FOF/TCY: Performance changing potential rating? (Lengthy question)

[Ramzavail]

I think this question relates to both games, but my ponderance about this came about from a specific experience in TCY.

Let me explain my current experience.

Stan Sweeney - Rutgers (current ranked #21 in 2006, just beat BC at home and they were a #15 rank) - 2006 - 7 current rating, 42 potential (unchanged since he began playing)

I can post a screenshot of his ratings when I get home if people are interested.

Backup Kicker. Starting kicker got hurt and then subsequently suspended. So Stan stepped in. And has he ever.

In 5 1/2 games - he hasn't missed a kick - I think he is 13-13 FG, Long of 37, and perfect on XP's.

So my question is...with players who have such a bad current rating and mediocre potential rating, will this player ratings go up b/c of his statistical performance? and vice versa for a player who has good ratings and performs poorly?

But that opens up a can of worms b/c you have to consider the opponents that the players are playing against. However, with a kicker or punter, I think they are the only two positions that the opponents don't really matter.
If you have an accurate leg and strong leg and can kick it through the uprights, it doesn't matter who your opponents are (not counting emotional affects, obviously).

But surely a DE at Rutgers with 10 sacks doesn't have the same talent as a player who gets 10 sacks at Miami b/c of the opponents that they play.

But thats a real life comparison - the universe in TCY changes, prestige changes, etc.

Regardless, I wouldn't mind seeing some sort of tweak to this, especially to a kicker. Maybe it exists, I don't know, but it is an interesting thought to me.

This can also relate to FOF just as easily, if you throw in a guy with bad ratings into the mix and he surprisingly succeeds, you would like to see some sort of benefit for that. and Vice Versa.

Thoughts?

[QuikSand]

I have yet to see any evidence that the cause-and-effect relationship happens in the reverse of the obvious.

A player's ratings drive his statistical performance.

It would take a lot of convinving to get me to agree that it works the other way around.



And a few games with a kicker (any kicker) isn't a very large basis for drawing much of any conclusions, for what it's worth. Congratulations on the early success with the marginal guy and his dozen field goals - but let's not name him homecoming king quite yet.

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

It would take a lot of convinving to get me to agree that it works the other way around.

I wasn't saying it was...but if you find success with a player with poor ratings over the course of a season....shouldn't the player get a ratings boost?

and vice versa - if you have a junior that you just cleared room to start and he is your starting halfback and he averages 3 yards a carry over the course of a season...i would think his ratings should take a hit in his senior season.

Sure it maybe early success with Sweeney - but I think it might last over the course of a season. It will be a wait and see and he is a freshman.

[Ramzavail]

bump, changed the topic title

[gstelmack]

I don't believe the player's ratings will get a boost, but rather you may find that he's actually better than he appears (i.e. your scout is wrong).

Of course, it doesn't take a particularly great kicker to go 13-13 on FGs when they're all 37 yards or under...

[Warhammer]

This happens in the real world. You can have a guy that has all the ratings, the best form, etc., but if he just doesn't have it, he does not perform as well as a guy who does not have all the tools, but has the fire.

That said, there are some studs that I have had that just didn't perform well. I plug in a 59 rating guy, with bars all significantly under the stud, and he performs well and has a better career than the stud.

FOF performs different than other sims I have played, yes, an 89/89 guy is better than a 19/19 guy every day of the week, but sometimes those 89/89 guys are not as good as the 65/65 or 59/59 guys. Even with the same personnel around them. You really need to look at performance in addition to their ratings in this game.

An example, in one of my leagues, I have a 48/54 starting WLB. Good ratings across the board, but he has a low number of tackles and sacks. I have another player who is rated 18/44 (I think, he is 18-20, and 44-46), but he has the highest tackle % on my team, six points higher than the starter. He has started two games, in those two games he has 2 interceptions (one in each), one returned 56 yards for a TD, and has a couple of sacks. My starter had 1.5 sacks in 14 games! Both contracts are up this year, you know who I am signing...

I have seen this much more with RBs though. I have had absolute stud RBs, that get 3.7 YPC, sub them out the next year for a retread, who then goes for 4.4 YPC. No change in the OL, or the offense.

[Ramzavail]

Keep in mind, his current rating is a 7.

for a 7, I think 13-13, is pretty spectacular.


Edit: Really my question is about should players than have a low potential rating (IE. real life Reuben Droughens, Lions fans speak up here) get a bump up if they perform higher than they ought to.

and vice versa (IE. Lawrence Phillips)

Should statistical performance factor in to a re-rate at the end of a season ?

[Honolulu Blue]

I think even the worst kicker in the league would make 80% or so from inside the 40. The simple chance of one of them stringing together 13 in a row is about 5.5%. I think your guy is more lucky than good, but it's too soon to tell either way.

As for your question:

Should statistical performance factor in to a re-rate at the end of a season ?

I happen to agree with you, that good performance should make your scout increase his ratings. But I'm pretty sure it doesn't happen in either FOF or TCY, and I don't think it ever has.

[henry296]

As opposed to an "Actual" ratings boost, perhaps a perceived ratings boost. I guess if a player performs above the scouts expectations shouldn't the scout change his opinon.

In this case the Kicker proably isn't a 7 current rating as the game processes his kicks. He might be a 25. Should the scout rating change during the season because of his success?

Todd

[Ramzavail]

Originally Posted by Honolulu Blue

I think even the worst kicker in the league would make 80% or so from inside the 40.

Even in college? I don't watch that much college football but is that true....in the NFL, I'd say you are probably right.

anyways

here is a screen shot

www.hatethemets.com/Misc/Sweeney1.JPG

Thoughts?

[dawgfan]

In a text-sim sports game, I think it would be a mistake to design the player ratings system such that performance affected the ratings. I can see the appeal in a 3D game where you have the opportunity to peform as the various players, but I don't think it makes much sense otherwise. I think you'd have too much potential of feedback cycles, both positive and negative.

In the example you've cited, I think there are a few things at work:

- I've noticed in TCY that the delta in performance between low-rated and high-rated K's and P's is not that big, certainly not as big as I would've expected.

- I suspect your scout is off on the low-side in rating your K

- As the season progresses, the overall ratings on the roster page don't change to reflect the growth in your players ability - thus, while his red bars likely have risen with playing time, his rating number on the roster page stays static until the next season

[cthomer5000]

playing time will help his ratings increase, but his performance will not.

[Warhammer]

Don't forget, scouts based their judgement on things they can grade. Intangibles is not something that the scouts in FOF rate.

I'll take a RL example, in HS basketball, I did not have a lot of actual talent, but I had a lot of heart. There were other players who had tons of talent but no heart. Who played better when it counted? I did. But, I had no upside, whereas these other guys had tons of upside, and in FOF terms even their actual ratings were higher than mine. They just didn't live up to their ratings.

[Ramzavail]

Here is an update about Stan Sweeney:

He only missed one FG all season and one XP.

He missed his first FG in the Happy Fun Bowl up 24-7 against Rochester. So essentially he hit 24 in a row.

www.hatethemets.com/Misc/Sweeney2.JPG
www.hatethemets.com/Misc/Sweeney3.JPG

This next screenshot spells all the theories about my scout being a little off his rocker. He is "terrific" rating kickers.

www.hatethemets.com/Misc/Ringo1.JPG

What could have happened here?

[Ramzavail]

bump

[Leonidas]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

playing time will help his ratings increase, but his performance will not.

To add on to this, players who have maxed out there ratings continue to improve as long as they play. I have never seen a player "grow" potential in TCY (unless you changed scouts), but all final will "grow" as the player continues to play after potential has maxed out.