GroupThink - 1998 Little Rock Rollers
 

This is a continuation of the GroupThink career, managing the Little Rock Rollers. The career started in 1990, and has been jointly managed by several of the regular FOFC members, with input from numerous others.

All are welcome to download the game files, and join in the discussions. (Note: the game files will rename your cities and teams, so back up your own universe directory before overwriting those files)

GroupThink Original File


For the detailed history of the Little Rock Rollers, here are previous threads that can get you up to speed:

GroupThink beginnings
1991 offseason
1991 regular season
1992 offseason
1992 regular season
1993 offseason
1993 regular season
1994 season
1995 offseason
1995 season
1996 offseason and season
1997 offseason and season


Here is an updated version of our house rules:

House Rules:

1. Must take 60 players to training camp each season.
2. Must keep at least 53 players on the roster all season long.
3. Players can not start out of position at the beginning of the season, and replacements for injuries must be made within position groups, if possible.
4. At the start of the career, all players under contract on the team must be offered a new contract or released.
5. No one can sim games except for the specified simmer for that week. That person can only sim once, the official results will be obtained from that sim.
6. When offering a contract to a player requesting a signing bonus, we must either:
- offer him exactly the deal he demands, or
- offer him a signing bonus at least as large as the largest yearly salary.

Trading:
1. Draft-pick-for-draft-pick deals can only be initiated during the draft. (plus potentially more restrictions)
2. We can accept any AI-initiated trade, if it meets the “fairness test”
3. We can shop a player, and then can only make one trade offer, to the top interested team-- if that offer is rejected, we must release the player.


Free Agents:

1. All offers to free agents who are new to the team must come prior to week 1, and may not be altered afterwards (except to withdraw the offer).
2. "Fan Favorites" or "Idolized" players who are the most popular players in their position group on our team must be offered at least their requested contract in week 1 of the 20-step process. These players may not be traded or released.
3. After our offers to players under #2 above are resolved, we may pursue one player at a time through free agency, from either within the team or without.
4. After week 10 of the FA process, we may no longer initiate offers to players outside our team.
5. Only undrafted rookie free agents may be signed outside of the 20-Step Process, and only to a one-year deal.

Renegotiations:
1. Renegotiation allowed only in last year of contract in the case of a "Classy Veteran" defined as:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- In the 10th year or later of his career.
- Has played 5 full seasons on our team.
- Has a Loyalty rating >75.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. No "classy veteran" whose Play For Winner Rating is 60 or above can be renegotiated with following a season when the team didn't make the playoffs. He can only be re-signed via the 20-Step Process.
3. No "classy veteran" who is unhappy or has a conflict with a teammate can be renegotiated. He can only be re-signed via the 20-step process.

And, in case you’d rather cut to the chase – here is the club’s record of success to date, after our taking over the franchise in 1990 (after the original one-player universe settled into maturity):


After staying among the league’s elite teams following our first Bowl win in 1992, we made history with a monstrous season in 1997, and come into the 1998 season with a fabulous 19-game winning streak intact.

So, read on, play along, join the staff or just let us know what you think!

1998 offseason

We come off our perfect 1997 campaign, with the challenge renewed, and a giant target on our backs. Everyone will want to be the ones to knock off the champs – and the winning streak can only last so long.


Retirements

We have one departure from our team – safety Donnie Bridgeman. Bridgeman was the grand old man from the club, and actually had a fabulous season last year, while still providing outstanding leadership and veteran influence on the whole squad. He leaves us now, and rightfully assumes his place in the league pantheon as a “Legend of the Game.”

Looking around the league, we also see a few somewhat familiar faces – QB Monty Houston, a member of our initial Rollers squad, has finally hung ‘em up.


Front Office

Financially, we got into the black this year – making $13 million in profits. That’s pretty good news, after a couple of fairly dark seasons. The big number moving was inn revenues – even though our ticket price increase was pretty modest. The extra home game and attention from the winning streak must have played a big role. We make another reasonable adjustment to ticket prices.

Our scout, Tony Shields, is awaiting a new deal. He’s still only 46 – and has a stellar record of 116-32 for our team. With all the great talent harvesting we have done, we simply must try to return him. Four years at an even million per, and he’s back. We’re intact in the front offices.


Player Situation

As we prepare to enter the free agent period, we have 27 players signed for this year. We have a whopping $60 million in cap space – but that is mitigated by some forced moves.

These players must receive new offers for this year:
RB Duane Crawford
LT Hardy Woolridge
SS Ty Lincoln
WR Wayne Hill
TE Donnell Thornton (!)

On the other end of this, we are currently paying WR Matthew Morrell $15 million this year (including $3m in bonus counted this year and next) – and following his recent injury, he is a shell of his former self. His popularity is below that of Wayne Hill, so perhaps we can relieve some of that burden and let Morrell go (unfortunately, that seems best).

So, we have a lot of room to fill on the roster, but also a lot of cap room with which to do it. This is a very important year for free agency – we need to make sure that we have fully refined our house rules here, as this is a potentially huge swing season in that regard.

I'll post the files now, and let us decide what to do from here.

Here's the first file:

Second file:

If my crystal ball is correct, if we folow the free agent rules as proposed (and as written above), we stand to get really wiped out this year. I'm assuming that many of our guys like DE Riddick Finley, S Bubba Nichols, FB Ethan Brock, RB Bo Biggs, and DE A.J. Hitchcock will get signed through the early stages of free agency.

These new proposed rules will not only restrict our ability to sign outside free agents, but they will certainly restrict our ability to re-sign our own players who are not fan favorites. That may or may not be a bad thing... but it is something to consider.

It will be interesting to see what happens with the new rule. I doubt we'll be bringing in any new talent if we want to keep our own guys.

I think this rule will really do exactly as intended.. This should bring out the realism.. how many NFL teams get to bring back all of their favorite guys (or almost all) and pick up whoever they want in FA.. they can't, and now we can't.. even losing those players, we're still a pretty good team.. I really have high hopes for this change in rules and feel we should follow through with them as stated in the previous thread...

As for Morrell, I unfortunately feel we probably have to get rid of him too.. it's sad to see that happen with one of my favorite players right after a big extension, but hey, he gets to keep his signing bonus..

This will be very interesting. The one thing I did not count on was the rule of no new bids after week 10. That might be a bit drastic knowing that even if you offer a great contract, the game sometimes just take its time for a player to decide - for no other reason than to allegedly make it 'realistic'. Good luck.

BTW.. I assume this means we'll fill our roster with URFAs?

The way I see it, we'll have no choice. I expect that we will carry something like 20 rookies this year, including draft picks and fillers.

Since it seems like we have consensus on the rules... it seems pretty programmed where to go from here. I'll make the initial forced offers to our fan favorites, and once that gets resolved we can start thinking about what we might want to do elsewhere. (Leaves a bit out of our decision-making process, but we'll see how it goes)

Sorry guys I had a really busy weekend so I wasn't able to contrbiute much. I will say I am a little skeptical about the rules. I won't "complain" about them as I didn't offer much of an alternative, but I am concerned this may sap some of the fun out of the game for me. I don't want a cake walk through the year every year either, but my interest in this game has always been more about the players than our record.

For example in 99 Vincent Wellman, Blaine Houston, and Adrian Brewer are all non fan favorite players who are up for new contracts. Now you add to that C Shaun Tobias and seems very likely we will only end up with one of those guys. That doesn;t seem to add any realism to me. I don't know any team that would let three out of four star players walk. I can see now bringing all of them back, but in our situation if we decide Wellman is our guy and we go after him and he takes until week 10 to sign we get no shot at our other guys.

I don't disagree that will make the game harder, but I don't know I will enjoy a constant rotation of URFA very much either. Like everyone else I like to have some immersion int he game and a constant rotation of players doesn't do that for me. So I guess we will see how it goes, but I will just say I would have preferred if we gave ourselves a little more wiggle room with our own players.

perhaps in the first 10 weeks we are allowed to pursue one of ours and one outside person?

Or maybe even something along the lines of we can never be pursuing more than one player outside, but we can go after two or our own players in the first ten weeks at a time. So in other words we can either look for onein and one out or two in at any given time.

Dola,

BTW don;t get me wrong. I understand most of the people involved have started to lose interest and if the proposed house rules are the only way the majority will be interested in it again then by all means that is the direction we should go in.

I am just afraid I may start to lose interest with some of the proposed rules, but that shouldn't hold up the majority rule.

primelord: You had said that "The stats are what really drive my enjoyment in these games". If that is the case, then it shouldn't matter as much who we have generating those stats. But I don't think that's really the point. You were a little defensive when I brought how easy it was to acquire really good talent but I think you can recognize that the groupthink have to play down to the stupidity of the roster acquisition/management AI. We want to have our actions/decisions to have consequences and it seems from the way everyone plays FOF, we have to significantly hamper ourselves in order not to have predictably good success. But having said that, I now think that this season should be a transition regarding the house rules. Perhaps going after one inside and one outside is a good compromise.

To be honest, I don't expect the huge turnover that you seem to be expecting primelord. I think the bigger impact will be that we won't be able to pick up free agents outside our team. We might lose 1 or 2 star players on occasion, but I expect we'll be able to keep most of our star players. My experience has been that players are pretty loyal early on in free agent and will wait for a few weeks before signing with another team. I do think pursuing two free agents at a time will probably give us too much freedom unless we put some more limitations in.

Another option that we might consider would be this:

1. Can pursue 2 players every week.
2. Can't pursue "outside" players after week 5.
3. Can't pursue anyone after week 10 (including our players).
4. Our "fan favorites" will be offered contracts first (in order of popularity). Two at a time as per the first rule.


Example:
So, if we have 4 fan favorites with popularity of 100,100, 95 and 92.

Week 1: we offer contracts to the 2 100's.
Week 2: 1 guy signs, the other is still considering. We offer 95 a contract.
Week 3: Both guys sign. We offer 92 a contract and then we can offer either one of our other free agents or an outside free agent a contract.

and so on..after week 5 - we can't add new "outside" free agents. After week 10- we can't offer new contracts to anyone.

Hmmm... I guess that this wasn't all settled as I thought. Oh, well - I was unable to get logged onto the site the last hour or two, and went ahead with the initial stages of free agency under th rrules as I understood them to have settled. I'm open to whatever we want to do from here.

With that...

Free Agency

With the franchise tag off the table – nobody is an obvious target here, in my book, and its viability remains unresolved as I see it – we go ahead and begin the FA process. Under our new restrictions, this process starts with our offers to our fan favorite players, and our actual decision-making process only really kicks in after that gets settled.

I put in offers as follows:
LT Woolridge: 2yrs, $5.34m
RB Crawford: 2yrs, $4.72m
WR Hill: 1yr, $8m
S Lincoln: 1yr, $13m
TE Thornton: 3yrs, $4.14m (done immediately)

I decide to go with the shortest acceptable deal to the guys seeking big money – trying to avoid having us eat a monstrous bonus that would kill us if they got hurt. Plus, we aren’t going to be that cash-strapped this year, so there’s less incentive to come up with a backloaded deal to save us this year.


After the first week of free agency, here’s the lay of the land. Our four guys are all pending to us. None have any other offers, so hopefully these get done soon.

DE Riddick Finley has an offer from two teams, and could end up in Wheeling (wow). RB Bo Biggs is also hearing from teams – Tijuana seems to be the leader with a fat six year package. So, we can probably cross off those two studs from our returning player wish list, unless things unravel very quickly.

Elsewhere, our former TE Lamont Dresow signed a new deal to play for Hawk Mountain – a solid, 4yr contract for over $33m.


In week 2, we sign S Ty Lincoln, and watch RB Bo Biggs accept his deal from Tijuana. In week 3, RB Crawford and WR Hill re-sign with us. FB Ethan Brock has gotten an offer from Texarkana down the road, and is in peril of departing too.

In week 4, LT Hardy Woolridge takes our offer. We’re done with our required deals, and now can look at the free agent market and our own potential re-signings.

Fortunately, DE Riddick Finley and FB Ethan Brock are both still pending – so pursuing one of them can be on the table for us.


I’ll share the files, and you can get up to speed. This is a very different process already.

Here is the first file update... through 5 weeks of free agency.

Second file.

While I await the FOFC server regaining itself, here are some thoughts about the team at this point:

QB – Excellent. Otis Coghill is the man, and Benjamin Newton is an okay reserve. Jesse Cascini might be a worthwhile target, as he has played very well in reserve, and we know Cog has trouble getting through a whole season – even though he’s asking for a fairly fat contract for a backup. The lack of real depth keeps me from using an embarrassing superlative rating here.

RB – Solid. Jamal Lucas now has to be the main man, as Biggs’ departure makes his role even bigger. Lucas has yet to really deliver superstar performance (in my book), but plays a good all-around game, and occasionally carries the team. Crawford is ready for reserve duty, but we probably need to pursue help here. Lenny Richmond is probably too expensive to bring back, but was productive for us in the past. Likely area for a mid-round draft pick, I’d expect.

FB – Inadequate. Chad Colford is signed, and ready to play. We have done well with Ethan Brock as our starter for seven seasons, but he may be elsewhere unless we pursue him aggressively here. With Lucas’s prolific receiving skills, the pressure on the FB position is less and less in our offense. I suspect we’ll be okay with Colford.

TE – Solid. Juan Hatcher got a fan fave contract through this year, then watched Donnel Thornton become the public’s darling. Neither are star caliber players, but it’s unlikey we invest top dollar to bring in new talent here, with two solid players signed for real money already.

WR – Passable. We go three deep with quality guys, even though Morrell has dropped off that list. Wayne Hill can step back in as a starter across from Karl Dockrey, and we have emerging young talent Matthew Sims as a solid #3 man. Tracy Curtis is a possible RFA re-signee (I recommend it), but this is a spot we may look to improve. I’m assuming we release Morrell this year, but if not he fits in as a decent reserve making $15m.

T – Inadequate. Cornelius Lofton and Cedric McGee are both playing adequately, and should be okay for this year. both are up for new deals after this season, and we have no young players behind them, only old man Woolridge. This position screams for a serious investment, either as a FA or (preferably) through the draft.

G – Passable. Derek Lofton is a star caliber player, and was an unsung hero for our stellar offense last year. (We should be running behind the LG spot more often, in my opinion – this guy is a tank) His deal is up after this season – re-signing him might need to be a priority for next year, though he will be unrestricted. We’re wide open elsewhere – Trent Ballard is a RFA, along with Percy Hironika and Lonnie Ancheta. I suspect we should try to re-sign the first two of them, assuming we have the time to do so during the FA process.

C – Excellent. Zack Jones yielded to young Shaun Tobias last year, and the 7th round pick of ours tuned in a solid season and shows immense future promise. Jones now becomes our all-purpose sixth lineman, a valuable spot to be filed. Tobias should team with Lofton in creating a mighty push on the interior line.

P – Wretched. Marco Messina is a good punter, but is seeking a new deal and may not be atop our list of priorities. If we get him back, we get back to “Solid” here – otherwise, we probably plug in a URFA, and who knows?

K – Inadequate. Cole Murray is okay, but missed 10 FG attempts last season. With a narrowed distance between us and our competition, that could have been very bad news. Not a top priority to replace him, but after this year, I suspect we’ll be looking.

DE – Passable. With two young developing talents in Adrian Brewer and Tommy Walton, our prospects look pretty good here. Walton had 9 sacks last year in only 222 pass plays, while Brewer posted 7.5 of his own given a bit more time. Both look like real contributors. We have Veteran Ben Howen returning from last year, where he was our starter (apparently at the expense of Walton’s developmnt) nearly all season. Howen is solid against the run, so the platoon makes some immediate sense. The question mark is DE Riddick Finley, who was a surprise re-signing last year, and had a nice season for us, with 7.5 sacks in 319 pass plays. When healthy, we know he can bring it – now we’ll have to decide whether he’s worth really paying for again.

DT – Inadequate. Bert Ellis has yet to develop the way we wanted, and now looks a bit shy of his original projections. He still shows real pass rushing promise, and is locked up for four more years – he gets the start. Last year’s surprise rookie fill-in Alan Schenk did an adequate job in the middle, but doesn’t seem to have much more to show us. Starter Marshall Castillo from last year is mostly a run-stopper, and is seeking only about $3m per season to come back. Might make sense to shore up a thin and shaky position, when the time comes. This looks like a target position for an addition – perhaps a top draft pick?

ILB – Solid. Vincent Wellman delivered when asked last year – he posted his most prolific numbers to date, with 100+46 tackles in the middle, a strong 19.3% tackle rate. Signed through next year, he’s the anchor for our unit here. nobody behind him right now, and I don’t think Rondell Gray merits a new deal – should be looking for an adequate fill-in here, perhaps in the middle or later draft rounds.

OLB – Passable. Long-timer Gerald John regained his role with us last year, and played fairly well. His skills are just a good fit for our needs – he’s a zone specialist, and can give run support. Skip Artis came out of the 3rd round and became a starter – he looks like he can hold down the job for us okay. James Becker hasn’t dropped off as much as initially feared, and now fits well as our 4th LB, the top guy off the bench for us. We could use a prospect here, but the situation is stable.

CB – Excellent. Blaine Houston and Austin Maffet are excellent for our system, and both have put up god numbers for us while playing together. There probably isn’t a better starting pair in the league. We have nothing behind them, and this is a real concern. Levon Reeg is a solid veteran nickel back, but is costly for that role at nearly $5m per (his demands right now). This position probably needs to be considered highly for our draft – especially as both starters will be up after next year.

S – Passable. The loss of veteran anchor Bridgeman leaves us with top-dollar fan favorite Ty Lincoln as the centerpiece, and second year man Nicky Mercado as his counterpart. Mercado needs to develop to be a passable starter – he has mixed skills, but could be all right. We need depth here for certain, one way or another. A cheap veteran would make a lot of sense, but re-signing Bubba Nichols seems unlikely, as he has decided he is Jim Thorpe and demands commensurate cash.


Top Need Areas:

Defensive Tackle
Offensive Tackle
Cornerback
Wide Receiver
Running Back
Inside Linebacker
Safety
Punter

Well I guess I misspoke a bit. It is the stats that drive my enjoyment of the game. However it's the stats of "my players" that I enjoy. It's not just anyone getting 12 sacks that I enjoy. It's a guy I developed getting 12 sacks. So in other words the win or loss is usually secondary in my mind to just watching how my guys perform. I am more interested in how my guys contributed to a win or loss than the win or loss itself.

And I didn't get a little defensive when you made that statement! I got a lot defensive. :)

From what I read the only player who has departed before we could bid so far is RB Bo Biggs? I don't have access to the game right now, can someone take a look and tell us what kind of contracts are on the table for Finley and Brock?

Edit: Nice write up about the positions Quik.

That seemed like a nice little dig at me. ;)

Howen was the starter last season, but I had his playing time set at 1 so him and Walton would rotate heavily. Which they did. The reson Walton got on the field so little is we had Finley and Brewer in on passing downs. They seemed to be the best men for the job at the time, but when Finley went down Walton got the passing down call and played very well.

I am actually leaning away from trying to sign Finley. Not that he wouldn;t be great to have again, but as you said Walton needs to play to develop. So we let Brewer have all the time on one side and Have Howen play the run and Walton play the pass on the other side. And we can probably find a backup in the lower rounds of the draft.

And at this particular point, under the rules as posted above (not including the recent discussion about loosening things), we now may make one new offer to a player. Here are a few thoughts:


We're heading into week 6 of free agency, meaning we have potentially five more weeks of pursuing outside players. We also have some players of our own who might be intriguing to re-sign, notably DE Riddick Finley, FB Ethan Brock, and QB Jesse Cascini.


Among the free agents out there, I note that the two-time defending all-pro OLB Casey Cronin is in the midst of a bidding war. It looks like about $13m per year would get him - and he's a stud. OLB Brenden Terrell is also out there - he's unproven, and costs a good deal less. Neither are perfect for our system (not great in zone defense) but woudl be assets nonetheless.

LT Randall Upshaw looks like a very solid player, at a position I consider a priority. In addition, his demands are pretty modest. He has no other offers, so it may not be urgent - but he'd make a fine addition.

SS Ronni Etaton looks like a potential quality starter, but is costly. On the map, but maybe not a bullsye for us. FS justin Taylor much the same story.

QB Steve goodwin would be a nice pickup if we knew we wouldn't get Cascini - he'd be another real find off the scrap heap for us. (There are just too many good QBs like him sitting around without jobs)

DT Riddick Flannery is a pretty decent middle man, capable as both run stoppe rand pass rusher. Not a superstar, but solid, young, and willing to sign pretty cheaply. I'd be willing to take a stab at a long term deal with this guy - we can't have enough defensive linemen, and inside guys are the top priority.

primelord, I see the widsom of using Howen, and I also could see (evident from my comments, I thought) that it was a designed platoon. It's tough to argue against the results - Walton did get 9 sacks. At the same time, Walton didn't get a whole lot of development out of last year. It's a trade off.

I have no real problem using the platoon, but we need to recognize that these are the osts involved. Using veteran players isn't free - it means that young players are denied the opportunity to start and maximize their development. It's all about opportunity cost.

I remember DE in particular jus because there was some discussion pre-season about who might start... after I suggested that perhaps Riddick Finley would be better used coming off the bench behind the two youngsters who'd be the starters. I stood in deference to your judgment that we needed Finley's run-stopping ability in the starting lineup, and left it at that. I don't recall Howen ever coming up as a consideration - and seeing that he started nearly all year was a surprise to me.

In any event, I'm far from upset about it. Again - it's very tough to dispute the results. And, as a defending champion, we ought to be concerned abotu the here and now, even if it comes somewhat at the expense of down the road.

Well done... defensive coordinator.

Rick: lol. Sometimes, though, I really wish you weren't the one chosen to be the liason. :)

Truth be told, I have struggled with this whole for a long time - not just in FOF but in many other games as well. What is the correlation between fun (re: winning) and challenge (re: difficult to win)? Would you really enjoy a game if you had to struggle just to avoid having the worse record? Assuming the game does not cheat, wouldn't that be the ultimate challenge? On the other hand, having to work at trying to win seems to be the most fun. But, of course, that's not where this game is at because without some severely handicaps, seems like no matter what the groupthink decides, success will come.

The most important thing, I believe, is the "groupthink" - the ability to have to choose only one of A, B or C and you better make the right choice because that "should" make a difference between great success and not-so-great success. So does this new rule accomplish that or any other rules for that matter?

I'm just rambling again so fwiw.

It's all good Quik I just wanted to make sure you knew I was trying to get Walton some development time. :)

You and me both buddy. ;)

Well I think the real problem with the AI is all in the draft. There is no question there are other areas that can be tightened up, but with Quik's fine analysis on finding busts and booms it just gives us a tremendous edge over the AI. I think that more than anything has led to our success. And I think that may continue to lead to our success even with our new rules.

It's all fine with me. I am not threatning to quit or anything. :) I was just giving my opinion, but I am fine with whatever we decide on and will make the best of whatever that is.

primelord, have a look-see at the available free agent linebackers out there. You think it would be worth a big investment to try to upgrade there, even though these guys aren't prototypical fits for our system? (Maybe Terrell would sign for one year at somethig liek $7-8m?)

If you don't think so, then I'd hope to target DT Flannery and LT Upshaw through free agency this offseason.

primelord, have a look also at ILB Bill Mosby. Looks like a good fit for our system, is fairly cheap. At 230 - would he be able to switch to MLB or WLB, though? If so, he might be a better target.

I don't know if I agree. We do have an advantage over the computer AI in the draft, but we've had a few busts as well. We have a much higher success rate than the computer though. I think just as big of an issue is the free agent market. We find tons of steals in free agency. Almost every year there are guys sitting there highly undervalued. There are also players who are highly overvalued that we would never consider signing to their outrageous demands, but the computer passes over the value free agents and goes after the high dollar guys consistently. Probably a lesser problem is the computer doesn't always start the right players either, so development on the computer teams is also hampered. While I agree the draft issues are a problem, I'm not sure it's the biggest contributor or not.

Well it's hard to find much wrong with Cronin. He isn't a great zone guy, but clearly can make plays and with Wellman developing into a stud we would be free to take advantage of Cronin's pass rushing skills. He had 10 sacks last year.

I think Terrell would also be a solid pickup. If he develops fully he is also a great pass rusher and even better against the run than Cronin and his Zone coverage skills are poor, but top out at the same as Cronins. So I think your right he may make more sense for the price.

With that being said have you looked at the DT's in the draft? The DT talent this season is awful. There isn't a stud in the entire group. So if we were looking for short term help in the draft I don't think we are going to get it this season. So if we are looking at need maybe we better focus on Flannery (who I also like) and Upshaw and then hope Terrell is still there in week 10 (if we get there) or maybe even a cheap stop gap like good old Donnell Wilkerson.

I have not yet looked at the draft at all...

Mosby looks interesting. I wonder how much his poor run ratings would be a factor. All his other ratings look pretty good and at the price it might not be a bad idea. Although if we were going to use some of our "time" I would rather go after a guy like Terrell.

Yes, in this sense, time is the big factor... I'm thinking its not worth wasting time on a guy like Mosby, even though under other circumstances I think he'd make sense.

Would you be okay if we pursued DT Flannery, then LT Upshaw... and then, if we still have a shot, tried to upgrade at LB?

Abesnt other countervailing input, that woudl be my plan here. Then, after week 10, we'll see who's left on our own team who might be able to rejoin us.

Among our restricted free agents, who we can re-sign any time (one per week), I'd slate them like this:

17: LB George Burgess
18: G Percy Hironaka
19: WR Tracy Curtis
20: G Trent Ballard

In theory, the longer we dork around with other stuff, the more guys come off this list. This season, I only see four RFAs worth pursuing, so it's not a major issue - I expect we'll have time to get them all, assuming we want to. In the future, this becomes more important - every week we dicker around might mean losing one more RFA off the re-signing list.

Some interesting trade-offs under this system, perhaps.

A timing issue here... when pursuing free agents, we might have the cap space this year to blow someone out of the water with a fat one year deal, hoping to get him to sign quickly, and thereforre allow us to move on to another guy.

Might make sense if we decided to pursue Riddick Finley. However, with the two FAs I'm targeting (Flannery and Upshaw), it makes more sense to try to lock them up to longer term deals, since I/we perceive them as value signings.

And does anyone have anything to say about WR Matthew Morrell? I intend to cut him (freeing up $12m in cap space this year) unless there are objections... anyone on the offensive side have a contrary opinion?

I think Wade said he hated to lose him, but agreed it made sense to cut him.

Thanks - i missed that above. I'll take that as an "all clear" to deal him. I'll first see if anyone will take his contract in a nothing trade (swapping sevenths or somesuch)... but assuming they will not, I will release him.

Quik,

I think your plan makes a lot of sense. DT and T are much bigger need areas for us than LB so I agree we go after those two and if we manage to sign them early enough try to land a LB.

The LB's in the draft look a little better than the DT's anyway so even if we miss out we may find a contributor in the draft.

Free Agency, continued

In week 6, we make an offer to LT Randal Upshaw, 3yrs, $7.8 million. It’s a little bit more than he asked for, in an attempt to get him to sign quickly. He does not accept the first week, and so we are waiting.

Meanwhile, DE Riddick Finley has accepted Lake Erie’s offer, and signs with them for three years – over $46 million. With his history, is he really a $15 million player?

T Upshaw takes our offer in week 7. Now we focus on DT Riddick Flannery, who has yet to receive any offers. At 3yrs, $9.2 million, we’d like to lock him up quickly, and then move on to one more acquisition within the 10-stage limit. Flannery takes our deal right away, and so we now enter week 9, and have the ability to make another move if we like.

Incidentally, FB Ethan Brock has accepted his offer from Texarkana, and will head down the highway to start for our regional rivals. Punter Marco Messina is listening to an offer from Manhattan, and might get lured away by the bright lights of the big city.

My instinct is to go with the fairly young LB Brenden Terrell, who has yet to really work into a starting role, but who looks like a serious player. He’s naturally a weak-side backer, so if he comes aboard, we will slide young Skip Artis to play the sam, and we’ll have veteran Gerald John slide into a reserve role.

However, this begs a question – one we have yet to work on. Terrell is asking for something like $9m per year. He’ll take an offer for one year, $9.5 – or we can tie him up for three fairly easily. Doing so means putting some $8m up front in signing bonus, and accepting risk if he gets hurt (as well as tying that money up for next year). I’m inclined to give him the multiyear deal, but I would like some feedback before I do so.

Any input?

I'm looking ahead to our expiring contracts after this season... it's really not that bad. In thinking about LB Terrell, maybe a two year deal would work? I'm looking ahead to two years from now, wwhen both our starting cornerbacks come due... we'll want to have cash for at least one of them, I'd think.

A two year deal sounds good to me Quik. I would hope Terrell will get an experience bump after training camp so he should be pretty well developed for his two years with us.

LB Brenden Terrell has accepted our offer of 2yrs, $19million - but it took him two weeks to do so. During that time, P Marco Messina accepted his offer, and has left our team as well.

At this point, we have $37.6 million in cap space, to re-sign anyone we want from our existing roster. We've got 34 players under contract, plus are slated to bring in six draft picks.

So, I break it down this way:

We need to leave our last four weeks for these RFA re-signees:
G Ballard
G Hironaka
LB Burgess
WR Curtis

And we have plenty of cash on hand to re-sign any of the following guys we might want to:

QB Jesse Cascini - wants $4.5m
CB Levon Reeg - wants $4.5m
DE A.J. Hitchcock - wants $5.8m
RB Lenny Richmond - wants $5.3m
RB Emmanuel Kahn - wants $5.7m
DT Marshall Castillo - wants $3.1m
S Bubba Nichols - wants $10.3m

My inclination might be to go after DT Castillo, QB Cascini, and DE Hitchcock from this lot. That will levae us dependent on the draft for our #2 running back, though.

More thoughts?

I agree with Castillo and Hitchcock is ok but he hasn't really been very productive for us when given the chance. I would almost think it would be better to use that money on Richmond or Kahn so we aren't up a creek if Lucas goes down.

So after the FA, did you really lose that much?

Tough to say based on one year, but this year we really didn't lose that much. We may have lost out on a wide open chance to make an extra addition or two that we might have under our old rules. Plus, I think we would have held onto at least one of the players we lost. But no - it didn't fall apart.

I too would love to see us retain Kahn, but I don't want to leave the defense too empty handed.. if we landed Kahn for a few years, then we could again go D in the draft if need be...

We wrap up the FA process, pretty much as expected. We get everyone on our target list re-signed, including RB Kahn, on a one year deal. QB Jesse Cascini also accepts a one year deal.

At the very end, with everyone inked, we have some cash left, and I decide to work out a two year extension with CB Cory Carlson, who has been a reasonably good performer for us. It's a very affordable deal, and he prodives us with some insurance at the CB position, especially if we don't get a quality guy in this year's draft. He was a lot cheaper than Reeg, and actually has performed a little better on the field - he's better in a zone system, it seems.

1998 Rookie Draft

Absent any input that we are targeting any particular player, I’ll advance the draft at least close to our first pick – so we can see what’s sitting out there.


This gets us to pick #26. I stop it here, because the to CB in the draft (in my opinion) Jay Vance is still available, but is now the #2 guy on the board at that position. It’s a draft without real superstars, but he looks like he’d be a solid player for us, and potentially better than he looks. There are other players who’d be fine for us, but he’s probably top my list right now.

This seems like a fair place to stop for discussion…

First file

Second file

Quik,

I like Vance too. But seeing he is the second CB on the list and he is still a little ways down the overall list I would think he may still be there at our pick. My suggestion would be to run the picks until the other CB gets taken and then maybe we make a trade up. But we are only a few picks away so I think he might fall to us.

Although we may want to have an alternate in mind in case he does get snatched up first. And if we can;t find anyoen else that we would be ok with settling for then maybe we should make the move up now. Iassume it wouldn't cost much to make that move.

Another guy that looks pretty good is RCB Tyrell Rusk

Dola's galore,

Quik also what do you think of a guy like NT Jerry Turnbull. I assume we want to avoid him because we don't know what his punish hitter rating was before it was zeroed out?

I don't have access to the game, but we don't want to forget to address our tackle needs. :)

Bee, we locked up a pretty solid free agent who is a natural left tackle. So, my level of concern about that position is lessend by that.

There is, a I recall, a pretty promising right tackle in this draft, who might make a very nice second or third round selection, if that works out. But I don't think there's a T to take at the end of round one.

Remember, in addition to "punish hitter" there is also "pass rush strength" as a key rating for defensive linemen and linebackers. With Turnbull, his is 21/55.

He'll be a major bust, never growing much at all past his current reds, which aren't worth squat.

There isn't much at all in this draft at DT... perhaps Sammy O'Donnel is the bst guy, but he's a mid-rounder at best.

Ah thats right I forgot about pass rush strength. Yea we don't want him. :)

Excellent. For some reason I read that Upshaw was a DT, my mistake. :)

For what it's worth...

Randal Upshaw, LT
6th year out of UVa
Played for Sault Ste. Marie for four seasons,
then one with Hawk Mountain

He has pretty limited playing time experience, but
our scouts like his ability a lot:

Run Blocking: 48/74
Pass Blocking: 48/72
Blocking Strength: 50
Endurance: 33/36

The scouting staff rates him a starting-caliber player, probably stepping in at left tackle after this season concludes, as Lofton will be demanding serious cash to stay around. Regardless, he's a great value and a solid player.

I agree that CB Vance is unlikely to go before our pick. I think we have options otherwise, but I'm comfortable sticking at #32, and taking him there. I think the new rules will add to the value of lower draft picks for us, and I'm less inclined to toss out middle round pick than I might have ben before (which is probably a good thing). We'll stay at #32.

Okay, here are teh picks leading up to us at #32:


Rats. Vance got snagged ahead of us, to my surprise. That leaves us looking for second best solutions, or perhaps at a trade down.

I'm not going to bother posting the files... only a few players have moved. Does anyone have a suggestion?

My thoughts, if we were to use this pick:

DE Ronnie Longfellow looks solid, and you can never have too many quality defenive linemen. DE Neal Ingalls, same song.

RT Vernon Huffman is a guy I' love to get at the end of round two... but if we needed to, he'd be a passable pick here. I have no real idea when he might get taken by someone else (he's second on the board there).

CB Tyrell Rusk is the next best corner, and pretty good. Not quite as good as Vance, but conceptually he makes the same commitment - get a playable corner who will be ready to start when we may have a void coming up ahead.


I could go with any of these guys. I also, since we have several options, could be comfortable with a trade down.

Lake Erie is willing to give up their 5th rounder this year to move up from #40 overall to #32 overall. So, that's on the table for us, if we want it.

I say take the extra 5th rounder and drop down a few spots. With 4 guys that we could take at this spot it seems like a lock that one of them will be there 8 picks from now.

Okay, we accept the deal from Lake Erie, and move down.


Only one of our target players is now gone... strangely, the one I though least likely to go by now. *sigh*

With three players left on the board about whom I remain fairly indifferent, I seek to move down once again - though the payoff is getting lower with each move, of course. I try to work out a deal with Tijuana to slip to pick #50, but they won't even give up a 6th rounder for the privilege... so I decide to cut bait. I think we need to make our top pick now, guys.

I vote for CB Tyrell Rusk... but don't feel all that strongly about it. That would seem to be our best chance of getting two of the remaining target players, though - take Rusk here, and hope that one of the two DEs slides to our pick at #64.

Note - oops, I missed that Longfellow, one mf my target Des went as well. So, we're down to two target players. I still support Rusk, but it's more a matter of BPA now than anything.

There are good fullbacks in the draft - that would be a possible direction for our next pick in round two, as well.

I alos vote for Rusk

We take our first pick, getting a passabl cover man in Tyrus Rusk out of Auburn. So, now, I hope against hope that we might get the remaining DE from our target list of four players:


No such luck, of course.

File update #1

File #2

Next pick possibilities:

Fullbacks look okay, but no home run guy there.

DE Ted Gunn is a high-risk guy, probably for a later pick. If he pans out as a breakout, he could be a monster, I'm telling you.

TE Luke Rice looks pretty good, and could be better than that, but it's not a need position, and this would be an early pick there. He or Arnie Burroughs might be there much later.

DE Burt Shroeder seems to be the best left there, and DT Sammy O'Donnell or Troy Settelmaier. None exactly gives me chills, but they ought to be passable (like Hitchcock, the guy still taking up oxygen on our bench).

G Conrad Ramirez looks good, but again - easy position to fill, and not a need for us.

I'm having trouble making any recommendation at RB. Who's better than the rest? I hae troubl sorting out these guys - each have strengths and weaknesses... nobody looks like a #2 to me.

Since we always seem to be so thin at T does it make any sense to take a G with good size and ability and see if he can make the position switch?

Sorry guys, In the process of packing to move this weekend, so I didn't get a chance to d/l the file.. so I will have to differ to you guys on the draft atleast until tonight... However, if there is a good, large guard available, Prime's idea does not seem to bad..

Guards generally don't switch very well to tackle. I think we can expect about a 75-80% retention in abiliity. If after the reduction the guard would still be worth the pick, I say go for it. Otherwise, we might consider another trade down to pick up another pick. I think with the new rules, late picks are pretty valuable. JMO.

I tried to trade down to get two picks out of this, but couldn't pull anything off that was at a ll reasonable - moving up from the 7th round to the 5th or 6th doesn't seem to be worth much, and that's about all we could do. I think we need to use this pick.

I'll be honest, I think DE Ted Gunn miht be the guy to take here. I realize that he isn't worth much on the surface, but if he lives up to his exceptional key ratings, this guy is not just a steal - he is a stud. I don't see anyon else at any position with any upsode anywhere near that area... so that's who I'd take here.

On the other hand, we wait two whole rounds after this pick for our next selection, and he's way down the list at DE - there's a very solid chance that he'd still be around even after two more rounds. So, that makes this a reach pick... I'm left torn.

If we can't get anything of value trading down, then I'd cede to the suggestion of drafting the guard.

We can trade ths pick, (#63, at the end of the 2nd round) to get Key West's 4th and 5th round picks, in the middle of each round. That's the best I can come up with.

We move down about 50 slots here, and get a 5th rounder for the move. I realize it's not too sexy, but does that sound good?

The best guard available is this guy:

Conrad Ramirez, UCF
RB: 8/51
PB: 10/57
BS: 74
EN: 47/60

To me, he looks like a pretty decent guy we could use at right guard, which has been an easy-to-fill position for us anyway. He's in the same general league as the players we just re-signed - solid potential starter, nothing too special.

Convert him to tackle (at 322 lbs) and he probably won't lose all that much - maybe 10-20%. Then we have a tackle who projects out to something like 45/50/75/55. Okay - what's that? A barely-starter-worthy right tackle? What's that worth?

I don't think this guy is a second round pick.

I think it depends on how confident you are the guys you like will drop. Could we get the DE "breakout" player in the 4th round and possibly one of the TE's or FB's in the 5th? If you think we have a good chance of something like that happening, I say make the trade. There doesn't seem to be a impact player at this point, perhaps we'd be better served to get a couple decent backups with longer contracts than the URFAs we'll be signing after the draft instead of 1 higher quality backup.

That's where I am, too, Bee. I don't think there's much quality in this draft, and I do think we can probably get my target DE with the 4th round pick. I think we'll take the deal.

Okay, we swing a deal with Key West, and move out of the second round. We wait about 50 picks until we come up again, but still get the DE that your GM likes as a "pet project."



This brings us to our next selection, and I'm stumped. The best-looking FB went off the board just after our last pick, and I don't have any strong feelings here. We wanted to get a runing back, but I cannot find a standout.

I'll post the files, and then some thoughts...

Unless I missed it, it looks like DT Sammy O'Donnell is still available. That would add even more depth to our D-line, which always seems to be a sore point for us.

Edit: Not sure if we really need another DT, but he was mentioned as a possibility with our 2nd round pick so getting him in the 4th or 5th might be a good value pick.

File update #1

File Update #2

The two guys that make the most sense to me here are:

DT Sammy O’Donnell
12/44
8/31
56
13/48
65
30/34

LT Hunter Craig
10/34
14/58
84
14/17


O’Donnell is only 269 pounds – so he’d probably have trouble switching within the DL (he might move to LB, but I have yet to see that switch work well). He’s officially listed at NT, and I suspect that means he’d be a man without a position on our team. Limits his utility to us.

Craig, I think, we would move to RT, and could look to him as a starter next season. Possible value pick there, and he also has some potential upside (implied slightly by the strong 84 rating). I wasn’t giddy about either of these guys in round two, but now they make sense.

I favor taking T Craig with the current pick.


Incidentally, I can’t find shit at linebacker. We need to bring in at least one guy, I believe. Any help would be appreciated there.

Late round scoop... QB Antoine Sawyer.

Remembr when we grabbed WR Matthew Morrell late in the draft? He had mostly crap ratings, but had a really high rating in both of his "key" areas? In a short while, he developed into a monster, as the high key ratings were the true indicators of his hidden ability.

That's the theory behind our picking DE Ted Gunn (67 PRS and 88 PH), and it might also apply to QB Antoine Sawyer (86 SR and 93 SF). Just a thought... I wouldn't take him now, but in a round or two, he might be a wise investment.

I definitely like Craig better than O'Donnell. Thanks for posting the ratings, that makes things a lot clearer for those of us who don't have access to the game during the day.

Here's a draft update...


We have picks at #147 and then again at #160 - so we can grab two more guys here in the fifth round. Some thoughts to come...

Here are a few thoughts...

RB Leland Watkins seems to be the best guy left at a need position. We’d cast him as our #3 guy this year, and if he pans out better than expected, possibly as our #3 next year. He does fairly well in the “key ratings analysis” as follows:

53
53
27
10/11
26/28
64
3/11
16/21
15/52
3/5
1/6
0
0
30/34

Not a star player by any stretch, but my hope would be that he shows us a little bump in his off-areas, and turns into a respectable reserve back. Thing is, Watkins is something like the 20th listed RB, in terms of future value. I still favor taking him here, but he probably wouldn’t even get drafted without our interest.


My top receiver is Seth Redman:

3/19
16/21
10/62
16/21
88
26/34
8/51
3/21
0
0
45/57

It’s easy to see what I like here... that 88 makes me dream about what could be. If he only had return skills, he’d be a fabulous late round pick.


FB Mario Price is a decent player, could be a guy we hold on to for a while:

23/76
20/72
36
52
32/42
52/78
22/72
9/30
39/44
5/20
31/39
19/23

Liability is in catching (9/30 is route running) – he’ll be okay, but won’t get open much to catch balls. I don’t have a problem with that, really – actually, I prefer my lower-skilled receivers to have low “route running” skills, because I’d rather have the ball in the hands of my playmakers.


Best safety I can locate is Russell Samuels:

15/54 (run d)
20/62
12/39 (zone)
12/16
8/30
54
53/66
0
0
55/70
30/39

We need a third safety just to field a legal team, and this guy has special teams skills, plus is at least decent in the areas we care about – stopping the run, playing zone, and getting picks. Looks like a need pick to me.

We lost our punter in free agency. If there are any standout punters in this draft we might want to consider signing them soon (this is where teams generally start drafting the top end kickers and punters).

I don't like much fo anything at punter - we may have moved too slowly...

Here's Lenny Mulitalo:

19/49
70/82
8/42

Great hang time, fair directional kicking, weak in kicking power. My thinking is we suffer through a year with a URFA punter, and try to lock up someone next year with a mid-round pick.

Watkins looks like a good target for signing as a URFA. I'd be surprised to see him drafted, but he does have the look of a potential breakout (high key ratings, very little green). Definitely a good signing as a URFA.

With the need at safety, I would vote we go with Samuels and target the FB Price with our next pick. Perhaps QB Sawyer after that?

Yep. Looks like the way to go this year.