinely asking for 20-30 million a year by the ned of their contracts. Its not much different now.

[RealDeal]

I feel like something changed on player demands after patch C. I've seen ridiculous demands beofre, but I've never seen some of the demands like I've seen in the last couple of days. My QB is asking for 6 years/$85 million, 21 million bonus, on a $75 million cap, with a final year cap hit of $22 million. Generally, even the best QB in the game wasn't asking for much more than $10-$11 million top cap hit before the patch.

[Easy Mac]

Every game I've ever run has Peyton Manning asking for a 120 million contract after the first season.

[Ben E Lou]

I thought this worth posting in the two appropriate threads.

Thanks for the support. By risky, I meant that I probably would have heard of crashes by now if something went wrong. There's nothing in 5.0d that should cause anyone to think of staying on 5.0c. The big change in AI FA acquisition was from 5.0b to 5.0c.

Teams in the NFL seem to have a core of 20-30 players that they keep for more than a year. Some go as small as 16 in retention, others as high as 32. Obviously, FOF 2004 is retaining fewer players. If that's what it takes to maintain a competitive AI, that's okay with me. I'll have to see how this issue plays out over the next week or so before I make any decisions on how to proceed.

This looks like the key sentence: The big change in AI FA acquisition was from 5.0b to 5.0c.

It sounds like our best bet is going to be giving Jim feedback on 5.0d. From reading the discussion thread about the FA bug, and from an e-mail conversation with Jim, I'm not yet convinced that we have a "show-stopping" problem here. There is some evidence that the problem comes from third-party rosters, and some evidence that after 15+ years, the problem doesn't exist at all regardless of what rosters you use. Because of the unable-to-cut-players-during-free-agency issue in 5.0c, the process of getting through multiple free agency periods and giving proper feedback would likely be accelerated by using 5.0d.

[Dutch]

And it won't matter at all for MP leagues.

I'm pressing on with my SP career with 5.0d, but it's slow going right now with RL.

[chinaski]

*bump*

/wish HR wrote FOF

:P

[ThomasG]

I just had the same problem in my last offseason. There were (among others) two QBs of 83 and 76 current rating. They were signed to the minimum by the same team, the New Orleans Saints, who already had a 77 ranked QB. Now that's what I call depth...

Those late contracts are one thing. But please, let them be signed by teams that need them!

[amdaily]

I still maintain that one of the biggest problems is that elite players demand, and recieve, far to much money, thus leaving 70-80 ranked players to sign for 1-year minimum deals prior to the season.

You need only look at players making more than $10 million per season. I did a long study on this some months back (I'll try and find it if anyone is interested), but if my memory is correct Peyton Manning is the only NFL playing making over $10 million per season. He is also the only FOF player making over $10 million when you load the default player file.

However, within 6 seasons the number of $10 million players (rather the equivelent of, after adjusting for inflation) will looking like this: 1, 1, 2, 5, 13, 18.

I feel that if the salary demands of elite players were reduced, it would in turn reduce the number of quality players still left on the free agent market at the beginning of a season.

[Goose]

I usually start my first rounders right away to speed up their development and not having to pay them millions to sit on the bench since I'm essentially stuck with their contracts. If I bench him for most of his rookie contract would I have a much better chance of signing him to a longer-term deal for reasonable money? I've had 2nd and 3rd rounders who develop into stars who are much more willing to resign for reasonable amounts of money

As for the FA issue. What annoys me the most is that 1) the player's salary demands increase right after FA period ends and before training camp and 2) I don't get first crack at resigning my star player who chooses to sign for minimum after training camp. Since my player has high loyalty ratings I would think that I would get a good crack at him if he was going to sign for cheap.