A Player Development Tell

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Commo_Soldier

I am not in an online league or anything so maybe I am missing something. But I am not sure how this would be much of an issue since it is viewable in free software that anyone in the league could have access too. If people are willing to take more time in doing research than others then they should be rewarded just like I am sure teams in RL are rewarded. This may be more of an issue if not everyone is able to access the software, but if accessible to everyone in the league than I do not see where a problem would really lie. Other than some owners not wanting to go through as much work, but than as stated as in RL if you do less work than someone else you have to be prepared to possibly pay for doing less.

I think you should be expected to do more work if you want to succeed in an online league, but I think that extra work should be confined to what is provided by the actual game, and not third party utilities, which is why I think the list of popular players should be provided to the league. Looks like most of the WOOF owners agree with that so far, so I don't expect it to be a big deal for us.

[Ben E Lou]

There were exactly 50 players with >40 pop in the WOOF draft. By all indications, that's on the high end of the scale. The average draft class appears to have in the low 40s. Here's where they went.

Pos	Popularity	DraftRound	DraftPick
G	91	1	22
WR	90	1	4
G	88	2	3
G	85	4	31
OLB	85	1	20
S	84	3	9
G	83	3	27
CB	80	1	19
WR	78	1	11
DT	76	1	32
C	75	5	21
OLB	73	1	12
P	73	6	8
WR	73	1	3
CB	73	2	6
RB	72	1	5
P	70	3	17
FB	69	1	24
FB	69	4	22
S	66	1	18
QB	66	1	1
OLB	65	1	21
C	64	0	0
G	60	5	1
G	60	3	1
DE	59	1	7
OLB	59	2	8
TE	58	2	17
FB	57	7	16
WR	57	1	8
DE	57	2	16
G	56	2	23
FB	55	3	16
K	55	3	31
TE	54	1	9
G	54	1	15
TE	53	4	30
DE	52	1	13
RB	50	1	6
S	49	1	31
WR	49	2	1
WR	48	1	17
DT	44	2	12
OLB	43	1	27
CB	43	0	0
RB	43	1	25
RB	42	7	19
FB	42	6	20
DT	41	0	0
DE	41	4	13

So a stud guard went at 1(22). Given the heavy depth of guards in this particular class and the lack of importance of that position in FOF, that's about right. If this info had been out to the entire league ahead of time, what happens? Maybe someone screws up and drafts that guard too early? Maybe the 1(3) and the 1(4) WR switch places? As you can see, the 1(2) pick didn't make the grade, but has combine stdevs of 3.22, 2.33, 2.00, 3.58, 4.00, and 2.43. Does this guy drop because of his popularity? If so, then the people who let him drop are likely making a huge mistake. This data point would have been most useful for the three guys who went undrafted. My best guess is that the lower two of them are 1s (probably end up in the 45/45ish range), and the center is maybe a 2 (somewhere in the 50/50 range). And like many leagues, the WOOF has a buttload of 50/50+ centers (at least 25 by my scout). Maybe those three guys go in the fourth or fifth round instead of undrafted. So again, my argument is that having the list public doesn't change much, other than giving an additional data point that would--if they choose to use it--end up helping people who don't know how to read the combines very well.

[Subby]

Well I'll point out another issue with folks using Interrogator to get information about a draft class.

Traits like leadership and personality don't reveal themselves until after a player is interviewed. That said - if you use Interrogator to pull the data, you can see personality traits for every single draftee. This has a pretty serious impact since chemistry is an important part of team building. Instead of having to use an interview on a mediocre LB who is a potential killer affinity match, you can save your interviews for the sole purpose of talent evaluation.

Anyway - the tube is out of the toothpaste, so to speak. In FOFL we have outlawed the practice of using Interrogator in certain situations for the time being, but I could see a day where we just post all of this stuff for the whole league's consumption.

[Celeval]

+1 to Subby. Thinking about it, that may be a bigger deal than the popularity - as particularly, giving the personality score away means it's no longer necessary to interview to figure out exactly how a particular player will fit into your affinity scheme (if you have one).

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Subby

Traits like leadership and personality don't reveal themselves until after a player is interviewed. That said - if you use Interrogator to pull the data, you can see personality traits for every single draftee. This has a pretty serious impact since chemistry is an important part of team building. Instead of having to use an interview on a mediocre LB who is a potential killer affinity match, you can save your interviews for the sole purpose of talent evaluation.

Agreed that you can see it, but don't agree that it's a big deal. My thinking on that is that it's a good bit more work (for most people) to pull leadership and personality strength and then cross-reference those with your players. If the high-pop list is already out there, though, I don't think there's enough advantage gained to be a motivation for someone to go through the trouble to do that just to grab the affinity info. On the other hand, if doing so is outlawed but someone is still putting in the effort to do it to grab popularity, then it's not as big a step from there to grab the other information as well.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Subby

Well I'll point out another issue with folks using Interrogator to get information about a draft class.

Traits like leadership and personality don't reveal themselves until after a player is interviewed. That said - if you use Interrogator to pull the data, you can see personality traits for every single draftee. This has a pretty serious impact since chemistry is an important part of team building. Instead of having to use an interview on a mediocre LB who is a potential killer affinity match, you can save your interviews for the sole purpose of talent evaluation.

Anyway - the tube is out of the toothpaste, so to speak. In FOFL we have outlawed the practice of using Interrogator in certain situations for the time being, but I could see a day where we just post all of this stuff for the whole league's consumption.

A couple of points. First off, I'm more than willing to fix Interrogator on this issue, but other solutions are being provided since a version that does this is out in the wild (and has been for a very long time).

Second, while the personality data can be used to predict the strength of affinity / conflict, the fact that there is an affinity or conflict can already be predetermined. So we're talking degree here, not whether or not an affinity or conflict exists.

[ace1914]

I agree with sentiment that if everyone knows, its not an unfair advantage to anyone. Just post it in the league. Hell, everyone on here is likely using Jdbaker's utility anyway. Ask if he can make it a function on the draft utility and, if he can that ends all of this "cheating" stuff.

Ironically, I've seen the stuff on interrogator and did not pay much attention to it.

[Subby]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Second, while the personality data can be used to predict the strength of affinity / conflict, the fact that there is an affinity or conflict can already be predetermined. So we're talking degree here, not whether or not an affinity or conflict exists.

Right - I was talking specifically about strength and leadership possibilities. Apologies if I wasn't clear about that.

[Yoda]

It's so interesting to see such.... 'doomsayers' here on this....

I'll admit, I've been using the Interrogator for quite a while. I have always associated popularity with putting people in the stands, helping team support, there for providing more $$ for things like hiring coaches and better chances for building stadiums.

I think this is an interesting and actually quite correct correlation.

I just honestly don't see this as that big of an issue. Especially now that it is in the public. Well, let me rephrase that....

The issue I see is that people are going to 'witch hunt' with this now. Outlaw/ban it.... huh? And just how on Earth are you going to do that? If someone drafts a below average player that ends up showing a high popularity you sanction that player?

Depending on my needs, sometimes I'll just sort by 40-dash, or strength or agility and take the highest, just hoping I get a hit, if he happens to have a high popularity, do I now need to load up Interrogator and see if he has a high pop so I don't draft him?

I almost feel as if this is a witch hunt really....

Anyway, all banning/outlawing it is going to lead to is witchhunts, it's a 'neat' thing, but I don't see it as a killer or a massive advantage.

[Subby]

Wise you are.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by Subby

Anyway - the tube is out of the toothpaste, so to speak. In FOFL we have outlawed the practice of using Interrogator in certain situations for the time being, but I could see a day where we just post all of this stuff for the whole league's consumption.

I am almost finished with my asp.net webpage with an sql database based off the Interrogator that I was going to be posting the the PFL website, but I guess I'll need to talk with Shard before I do it now, to see how the league is going to handle it.

[MalcPow]

Ben's numbers match what I've seen. A >90 player is a rare occurence, usually one or two per class, and probably never more than four. Players with popularity between 80-90 are also by no means common, we're probably talking 5-10 guys a draft class.

For what it's worth, the concept of good players having high popularity isn't a revelation for a fair number of people. The Interrogator angle that reveals this stuff pre-draft is probably the piece that pushes this from "advanced knowledge of the game" to "exploit." I'm not pretending to know what the popularity numbers mean exactly (and I'm fairly certain they were never intended to "mean" anything very specific in this regard), but the >40 breakpoint would be obviously significant to anyone who takes a look at this stuff. The other information is informed theory based on what I've seen.

Again though, I'll reiterate that there are always other indicators that would lead someone to valuing these players. Whether it is combines, strange bar patterns, %developed, or any number of things, these guys have other data points that would make them intriguing. The popularity angle just seems to be a very reliable confirmation of that.

[Hammer]

Big fuss over nothing. If this is a big deal, people who do studies revealing the combine-skill relationship should be shot. What about the guys who don't read FOFC and arn't privelege to this excellent info? The sky isn't falling, this is no big threat to the game.

Think back to FOF2004 when MP GMs could sim ahead...now that was something to worry about.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

For what it's worth, the concept of good players having high popularity isn't a revelation for a fair number of people.

Totally agreed there. I think a connection between initial popularity and overall quality/potential has been there a long time, and I know it's been commented upon here from time to time, though not with as much precision as in this thread. The real matter is the access/timing.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by primelord

I think people are over reacting a bit to this. This isn't an end all tell or anything. You can't just make your way down the popularity list and get all studs. As has been said, in the top leagues the vast majority of these guys are drafted already as it is.

It's important that everyone know this kind of stuff so everyone is working from the same page, but this did not suddenly unlock the draft. It is not equivelant to a key to print out the real ratings for all the players.

That's pretty much how I feel about it. To me, it almost sounds like it's no big deal at all.

[Dutch]

Ideally, a patch that opened up Fan Popularity for all to see would fix this problem. But I'm guessing, due to circumstance, that won't happen.

Realistically, a top-50 would be a fair alternative.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Ideally, a patch that opened up Fan Popularity for all to see would fix this problem. But I'm guessing, due to circumstance, that won't happen.

Realistically, a top-50 would be a fair alternative.

If it were just Fan Popularity, that would be a good solution (I can't see why it should be hidden anyway, unless Solecismic understands it as a "tell"). You'd still have the other personality ratings to contend with though. Though I do personally lean towards making Fan Pop public.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Totally agreed there. I think a connection between initial popularity and overall quality/potential has been there a long time, and I know it's been commented upon here from time to time, though not with as much precision as in this thread. The real matter is the access/timing.

Interesting.

I, for one, had no idea that connection was there. It's the accumulation of little things like this that clearly a few (or possibly many) people know that give them a huge leg up on others that don't.

Those kind of undocumented, non-intuitive 'tells' make the game much less appealing to me. Not knocking you guys for using them, it just has negatively affected my opinion of the game.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Interesting.

I, for one, had no idea that connection was there. It's the accumulation of little things like this that clearly a few (or possibly many) people know that give them a huge leg up on others that don't.

Those kind of undocumented, non-intuitive 'tells' make the game much less appealing to me. Not knocking you guys for using them, it just has negatively affected my opinion of the game.

but it's also going to benefit people without them knowing it. I for one have looked for high popularity players to fill in my roster (tho I've done it primaryily with old guys) to get a ticket boost and neevr knew about this "tell".

I also don't think that the number of guys this affects in a draft makes it all that big of a deal but safeguards should be in place for however a league wants to deal with it.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Ideally, a patch that opened up Fan Popularity for all to see would fix this problem. But I'm guessing, due to circumstance, that won't happen.

Well, it's not exactly fair for Solecismic to fix a mess that I basically created.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Those kind of undocumented, non-intuitive 'tells' make the game much less appealing to me. Not knocking you guys for using them, it just has negatively affected my opinion of the game.

+1

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Interesting.

I, for one, had no idea that connection was there. It's the accumulation of little things like this that clearly a few (or possibly many) people know that give them a huge leg up on others that don't.

Those kind of undocumented, non-intuitive 'tells' make the game much less appealing to me. Not knocking you guys for using them, it just has negatively affected my opinion of the game.

I'm in the same boat and I find this whole situation disheartening.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Interesting.

I, for one, had no idea that connection was there. It's the accumulation of little things like this that clearly a few (or possibly many) people know that give them a huge leg up on others that don't.

Those kind of undocumented, non-intuitive 'tells' make the game much less appealing to me. Not knocking you guys for using them, it just has negatively affected my opinion of the game.

The highlighted portion has been an interesting sidelight to this discussion for me. It makes complete sense to me that popularity should correlate with talent. Are there any guys in the NFL who we'd categorize as Pop>90 who haven't been at least very good players at some point in their careers? Maybe one or two stray guys who do a bunch in the community might have localize popularity, but FOF doesn't claim to try to model that sort of thing.

[gstelmack]

So I can boil this down to we have two choices, and it does not seem like we've reached a consensus yet:

1) I fix Interrogator (it's only a couple of minutes to fix), and we outlaw using old versions in leagues. I've got other fixes / features I could roll in to encourage the upgrade. This has the problem that old versions are out there, we can't guarantee people aren't using it (it becomes a trust issue), and it opens the door for folks who happen to find a creeper through other means being labelled a "cheater" if the guy is revealed later to also have high pop. I actually think we could trust most folks on this, but it's the false accusations that concern me.

2) We publish the data in the leagues to level the playing field, which is what Ben is proposing in WOOF. This means that everyone has the info, and it really is only going to affect a handful of players every draft (high popularity, low bars and combine guys), but it continues an exploit that is unavailable in the game itself, ruining part of the design and balance of the game.

So the ultimate question is, do we open close door #1 or open door #2? If there are leagues that desire #1, I can do it anyway, even if others want to go #2.

[larrymcg421]

If someone can explain to me how option 1 can even be enforced, I'd love to hear it. I've heard several people in this thread mention that the use of this information should be banned, but how on earth are you gonna be able to enforce that? I fear that someone who could just be an excellent drafter and randomly get a bunch of high pop guys over a couple seasons will be targeted, and I'm not comfortable with someone being punished with such circumstantial evidence.

I'm honestly not sure how any league could possibly progress fromt his point without resorting to option #2.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Well, it's not exactly fair for Solecismic to fix a mess that I basically created.

Well, honestly, I don't see the reason it's hidden to begin with, popularity is something that should be well known.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The highlighted portion has been an interesting sidelight to this discussion for me. It makes complete sense to me that popularity should correlate with talent. Are there any guys in the NFL who we'd categorize as Pop>90 who haven't been at least very good players at some point in their careers? Maybe one or two stray guys who do a bunch in the community might have localize popularity, but FOF doesn't claim to try to model that sort of thing.

I think the non-intuitive part relates to this being pre-draft analysis. There are lots of players who are very popular coming out of college who are not good NFL players. Reggie Bush, for example.

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I think the non-intuitive part relates to this being pre-draft analysis. There are lots of players who are very popular coming out of college who are not good NFL players. Reggie Bush, for example.

[st.cronin]

lol

I suppose a better example would have been somebody like Troy Smith or Chris Leak.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

So I can boil this down to we have two choices, and it does not seem like we've reached a consensus yet:

1) I fix Interrogator (it's only a couple of minutes to fix), and we outlaw using old versions in leagues. I've got other fixes / features I could roll in to encourage the upgrade. This has the problem that old versions are out there, we can't guarantee people aren't using it (it becomes a trust issue), and it opens the door for folks who happen to find a creeper through other means being labelled a "cheater" if the guy is revealed later to also have high pop. I actually think we could trust most folks on this, but it's the false accusations that concern me.

This really isn't an option for the reasons you stated.

2) We publish the data in the leagues to level the playing field, which is what Ben is proposing in WOOF. This means that everyone has the info, and it really is only going to affect a handful of players every draft (high popularity, low bars and combine guys), but it continues an exploit that is unavailable in the game itself, ruining part of the design and balance of the game.

I can see why people are calling it an exploit/cheat, but honestly, as I mentioned before, popularity is something that should be known, it makes SENSE for it to be known. And I am not sure I agree with 'ruining part of the design/balance of the game'.

So the ultimate question is, do we open close door #1 or open door #2? If there are leagues that desire #1, I can do it anyway, even if others want to go #2.

I see this is as a tool, no different than using various people's studies on finding the relationships between combine scores/ratings and other 'niches' in the game.

Personally, I would like to see a list of 'hidden information' (HoF for example) that would be 'neat' info to have, but isn't damaging (like where the actual values for players are), I feel that kind of information would just add to the experience, and that's what I believe this will do, is just add to the experience.

There are people that will use it, that that will dismiss it, and people that don't put that much effort into drafting anyway.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

If someone can explain to me how option 1 can even be enforced, I'd love to hear it. I've heard several people in this thread mention that the use of this information should be banned, but how on earth are you gonna be able to enforce that? I fear that someone who could just be an excellent drafter and randomly get a bunch of high pop guys over a couple seasons will be targeted, and I'm not comfortable with someone being punished with such circumstantial evidence.

I'm honestly not sure how any league could possibly progress fromt his point without resorting to option #2.

Were you in a league prior to FOF 2007? Because with FOF 2004, none of the critical hidden data was encrypted like it is now. Anyone with a hex editor and a bunch of time could have went in the data files and figured out all sorts of useful things. Or they could have went ahead and converted a MP league to SP to sim ahead. Or a bunch of other things. Since all those possibilities were there (and unenforcable), you had to rely on trusting people to follow the rules. Of course, it's better now since those things were shored up with FOF 2007, but even then, if you're in a league where you don't think you can trust adults to follow the rules, I would suggest that you may need to find yourself new league.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Of course, it's better now since those things were shored up with FOF 2007, but even then, if you're in a league where you don't think you can trust adults to follow the rules, I would suggest that you may need to find yourself new league.

I'm in WOOF and I trust the players in the league to follow the rules. However, it would only take one person to ignore this rule and we'd have no way of knowing. I'd say if you're in a league and don't think it's possible that 1 of the 32 owners could be cheating, then that's pretty naive.

Also, the bigger point I think is the accusations that would be leveled against those that end up with lots of high pop guys. That wouldn't come from me. It would come from others (and we've seen a little bit of it in the WOOF thread), so my trustworthiness int he rest of the league isn't really a factor there.

I really think leagues will be much better off just publishing the high pop list than trying to trying to enforce an unenforceable rule.

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by st.cronin

I think the non-intuitive part relates to this being pre-draft analysis. There are lots of players who are very popular coming out of college who are not good NFL players. Reggie Bush, for example.

Thanks. Way to follow-up the gut punch of this thread with a high knee to the groin.

[KWhit]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

The highlighted portion has been an interesting sidelight to this discussion for me. It makes complete sense to me that popularity should correlate with talent. Are there any guys in the NFL who we'd categorize as Pop>90 who haven't been at least very good players at some point in their careers? Maybe one or two stray guys who do a bunch in the community might have localize popularity, but FOF doesn't claim to try to model that sort of thing.

Well, then I'd expect leadership to be an attribute tied to ability too. You don't see too many team leaders who suck on the field. Is it the same kind of tell?

Also, I'd expect taller receivers to have an edge. And for a guy who was a FB last week, but a RB this week to be able to be a FB again the following week without totally forgetting everything he ever knew about the position. And for locker room relationships to be based on something other than a guy's Love Sign. And if a guy's rating slightly improves when he's first put on the roster that would mean he was actually better (not worse) than before.

But I digress.

[MalcPow]

Well taller receivers do have an edge. (Straight from the horse's mouth: February 2008 Solecismic Q&A: Drafting Tips - Front Office Football Central)

Not trying to be a smartass, and I can very much relate to the feeling that most of the information about this game is spread about in semi-random places, but figured I'd clarify that point since people seem to be checking this thread out.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by KWhit

Well, then I'd expect leadership to be an attribute tied to ability too. You don't see too many team leaders who suck on the field. Is it the same kind of tell?

Also, I'd expect taller receivers to have an edge. And for a guy who was a FB last week, but a RB this week to be able to be a FB again the following week without totally forgetting everything he ever knew about the position. And for locker room relationships to be based on something other than a guy's Love Sign. And if a guy's rating slightly improves when he's first put on the roster that would mean he was actually better (not worse) than before.

But I digress.

Heh. I don't really disagree with any of that (and as is pointed out, the tall WRs do). All I'm saying is that in this particular case, it's not a big non-intuitive kinda thing.

[jdavidbakr]

Just released 1.14 of Conscriptor that allows the admin to upload this info when they upload the draft. If uploaded, the popularity can be selected as one of the columns on the player list and also shows up as a bar on the player's page.

[ace1914]

Originally Posted by jdavidbakr

Just released 1.14 of Conscriptor that allows the admin to upload this info when they upload the draft. If uploaded, the popularity can be selected as one of the columns on the player list and also shows up as a bar on the player's page.

Problem solved. Plus, is it really unlikely for someone to be popular because of their play on the field, but not high on draft charts and average/below average combines and STILL end up being pretty decent?

[zullojer]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

So I can boil this down to we have two choices, and it does not seem like we've reached a consensus yet:

1) I fix Interrogator (it's only a couple of minutes to fix), and we outlaw using old versions in leagues. I've got other fixes / features I could roll in to encourage the upgrade. This has the problem that old versions are out there, we can't guarantee people aren't using it (it becomes a trust issue), and it opens the door for folks who happen to find a creeper through other means being labelled a "cheater" if the guy is revealed later to also have high pop. I actually think we could trust most folks on this, but it's the false accusations that concern me.

2) We publish the data in the leagues to level the playing field, which is what Ben is proposing in WOOF. This means that everyone has the info, and it really is only going to affect a handful of players every draft (high popularity, low bars and combine guys), but it continues an exploit that is unavailable in the game itself, ruining part of the design and balance of the game.

So the ultimate question is, do we open close door #1 or open door #2? If there are leagues that desire #1, I can do it anyway, even if others want to go #2.

I like having any extra information I can gather, and I don't think any leagues need to publish a top 50 list or ban anything. The only post that makes sense to me, is one saying, here is a link to the gstelmack software, then describing the benefits to using said software.
Thus, if i put in the extra time scouting over the next owner who chooses not to utilize this great software. Then naturally that should give me a slight advantage in my scouting. Besides, you still have other variables that can counter that one (popularity) rating, until somebody proves otherwise with some simulations.

[WelshWizard]

I guess I should not have drafted my 74/74 WR in one of my leagues because his popularity is 21. This gives people one other reason to second guess a decision over a player which I am fine with because even knowing what I know today about the popularity rating I would still draft the same WR. With this info being brought to light today may make someone look past this WR and I am quite happy to snap him up.

[Yoda]

Originally Posted by WelshWizard

I guess I should not have drafted my 74/74 WR in one of my leagues because his popularity is 21. This gives people one other reason to second guess a decision over a player which I am fine with because even knowing what I know today about the popularity rating I would still draft the same WR. With this info being brought to light today may make someone look past this WR and I am quite happy to snap him up.

And you SHOULD be, honestly, this is just another tool (like RKG's theory about the hidden avoid int skill), and should be used accordingly.

This isn't the end-all-be-all and it's not completely irrevelant either.

[WelshWizard]

Originally Posted by Yoda

And you SHOULD be, honestly, this is just another tool (like RKG's theory about the hidden avoid int skill), and should be used accordingly.

This isn't the end-all-be-all and it's not completely irrevelant either.

Agreed Yoda, completely agree with you. Not stating that this is not irrelavent but with so much talk about it i just feel people are going way overboard. It is just another thing that has been found to measure a player. Yet as someone mentioned earlier could still get hit with the Volatilty stick and be a complete bust after all the research done no player is a sure thing.

[stevew]

Fwiw the reining Woof champs were constructed with basically no use of any outer game tools and very minimal draft preparation. As well as little to no focus on chemistry and affinities whatsoever. If youre the type of casual gamer there can still be hope for you. . This ain't everything and I hope the casual player will not be dissuaded.


And I do kick myself for not making the coorelation between popularity and success just because it did appear that good players ad a much higher chance of being fan faves un this version. Much more than in older versions in my unscientific data gained through observation

[Celeval]

I think one major part of the uproar is that it's something exposed outside the game. FOF has been a game that has generally not had the third-party-scouting utilities that are accepted (somewhat) in games like FM/WWSM. We're all somewhat LLMers that way.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

My thoughts if you care.

1. Let's be clear this isn't a bug or tell created by Solecismic, since it's a third party app. that is affecting the timing of the information.

2. I think this is a fairly non-event. There are a zillion variables that go into winning games and championships (this is what the game is all about), and the fact somebody wants to use interrogator to learn popularity early makes it rather insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

3. A perfect example of #2 is even knowing this information now, I have no intention of using interrogator (if it was still allowed by my league). I got better things to do with my time for such a minor advantage. I also say have at it to those who want to spend their time doing it for the advantage.

4. gst, that would be great if you could expose yearly HOF votes. It would add some nice immersion, and I see no harm in it. Pretty please.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Celeval

I think one major part of the uproar is that it's something exposed outside the game.

I'd be surprised that was the case. Everybody, including Jim, recognize that 3rd party utilities have helped extend the life of this product.

[Dutch]

However...

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

gst, that would be great if you could expose Fan Popularity. It would add some nice immersion, and I see no harm in it. Pretty please.

Fixed.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by jdavidbakr

Just released 1.14 of Conscriptor that allows the admin to upload this info when they upload the draft. If uploaded, the popularity can be selected as one of the columns on the player list and also shows up as a bar on the player's page.

We just finished our draft and I'd lik eto leave Conscriptor up. Am I correct in assuming that if I upload the newest version and a new database everything will be overwritten, or can I upload the Interrogator stuff now just to test it, and not lose the picks?

[JMO]

In my recent draft in the Imperial League, I had 5 picks. None in the first round. 3 of those picks had over 40 pop(at least now ten weeks into the season they do..none of them have produced enough to signifcantly effect their pop). I picked the first two on pure combine/% dev and the last one because i liked his strength and endurance bars and I had seen guards like that blossom before. He has 72 pop now although he hasn't played a snap except on special teams. I had no knowledge of the popularity tell before and i only use apps such as change tracker and the draft analyser.

Moral of the story..it would be nigh on impossible to tell who was using this tell as it will coincide way too often with good combine/creeper guys. Be careful before pointing fingers.

[jdavidbakr]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

We just finished our draft and I'd lik eto leave Conscriptor up. Am I correct in assuming that if I upload the newest version and a new database everything will be overwritten, or can I upload the Interrogator stuff now just to test it, and not lose the picks?

You have to upload the interrogator stuff when you upload the rest of the draft data, but if you export the "pick" table and then re-import the draft and import the saved "pick" table it should restore the picks. (If you do this you should probably backup the whole database just in case it doesn't work). There's a database change for the new version so you'll want to run the upgrade script upgrade_1_13.sql as well. So the down and dirty steps assuming you're using phpMyAdmin:

1) Export the whole database for backup
2) Export the "pick" table
3) Unzip the 1.14 version of Conscriptor and put in place on top of the old one. Be sure to retain the "includes/config.inc.php" file from the old installation.
4) Import the upgrade_1_13.sql script (and any prior upgrade scripts starting with the version you currently have, but be sure to do them in order if you need to do more than one)
5) Log in as admin and upload the draft using all of the files
6) Go back to phpMyAdmin and import the "pick" table
7) Check to make sure the picks are still there and are for the correct players, and that the popularity bars show up.