Alright Boyz, Here We Go!!! (Front Office Football 8 Thoughts)

[sirotka33]

Is there a way to see an individual player's game logs?

[henry296]

Originally Posted by sirotka33

Is there a way to see an individual player's game logs?

Yes, open their individual statistics from their player card and click on the year and it brings up the individual game stats.

[sirotka33]

Originally Posted by henry296

Yes, open their individual statistics from their player card and click on the year and it brings up the individual game stats.

Cheers man, appreciate it.

[yabanci]

This is confusing me a bit, am I missing something?


My starting QB is listed as a running QB. When I generate my offensive playbook, all the offensive plays say Quarterback Playing Style: Long Pass QB.

My backup QB is listed as a long passing QB. When I select him as the starting QB, the exact same plays change to say Quarterback Playing Style: Running Quarterback.


http://imgur.com/a/nSMlF

http://imgur.com/a/bX3o2

[MrBug708]

So I'm in year 2098 and here are some HOF #'s
QB/RB - Plenty of guys, not really an issue.
FB - 0 - In fact, the career leader in rushing yards is at 800 and change
TE - 7 of them, but three of them are Gronk, Gates, and Witten
WR - 5 with one getting 85% of the vote needed. Pretty sad numbers all things considered
Left Tackle - 1 - Joe Thomas
Guard - 1 - A regen guy who made all league second team once
C - 7
Right Tackle - 2, on of which was Peters and the other was a solid guy, nothing more
P - 1 - Which I could buy, but the same as the amount of guards?
K - 4 - I could buy
DE/DT - Plenty of them. Possibly too many?
MLB/OLB - Plenty of them
CB - 4 - Hargraves, Revis, Sherman, and a regen
S - None

I'd assume this needs some tweaking? More Punters than Fullbacks and Safeties combined? More Centers than WR's?

[TroyF]

Amazing season for me. Had won two straight titles. (the first with a rookie QB, the second after he had developed into a beast) Going for the threepeat was tough. Tons of injuries to the OLine and secondary. The offense was still good, but the defense wasn't. I went 11-5 (which easily could have been 9-7.) Lose the division to SD and have to play three straight weeks on the road.

Win all of those games and then face the Cardinals in the Super Bowl. The Cardinals were 5 point favorites. They had the #2 offense and #2 defense in the league. My QB/WR tandem puts on a clinic. 27-33 for 356 and 4 TD's for the QB. 11 catches in 14 targets for the WR totaling 201 yards and 2 TD.

One of the best championship game performances I have ever had.

[wustin]

i lost to a 50 yard hail mary in my last super bowl

edit: and my starting QB went down with a stomach injury in the 3Q. It was frustrating watching the play by play but the back up played very well.

[yabanci]

It looks to me like on the scouting overview and scouting report for every team, the flanker is being listed as the split end and split end as the flanker (including my team, where I know my flanker and split end are in those respective positions in every spot on the depth chart).

Is this a known bug or am I just confused?

[QuikSand]

The SE/FL issue (bug, I think) was in the first set of patch-worthy issues compiled for the developer, and has been re-submitted since then.

I honestly think it's just a graphics bug in the elements.bmp file, but have no technical insight into that.

[sirotka33]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I honestly think it's just a graphics bug in the elements.bmp file, but have no technical insight into that.

Yeah, hopefully that is it. At least in the depth charts it is correct.

[yabanci]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

The SE/FL issue (bug, I think) was in the first set of patch-worthy issues compiled for the developer, and has been re-submitted since then.

I honestly think it's just a graphics bug in the elements.bmp file, but have no technical insight into that.

Thanks, I thought it might just be graphics too, but if you look at any team's scouting report (game day>reports>scouting report), they list wrong there too even though it doesn't use graphics. In any event, it must be a cosmetic bug only otherwise it would have been a priority fix for the first patch (I would think).

[MizzouRah]

So I'm Cleveland and we go 6-9-1 what the heck! Guess that franchise QB isn't coming my way anytime soon.

[cdunlap]

When watching games, the plays should be shown even when not calling plays for all teams, instead of just a blank section to the right of the scoreboard. The play diagrams should be shown for CPU teams.

[cdunlap]

When choosing show games on the scoreboard, why does it stop on every game after it is simulated instead of automatically going to the next and finishing out the week. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. You have to click on "Exit after Week" to move to the next game.

[MizzouRah]

It's crazy how this game is so immersive.. really speaks highly of Jim's talent. I don't need graphics to visualize my players and it boggles my mind.

[garion333]

Originally Posted by yabanci

This is confusing me a bit, am I missing something?


My starting QB is listed as a running QB. When I generate my offensive playbook, all the offensive plays say Quarterback Playing Style: Long Pass QB.

My backup QB is listed as a long passing QB. When I select him as the starting QB, the exact same plays change to say Quarterback Playing Style: Running Quarterback.


http://imgur.com/a/nSMlF

http://imgur.com/a/bX3o2

I'd report that as a bug and let Jim figure it out.

[wustin]

Does anyone have an issue when loading your defensive playbook? The last three red zone downs are always blank and you can never add plays to them because the game thinks you have 78 defensive plays saved already even if you have way less than that.

I have to manually re-do the gameplanning every year because of this because Rex does a poor job at selecting defenses.

[SplitPersonality1]

Wow.

Haven't visited FOFC for quite some time. Imagine my surprise when I saw that FOF8 came out a few weeks ago. Thanks for the early Christmas present Jim. Can't wait to play it.

[Jukeman]

Didn't play FOF7 much or any other FOF for that matter because I felt the game was made more for multiplayer which I don't have much interest in. With that said, I am happy with FOF8. AI is so much better than the previous versions I tried out. There are a few things that bother me like not being able to determine playing time and the lack of control on defense. The concept of a staff draft is just weird to me, and a red flag was drawn when the Cowboys decided to draft another HC instead of retaining Garrett even though he coached them to a 15-3 Super Bowl victory... I am guessing his low Head coach suitability rating was the culprit for the decision. Garrett ended up as an assistant coach for the previous 5-11 Panthers

Other than that, the game is going in the right direction for me to finally buy the game.

[beauforsure]

havent purchased it yet, but reading thru the majority of this thread , it seems like a mixed bag. And seems that some of the the newer stuff in game is rather small. im not sure i can say from reading that FOF 8 is better than 7. the fact you cant assign a backup or even choose the backup during a game is a glaring omission. The AI seems to be average at best when using it to set lineups etc. even on the CPU side. i thought 7 was at least stable enough .

[beauforsure]

Originally Posted by Jukeman

The concept of a staff draft is just weird to me, and a red flag was drawn when the Cowboys decided to draft another HC instead of retaining Garrett even though he coached them to a 15-3 Super Bowl victory... I am guessing his low Head coach suitability rating was the culprit for the decision. Garrett ended up as an assistant coach for the previous 5-11 Panthers

couldnt agree more. thats not good. in reality that wouldnt happen. ex. Harbaugh had 1 year after the 49ers SB run until the wheels fell off. and thats a huge exception in reality. most cases HC gets a long run after a SB win. This should prb be looked at and patched .

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by beauforsure

couldnt agree more. thats not good. in reality that wouldnt happen. ex. Harbaugh had 1 year after the 49ers SB run until the wheels fell off. and thats a huge exception in reality. most cases HC gets a long run after a SB win. This should prb be looked at and patched .

No, no, a thousand times, NO. If I am coming off of 4 straight Super Bowl wins and my HC is 65 Suitability and there's an 70 Suitability guy that I can get, my HC is getting fired. Period.

And in the interest of the AI being as competitive as possible, I want it to do the *exact* same thing.

If Jim wants to make a big change to the way the game works and incent me to keep my HC despite a better one being available, I'm all for that, sure. However, absent that, I want the AI go all out and do the same unrealistic stuff I would do.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

No, no, a thousand times, NO. If I am coming off of 4 straight Super Bowl wins and my HC is 65 Suitability and there's an 70 Suitability guy that I can get, my HC is getting fired. Period.

And in the interest of the AI being as competitive as possible, I want it to do the *exact* same thing.

If Jim wants to make a big change to the way the game works and incent me to keep my HC despite a better one being available, I'm all for that, sure. However, absent that, I want the AI go all out and do the same unrealistic stuff I would do.

Yeah, it's always weird to see Belichick fired for Josh McDaniels in almost every career, but it should be that way for the AI too. Now, I wouldn't mind some sort of cohesion bonus for keeping the same staff for awhile - it is weird that players get that bonus for staying together, but there's none for playing under the same system. Iirc TCY had a bonus for your OC running the same offensive system for several years in a row.

[JonInMiddleGA]

I just wanted to say that I appreciate the amount of feedback the thread has provided. Effectively serving as "reviews" without the confines of being structured as such.

The discussions about the depth chart/playing time were critical in my (well, largely my son's) buy/no buy decision.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Yeah, it's always weird to see Belichick fired for Josh McDaniels in almost every career, but it should be that way for the AI too. Now, I wouldn't mind some sort of cohesion bonus for keeping the same staff for awhile - it is weird that players get that bonus for staying together, but there's none for playing under the same system. Iirc TCY had a bonus for your OC running the same offensive system for several years in a row.

The coaches ratings change at the start of each game. They are named, but they can be WILDLY different than what we perceive them to be. Wade Phillips is the worst DCo in the league 1/2 the time I start up a new career. I now don't even use the real coach file for that reason when I start.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

No, no, a thousand times, NO. If I am coming off of 4 straight Super Bowl wins and my HC is 65 Suitability and there's an 70 Suitability guy that I can get, my HC is getting fired. Period.

And in the interest of the AI being as competitive as possible, I want it to do the *exact* same thing.

If Jim wants to make a big change to the way the game works and incent me to keep my HC despite a better one being available, I'm all for that, sure. However, absent that, I want the AI go all out and do the same unrealistic stuff I would do.

I would keep my coach who had won that many in a row, but I see and agree with your point 100%.

[MizzouRah]

Coaches should be done like FA though and not a draft.. that's so weird to me.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by TroyF

The coaches ratings change at the start of each game. They are named, but they can be WILDLY different than what we perceive them to be. Wade Phillips is the worst DCo in the league 1/2 the time I start up a new career. I now don't even use the real coach file for that reason when I start.

Of course. Same reason I used to wish for an option to start with completely random players (not just re-named 6th round pick from Michigan starting at QB for NE) until the awesome Build History option appeared and effectively lets me do that. The X-Factor is just so big that having real names seems largely pointless to me.

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Coaches should be done like FA though and not a draft.. that's so weird to me.

It's definitely a gimmick, but I like that it makes the financial part mean SOMEthing. Not a lot because I want salary cap management to be 99% of the financial aspect, but unless you played with house rules or really cared about Herb's score before it was basically like you were bidding with monopoly money and could easily assemble the best staff without much effort.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

Coaches should be done like FA though and not a draft.. that's so weird to me.

If coaches are done like FA, we get everyone we want and the AI is screwed. Why would i care about the financial ramifications of overbidding. I'm having the best coach all the time. I like the way the game handles it. If I'm blowing through money, it does have a consequence. I may not get the coaches I want. I like that and always have.

I do get the people who don't though. It is different than other management sims and it isn't realistic. To each his own.

[TroyF]

Bishop: Build history is the only way I play. I usually go about 12 years into the future. Enjoying the heck out of that feature.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by TroyF

If coaches are done like FA, we get everyone we want and the AI is screwed. Why would i care about the financial ramifications of overbidding. I'm having the best coach all the time. I like the way the game handles it. If I'm blowing through money, it does have a consequence. I may not get the coaches I want. I like that and always have.

I do get the people who don't though. It is different than other management sims and it isn't realistic. To each his own.

You might have a point.. I guess I'm used to all the other text sims out there and how you negotiate with coaches just like players. I guess it does even the playing field so to speak.

[aston217]

Maybe FA should be done like the staff draft, hehe ;-)

[yabanci]

Originally Posted by TroyF

If coaches are done like FA, we get everyone we want and the AI is screwed. Why would i care about the financial ramifications of overbidding. I'm having the best coach all the time. I like the way the game handles it. If I'm blowing through money, it does have a consequence. I may not get the coaches I want. I like that and always have.

I do get the people who don't though. It is different than other management sims and it isn't realistic. To each his own.

Agreed. I scoffed when I first heard about it, but the results are great. It was a very clever idea and well implemented imo. I like that kind of out of the box thinking where appropriate as long as it's not overdone.

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

No, no, a thousand times, NO. If I am coming off of 4 straight Super Bowl wins and my HC is 65 Suitability and there's an 70 Suitability guy that I can get, my HC is getting fired. Period.

And in the interest of the AI being as competitive as possible, I want it to do the *exact* same thing.

If Jim wants to make a big change to the way the game works and incent me to keep my HC despite a better one being available, I'm all for that, sure. However, absent that, I want the AI go all out and do the same unrealistic stuff I would do.

I agree but would love one added change that being that if my coach is under contract and you poach him then I should receive some form of compensation in return. Something like this:

“Except for head coaches and high-level club employees (club presidents, general managers, and persons with equivalent responsibility and authority), clubs are not permitted to exchange draft choices or cash for the release of individuals who are under contract to another organization,” the league’s anti-tampering policy states. When coaches are traded, it doesn’t happen the same way players are traded.* Typically the coach’s contract doesn’t get shipped to a new team.* Instead, the two teams agree on compensation (draft picks and/or cash) that would be exchanged if the new team works out a contract with the coach. *If that happens, the current team releases the coach in exchange for the compensation."

[Jukeman]

And that is a reason why I stay away from online leagues (online games in general) it's almost always about the numbers rather than immersion.

If your head coach wins 4 straight SB's, then I am guessing he's more than suitable to be a head coach. The suitability number shouldn't be static if we are basing staff hirings on just that. What is the formula that comes up with the suitabilty rating? In no way should a unemployed career offensive coordinator be more suitable than a head coach who just lead a 15-3 team Tina Superbowl victory. Which is what happened in my game.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

[beauforsure]

Originally Posted by Jukeman

And that is a reason why I stay away from online leagues (online games in general) it's almost always about the numbers rather than immersion.

If your head coach wins 4 straight SB's, then I am guessing he's more than suitable to be a head coach. The suitability number shouldn't be static if we are basing staff hirings on just that. What is the formula that comes up with the suitabilty rating? In no way should a unemployed career offensive coordinator be more suitable than a head coach who just lead a 15-3 team Tina Superbowl victory. Which is what happened in my game.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

yea exactly. Immersion is why i play this game mostly. Its almost as if the suitable rating was intended to be a "chemistry" rating but its almost the exact opposite of that. I think that would be more immersive to me if your staff had "chemistry" ratings also along with the scheme stuff. i think thatd be cooler anyway and would take more effort to find a coach who fits in rather than hes a good coach by rating. After 4 SB wins your wouldnt think about firing your coach since he fits in so well.

[Ben E Lou]

Ummmm...my comment had absolutely nothing to do with online leagues. It's for *single* player. Let's get rid of the terminology, then. This is the scenario:

COACH A won four straight Super Bowls
COACH B is available to me and is *BETTER* than COACH A.

What do I mean by "better?" I mean this:

Coach A is 70 in Motivation. Coach B is 80.
Coach A is 65 in Disciple. Coach B is 75.
Coach A is 85 in Young Player Development. Coach B is 95
Coach A is 75 in Scouting. Coach B is 85.
Coach A is 60 in Player Development. Coach B is 70.

The "Suitability" rating is simply a combination of the numbers.



I am grabbing Coach B in Single Player. And I will do it Every. Single. Time.

And because I want the AI to be as strong against me as possible, I want the AI to get rid of the "good-enough" guy they had and get the BETTER coach. Because, here's the thing: if the AI doesn't grab that better coach, *I* might be the next guy up, and therefore it makes the game easier for me because I get the better coach that the AI passed up, and now I have a better coach than the AI team that beat me last year.

And again, sure, I'd love it if the game mechanism were changed so that there's a reason for me to keep Coach A. But with the way the game works, in Single Player, the AI needs to grab Coach B in that scenario.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Jukeman

And that is a reason why I stay away from online leagues (online games in general) it's almost always about the numbers rather than immersion.

If your head coach wins 4 straight SB's, then I am guessing he's more than suitable to be a head coach. The suitability number shouldn't be static if we are basing staff hirings on just that. What is the formula that comes up with the suitabilty rating? In no way should a unemployed career offensive coordinator be more suitable than a head coach who just lead a 15-3 team Tina Superbowl victory. Which is what happened in my game.

Sent from my Z958 using Tapatalk

I stay away from online because I always THINK I have the time to do it and then don't. This ends up screwing whatever league I get in.

Having said that, I agree 100% about the immersion factor of SP. I am not firing a coach who just won me ONE Super Bowl the following year because a better coach comes along.

I'm going to overspend to keep a player who has played well for me on occasion. When I get in the middle of a good, long SP career, I am involved in my team to a ridiculous degree. I remember when that undrafted RB filled in for 3 games and played fantastic. I remember when the top draft pick blew his knee out. Sure, the numbers still matter, but they aren't the overriding thing. I love the immersion.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by beauforsure

Its almost as if the suitable rating was intended to be a "chemistry" rating but its almost the exact opposite of that.

No, it wasn't. I teased out the correlations in FOF7, and can do it again for FOF8, but to be clear, it's just like the current/future "overall" ratings that we see for players: a combination of all of the ratings, weighted differently for different coaching attributes. I have a 50+ year career and will do the correlations right now.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I stay away from online because I always THINK I have the time to do it and then don't. This ends up screwing whatever league I get in.

Having said that, I agree 100% about the immersion factor of SP. I am not firing a coach who just won me ONE Super Bowl the following year because a better coach comes along.

I'm going to overspend to keep a player who has played well for me on occasion. When I get in the middle of a good, long SP career, I am involved in my team to a ridiculous degree. I remember when that undrafted RB filled in for 3 games and played fantastic. I remember when the top draft pick blew his knee out. Sure, the numbers still matter, but they aren't the overriding thing. I love the immersion.

To be clear, I'm perfectly fie with the human player doing that. That's great if it's more fun that way. What I strongly push back against in this and all text sims is intentionally weakening the AI in the name of immersion, which is what these guys were suggesting should happen.

[Ben E Lou]

Here's the FOF7 info on suitability. These correlations have definitely changed for FOF8--at least for HC, which is the one I've looked at so far.

Importance Of Each Staff Rating: Correlations Of Staff Attributes To Suitability - Front Office Football Central

[garion333]

Originally Posted by Jukeman

If your head coach wins 4 straight SB's, then I am guessing he's more than suitable to be a head coach. The suitability number shouldn't be static if we are basing staff hirings on just that. What is the formula that comes up with the suitabilty rating? In no way should a unemployed career offensive coordinator be more suitable than a head coach who just lead a 15-3 team Tina Superbowl victory. Which is what happened in my game.

A couple things stick out to me here.

(1) No real NFL coach wins four Super Bowls in a row, that only happens in FOF because of human advantage. I can win four Super Bowls with a terrible Head Coach.

(2) Of course there will sometimes be better coaches on offer come the next seasons even if my Head Coach won a lot of games. The suitability isn't an arbitrary number, it's a rating based off of the skill/bars present, as Ben talked about.

A game will always have a give/take for immersion factor and coaching in FOF tends on the less immersive side of things for sure. A lot of the game is abstracted, but the underlying stats engine is so damn tight I'm okay with less immersion.

If you want more immersion from coaching then I can see your grievances, but just because someone wins a Super Bowl doesn't immediately make them The Best Head Coach. If immersion is important to you then maybe make up a story that says the unemployed OC was a baseball stats guru who decided he wanted to try his hand at something new so he joined up to be a FOF coach. If immersion is super important you can find a way to make it immersive. Coach win a Super Bowl but get fired? Maybe his owner is an asshat.

You can find a way to make the game immersive, even in spite of its flaws.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by TroyF

Sure, the numbers still matter, but they aren't the overriding thing. I love the immersion.

THIS is what I am recapturing with this version. I had a RB who put up really good numbers for a couple seasons. Then he was a cap casualty. Years later, I noticed him in FA as a 32/32 vet who had bounced around putting up 3ypc for different teams. So I signed him to a 3 year deal to be my 4th RB. I imagined him serving as a half-player/half-PR guy, staying late after practice to take selfies with fans and soak it all in.

I haven't had this level of immersion with FOF in years.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

To be clear, I'm perfectly fie with the human player doing that. That's great if it's more fun that way. What I strongly push back against in this and all text sims is intentionally weakening the AI in the name of immersion, which is what these guys were suggesting should happen.

And to be clear for me: I am in 100% agreement with your take on the AI. I want the AI to do EVERYTHING in its power to beat me within the laws of the game. If that means firing a coach because another one is 1 point higher in so be it. If it means moving the team to Portland because it generates a crap ton of more revenue, I'm good with it.

The immersion I'm talking about only plays with me. I will not fire a coach who just won me a title, even if I've been trying to replace him for two years and just couldn't. I don't want the AI thinking like that.

[Jukeman]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Ummmm...my comment had absolutely nothing to do with online leagues. It's for *single* player. Let's get rid of the terminology, then. This is the scenario:

COACH A won four straight Super Bowls
COACH B is available to me and is *BETTER* than COACH A.

What do I mean by "better?" I mean this:

Coach A is 70 in Motivation. Coach B is 80.
Coach A is 65 in Disciple. Coach B is 75.
Coach A is 85 in Young Player Development. Coach B is 95
Coach A is 75 in Scouting. Coach B is 85.
Coach A is 60 in Player Development. Coach B is 70.

The "Suitability" rating is simply a combination of the numbers.



I am grabbing Coach B in Single Player. And I will do it Every. Single. Time.

And because I want the AI to be as strong against me as possible, I want the AI to get rid of the "good-enough" guy they had and get the BETTER coach. Because, here's the thing: if the AI doesn't grab that better coach, *I* might be the next guy up, and therefore it makes the game easier for me because I get the better coach that the AI passed up, and now I have a better coach than the AI team that beat me last year.

And again, sure, I'd love it if the game mechanism were changed so that there's a reason for me to keep Coach A. But with the way the game works, in Single Player, the AI needs to grab Coach B in that scenario.

My comment didn't really have anything to do with online leagues as well, just making a point that in a non competitive league with just myself, I wouldn't be too caught up in numbers. Thats like getting rid of a player even though his stats were great in favor of a player with good ratings who put up similar numbers but cost more. In FOF, does good ratings always equal good stats? In OOTP, a player can perform well below or beyond his ratings.

I figured the suitability rating was made up of those things. If you want staff to just be a bonus modifier than yea I get the reasoning wanting the AI to get the best "upgrade" while ignoring the coach's history. IMO those ratings are a good start but a scheme or system along with how well a coach fits his players in it should also matter. Which brings up a suggestion that the Head coach's play style should overwrite the coordinator. For example, if my head coach is offensive, then we should use his offensive playbook instead of the offensive coordinator and the defense should be based on the defensive coordinator.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by Jukeman

My comment didn't really have anything to do with online leagues as well,

Do WHUT????

Originally Posted by Jukeman

And that is a reason why I stay away from online leagues (online games in general) it's almost always about the numbers rather than immersion.

[yabanci]

interesting tidbit buried in the Solecismic Software (aka "about us") selection of the help file:

Over the years, I've collected many design ideas for modeling professional football. Some were inspired by trips to the NFL Hall of Fame Museum in Canton, Ohio, where I was allowed to visit their research room and examine recent playbooks and other coaching material. I came up with a design for play-calling that mirrors how many NFL coaches prepare for games.

[Ben E Lou]

The MP upload/download process is a *lot* faster due to some file compression that Jim is doing now.

[Jukeman]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Do WHUT????

Well in my first post I mentioned that I haven't purchased the game in the past because it wasn't up to par for single player and said the game was great with multi player in mind and also made a comment that I have no interest in multiplayer player hence the non purchase. You happen to come along and gave a spot on example of why I don't play online. Your example is what I have experienced playing online leagues. Maybe you would make that move in your single player save but I certainly would not.

[Sharkn20]

Do the combines change during their careers?? Or a player who came in the FOF with let´s say 4,30 seconds in the 40 Yard Dash, will retire with 4,30 seconds in the 40 Yard Dash? Can they reduce the combine numbers, or increase them??