FOF Historic Files - rev0 released

[nilodor]

ok, thanks for this. I'll have to make some adjustments to my processing file then. I'll see if I can do it tomorrow. I ran it with the 26 team numbering, so I'll need to rerun it. I should also make a post on the qb's since Johnny U is a 5 in the files... If you strictly follow the percentages there are only 4 9 rated qb's in history. I think people could guess 2, then 1 they would be like ok, and the 4th would be a surprise.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Eh, just grabbed my personal computer. Here's the numbers, let me know if you have any questions! Note that 22_4_14 is for 1961-1962 and 22_4_15 is for 1963-1965.

Sorry to be lazy can you tell me which years for which schedules for the others as well?

[Passacaglia]

21_4_14 is 1960 (Dallas joins)
22_4_14 is 1961-1962 (Minnesota joins)
22_4_15 is 1963-1965 (Titans and Texans become Jets and Chiefs)
24_4_14 is 1966 (Atlanta and Miami join)
25_4_14 is 1967 (New Orleans joins)
26_4_14 is 1968-1969 (Cincinnati joins)

If it makes it easier for you, feel free to tell me what numbers you want each team to have instead.

And 4 9s sounds right, that's supposed to be "generational" talent, right? We're talking 64 years, so if there's 4, that means an average generation is 16 years? That sounds like the career length of a typical really good QB, so I think that makes sense.Seeing a post on it would be awesome.

[nilodor]

Ok, I've emailed them to you. We'll see if the zip file makes it.

[Passacaglia]

I got it -- so far so good! I started a game as the 1960 Eagles, and the teams seem like they have the right QBs on them! I'll email you my league_info, default_teams, and schedule files.

You rock, nilodor! If you ever need anyone else to corroborate that you don't smell, I'm your guy!

[Passacaglia]

1969 looks good based on the QBs, too. I just realized that the QBs have their own file, and thus I haven't even looked at anyone who would be in the actual players files. But it's probably a pretty safe assumption that if you got it right for the QB file, then you got it right for the player file.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nilodor

Was actually just looking at it. The biggest one is getting the teams right. Did you use a consistent mask like you showed here for all the years between 60 and 69? The salaries will still be geared to a 1000, which I think is a 100 million cap. I find the granularity is better with the sim engine, but you can just run a multiplier if you want something different.

Whoops, the files I sent you are not geared to 1000. I'll fix those when I get a chance and send them again. I think setting it to 1000 makes sense since nothing is perfect here*, and users can set it to whatever they want.**

* -- This feels like a no-win situation where something is going to look off. When I set the salary cap and salaries to be really high, they look weird considering the time period. But if I set the cap and salaries low, they look stupid compared to the financials around ticket prices and stadiums.

** -- Note to any users who makes these changes: The text files suggest keeping the same proportion between minimum salaries and salary cap that's originally in the files, and I've found that when it's not proportional, it does make the game funky. So, make sure if you're adjusting the cap, make the same adjustment to all the minimum salaries.

[Passacaglia]

Okay, I just sent you a revised league_info file that should be aligned to the salary cap you have. I also realized I forgot to send you the xxxx_info files, so I sent you those, too.

[nilodor]

Thanks, I'll send them along to Ben one of these days. Let me know how they go.

[beatle]

Once again, Thank You, for doing these files! Much appreciated!

[KingZal]

Originally Posted by nilodor

ok, thanks for this. I'll have to make some adjustments to my processing file then. I'll see if I can do it tomorrow. I ran it with the 26 team numbering, so I'll need to rerun it. I should also make a post on the qb's since Johnny U is a 5 in the files... If you strictly follow the percentages there are only 4 9 rated qb's in history. I think people could guess 2, then 1 they would be like ok, and the 4th would be a surprise.

I noticed that when I was looking through your QB files and I was pleasantly surprised. I know you used a statistical approach and didn't bring your personal biases into play, but I like that your files reward how talented he was even if he never won a Super Bowl.

For anyone who's curious, the player is:

Spoiler

Dan Fouts

[Passacaglia]

Hey nilodor, I think something is still up with contract lengths. I was looking at the 1966 file, and maybe four teams had 30+ players on contract for 1967, a few more had single digits, and a ton had zero. I can alter this myself again to make something that looks more reasonable, but I just thought I'd let you know.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nilodor

Thanks, I'll send them along to Ben one of these days. Let me know how they go.

Does Ben host there somewhere or something? I've put a few up on Dropbox (free version, so I'm not even positive people can DL it), but if Ben has something he does, maybe that's better.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Does Ben host there somewhere or something? I've put a few up on Dropbox (free version, so I'm not even positive people can DL it), but if Ben has something he does, maybe that's better.

Ben does host them, you can access them through the FOF9 reference link. If you have them together and want to send it in that would be great!

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nilodor

Ben does host them, you can access them through the FOF9 reference link. If you have them together and want to send it in that would be great!

I can do that. Let me know if you want to change contract lengths in your file first, though.

[NawlinsFan]

Are any of your schedules covering pre-merger or are you considering combing the AFL and NFL schedules?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by NawlinsFan

Are any of your schedules covering pre-merger or are you considering combing the AFL and NFL schedules?

The schedules I'm making are all pre-merger. There are some preseason games where AFL teams played NFL teams, after the merger was agreed on but before it happened (so like 1967-1969), but that's it. There's already a 26_6_14 schedule that has AFC and NFC teams play each other. I'm not sure where I got it, if it came with the game, or if it was from nilodor, but that's what you'd want to use if you're looking for a post-merger schedule -- you could probably use that for 1968 or 1969, since those have 26 teams. You could probably use it for even earlier years and be fine, but the further back you go, the more empty teams you have. Well also, I think team numbers might get screwed up, but I can walk you through that if there's something specific you're looking to do.

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

The schedules I'm making are all pre-merger. There are some preseason games where AFL teams played NFL teams, after the merger was agreed on but before it happened (so like 1967-1969), but that's it. There's already a 26_6_14 schedule that has AFC and NFC teams play each other. I'm not sure where I got it, if it came with the game, or if it was from nilodor, but that's what you'd want to use if you're looking for a post-merger schedule -- you could probably use that for 1968 or 1969, since those have 26 teams. You could probably use it for even earlier years and be fine, but the further back you go, the more empty teams you have. Well also, I think team numbers might get screwed up, but I can walk you through that if there's something specific you're looking to do.

Asking as I am making helmets now. Almost done with 60 and moving on from there.

[Passacaglia]

Those look awesome!

[Passacaglia]

Oh also, the last post on page 2 should help you with what number you need to choose for each team so the game knows how to put them in the right place.

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Oh also, the last post on page 2 should help you with what number you need to choose for each team so the game knows how to put them in the right place.

Yeah, numbering will follow creation to ensure they are numbered correctly from season to season.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Hey nilodor, I think something is still up with contract lengths. I was looking at the 1966 file, and maybe four teams had 30+ players on contract for 1967, a few more had single digits, and a ton had zero. I can alter this myself again to make something that looks more reasonable, but I just thought I'd let you know.

I'll take a look at it

[Passacaglia]

1961 coaches file is done. I took a detour to work on a schedule file for the dynasty I'm planning, which will have a weird mid-to-late 60s ish kind of set up. My plan is to do these until 1966, when my dynasty will start, and from there see how much interest there is in going out to 1976, since I have one for that year, and that means I probably already have most of the coaches inputted somewhere, and it's just about putting them in the right place. But if no one even wants it, I won't bother.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by nilodor

I'll take a look at it

Ok, so I looked at the 66 file.

In my master file for Baltimore there are 47 players, 35 of which play for Baltimore in 67. In the 66 players file there are 43 players none of which have a salary.

I think I figured it out. When I wrote the contract code I wrote it for the 32 team league, i.e., the team number would only change if the player changed teams. For FOF9 the team numbers for the same team change when the league is a different size. Good catch, I'll fix it up and run the database again. I haven't had anytime to play with the files, so I really did only minimal QC, glad someone was paying attention!

[nilodor]

Ok, I've fixed it. I'll rerun the files now. This also affected the players years with team, which plays into the cohesion rating.

[nilodor]

If you're interested, the above example now gives 33 of the 43 in the player file (excluding qb's) who have contracts beyond year 1.

[Passacaglia]

Awesome! You truly don't smell!

[nilodor]

I've sent the files in to Ben, so hopefully they should be up in the reference link soon.

[Passacaglia]

Awesome! I just sent him my files too.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Also, all kickers are rated 0. The help file says that for FB, K, P, and LS, the highest rating that can be assigned is a 2. That's not completely true, I gave Jan Stenerud a 9, and I gave Fred Cox a 6. But it could be that when you go higher than 2, it's not meaningful -- in the one universe I loaded with it, Stenerud was an 83/89 and Cox was 83/83. This file also has a 0 for all Punters, except for Marshall Newhouse, who will have a 1 when he enters the league in 2010.

Originally Posted by nilodor

There's a note in the ratings file that kickers/punters should be rated a 10, 0, 1 or 2. I'm not sure why, but that's the note. So I abided it, I haven't played around with it.

Hey nilodor, any chance we can revisit this? Like you say, there's a note say all kickers/punters should be rated a 10, 0, 1, or 2. But all kickers are rated 10 or 0 -- there aren't even any 1s or 2s. And for Punters, there's just one 1 -- Marshall Newhouse. I still believe that you *can* have ratings higher than 2, but it might not make sense to. In a quick test, I gave one kicker a rating from 9 to 1 to see what would happen.

The 9 was 68/75
The 8 was 33/47 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 7 was 63/78
The 6 was 54/68
The 5 was 37/37
The 4 was 48/70 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 3 was 65/89 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 2 was 57/57
The 1 was 47/67

I took the same kickers and rated them all 2:
43/47
42/50
83/88
77/87
69/69
53/71
41/61
63/73
69/81

Both times these 9 kickers were all in the Top 10, with one rando slipping in. I dunno -- I think either capping them at 2, or letting them go to 9 makes sense. I think that the 2s seem to mostly all end up "good kickers", although it's not like having ratings up to 9 are warping things, and even kickers rated as high as 8 end up not that good. But when they're all 0s or 10s like what's in here now, there's very few that are even decent. FWIW, you've already violated the note in your players file because the note says that it applies to FB and LS too, and you have FBs going up to 8.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Hey nilodor, I think something is still up with contract lengths. I was looking at the 1966 file, and maybe four teams had 30+ players on contract for 1967, a few more had single digits, and a ton had zero. I can alter this myself again to make something that looks more reasonable, but I just thought I'd let you know.

Originally Posted by nilodor

If you're interested, the above example now gives 33 of the 43 in the player file (excluding qb's) who have contracts beyond year 1.

I'm seeing the same thing for Baltimore -- 33 players have are on contract for next year, plus 2 QBs, so in the salary cap report, it shows 35 players on roster for next year. Perfect!

But, I'm still seeing a few teams with no players under contract for next year. Not nearly as many, but still a few. Philadelphia (team 17) has 4, N.Y. Jets (team 18) has 1, and Oakland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Diego, Washington, and San Francisco (teams 19-24) have none. The players on Philadelphia and the Jets are not QBs, and these are 1966 (24_4_14) team numbers.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nilodor

ok, thanks for this. I'll have to make some adjustments to my processing file then. I'll see if I can do it tomorrow. I ran it with the 26 team numbering, so I'll need to rerun it. I should also make a post on the qb's since Johnny U is a 5 in the files... If you strictly follow the percentages there are only 4 9 rated qb's in history. I think people could guess 2, then 1 they would be like ok, and the 4th would be a surprise.

Originally Posted by KingZal

I noticed that when I was looking through your QB files and I was pleasantly surprised. I know you used a statistical approach and didn't bring your personal biases into play, but I like that your files reward how talented he was even if he never won a Super Bowl.

For anyone who's curious, the player is:

I was just realizing I'd never looked at the historical quarterbacks file that comes with the game. That file has 3 QBs that are rated a 9. Two QBs are a 9 in both files -- Steve Young and Tom Brady. The historic file gives Joe Montana a 9, and you give him an 8. You give Peyton Manning a 9, and the historic file gives him an 8. Your fourth 9, spoiler guy, gets a 6 in the historic file.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Hey nilodor, any chance we can revisit this? Like you say, there's a note say all kickers/punters should be rated a 10, 0, 1, or 2. But all kickers are rated 10 or 0 -- there aren't even any 1s or 2s. And for Punters, there's just one 1 -- Marshall Newhouse. I still believe that you *can* have ratings higher than 2, but it might not make sense to. In a quick test, I gave one kicker a rating from 9 to 1 to see what would happen.

The 9 was 68/75
The 8 was 33/47 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 7 was 63/78
The 6 was 54/68
The 5 was 37/37
The 4 was 48/70 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 3 was 65/89 (rookie, possible X-factor?)
The 2 was 57/57
The 1 was 47/67

I took the same kickers and rated them all 2:
43/47
42/50
83/88
77/87
69/69
53/71
41/61
63/73
69/81

Both times these 9 kickers were all in the Top 10, with one rando slipping in. I dunno -- I think either capping them at 2, or letting them go to 9 makes sense. I think that the 2s seem to mostly all end up "good kickers", although it's not like having ratings up to 9 are warping things, and even kickers rated as high as 8 end up not that good. But when they're all 0s or 10s like what's in here now, there's very few that are even decent. FWIW, you've already violated the note in your players file because the note says that it applies to FB and LS too, and you have FBs going up to 8.

I'll take a look at this.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I'm seeing the same thing for Baltimore -- 33 players have are on contract for next year, plus 2 QBs, so in the salary cap report, it shows 35 players on roster for next year. Perfect!

But, I'm still seeing a few teams with no players under contract for next year. Not nearly as many, but still a few. Philadelphia (team 17) has 4, N.Y. Jets (team 18) has 1, and Oakland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Diego, Washington, and San Francisco (teams 19-24) have none. The players on Philadelphia and the Jets are not QBs, and these are 1966 (24_4_14) team numbers.

I think it's that the team number's are changing so frequently, so I'd need to do the lookup a different way. This will take a bit longer (it won't take that long, I just don't have any free time for a bit, so it will have to come on a free lunch hour at work).

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by nilodor

I'll take a look at this.

Weird, I must have screwed something up when I brought them in from the ratings file as they're all 0's. I think I might go 0 to 10 since I already have them rated that way.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by nilodor

I think it's that the team number's are changing so frequently, so I'd need to do the lookup a different way. This will take a bit longer (it won't take that long, I just don't have any free time for a bit, so it will have to come on a free lunch hour at work).

If it's easier, I can set up the team numbers differently. I already did that for my own semi-fictional league, so that the standings-based scheduling works with what the standings were the year before.

[nilodor]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

If it's easier, I can set up the team numbers differently. I already did that for my own semi-fictional league, so that the standings-based scheduling works with what the standings were the year before.

Whatever you think makes the most sense, I've barely played the game, so I'm not sure what works best.

[Passacaglia]

In terms of playing the game, the numbers don't matter at all.

The only thing I can think of that might be "better" is if I arrange the teams so that if you make a schedule based on the teams position last year (which the real NFL does), it works out properly. For example, if you are starting in 1967, and you have a schedule where in week 1, the #2 team in the East plays the #3 team in the West, the game looks at the standings from the previous season. But, in the first season of the game, there's no previous season, so the game looks at each team's index number. I can set it up so that the index number correspond to how they finished in 1966, so it works seamlessly.

BUT, if you started your universe in 1968, it uses the same schedule file as 1967, so if I set up the team numbers this way, the game would only know about the order in 1966, not 1967. I could create a separate schedule file for every single year, but I don't think it's worth it. Also, the schedule files I've created don't even use this feature - I used index numbers instead of standings, so I could recreate schedules exactly as the year played out, regardless of the standings (so if Dallas played Minnesota in Week 1 of 1969, those two teams will play no matter what, instead of saying #2 in East plays #3 in the West no matter what).

So I'd rather just number them in a way that makes it easier for you then to worry about all that. Easiest for me is to just keep it the way it is so I don't have to do anything, but if you prefer something else, like starting with the 21 teams in 1960, then adding expansion teams at the end when they show up, I can do that too.

[nilodor]

i took a look at it. and the numbers don’t matter. i just changed where it was looking to find out how long a player stayed with a team. for the 1960 file most teams had 30+ players under contract for the next season

[Passacaglia]

Awesome! Now I'll just need to do the coaches up to 1966, finish up the schedule, maybe get some logos, and I'll be ready to do my dynasty!

[Passacaglia]

Okay, I've got files from nilodor which look like they addressed everything I mentioned, so as far as I know, they're good to go! We both sent files to Ben, but haven't heard from him about hosting them on the site. If anyone wants them, send me or nilodor a PM I guess?

[Passacaglia]

I'm working on the 1962 coaches file, and I've come across Dick Nolan. Per wikipedia:

Dick Nolan, who had played defensive back for the New York Giants when Cowboys head coach Tom Landry was the defensive coach there, was hired as an assistant coach on the defensive side of the ball, but ended up actually playing safety for most of the season, in addition to coaching.

Is it weird to include him as both a player and a coach? I could see a situation where the player ends up signing to a different team, but the coach stays, or ends up at another different team. This only happens in 1962, so I could also just let him be just a player in 1962, and just a coach in 1963.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Awesome! Now I'll just need to do the coaches up to 1966, finish up the schedule, maybe get some logos, and I'll be ready to do my dynasty!

I've done the coaches files up to 1966 now, and I've got my schedule set up. Last thing I need to do is a little player movement I have planned in my dynasty, then it's just logos. Nawlinsfan, do you think you'll have anything soon? I'm not picky about exactly what year they come from, but I'm creating a custom universe that starts in 1966, but includes New Orleans and Cincinnati, so it's got 26 teams. No big deal if not, I can just create my own after I finish my player movement.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

I've done the coaches files up to 1966 now, and I've got my schedule set up. Last thing I need to do is a little player movement I have planned in my dynasty, then it's just logos. Nawlinsfan, do you think you'll have anything soon? I'm not picky about exactly what year they come from, but I'm creating a custom universe that starts in 1966, but includes New Orleans and Cincinnati, so it's got 26 teams. No big deal if not, I can just create my own after I finish my player movement.

Also, I'm stopping at 1966 because it doesn't seem like there's much interest in these files, but if anyone would like me to create a file for a specific year, I'm happy to do it.

[Passacaglia]

Hey nilodor, here's a weird one. I'm not seeing Milt Sunde, Milt Sunde Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com, in the 1966 or 1967 file. Maybe he's in some others, I dunno, but it's weird that with all the poking around I've done, I haven't seen anyone missing until this one dude just now.

Also, NawlinsFan, any helmet news?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Hey nilodor, here's a weird one. I'm not seeing Milt Sunde, Milt Sunde Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com, in the 1966 or 1967 file. Maybe he's in some others, I dunno, but it's weird that with all the poking around I've done, I haven't seen anyone missing until this one dude just now.

Found one more missing from the 1966 file, Sherman Plunkett. Sherman Plunkett Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com

Just to be clear, I'm not asking you to add them in or anything, if I want to be sure they're included I'll just add them myself -- I'm just letting you know in case it helps you spot something you missed while making the files.

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Hey nilodor, here's a weird one. I'm not seeing Milt Sunde, Milt Sunde Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft, College | Pro-Football-Reference.com, in the 1966 or 1967 file. Maybe he's in some others, I dunno, but it's weird that with all the poking around I've done, I haven't seen anyone missing until this one dude just now.

Also, NawlinsFan, any helmet news?

Life and being old has gotten in the way a bit but I have 60-64 done for the NFL and AFL as png's and will have to convert them. Working 65-69 now. Once I get rolling they will go at a pretty decent pace.


Spent about an hour and am now working on files from 60-74. Once I have the historical png's done I will need to convert them to bmp's but they will still need to be renamed to align with the corresponding season file format.

[Passacaglia]

Sweet! I made some logos for my dynasty already. It's set in 1966, but there's a lot of fictionalized elements in it. For example, the Bengals and Saints are included -- it just let me make the divisions better. I just grabbed logos from each team and chose something that I thought looked neat that was at least from the 60s. I don't know what I'm doing, so they don't look as good as yours, but they work for now. I'll probably switch back and forth between them both as I play.

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Sweet! I made some logos for my dynasty already. It's set in 1966, but there's a lot of fictionalized elements in it. For example, the Bengals and Saints are included -- it just let me make the divisions better. I just grabbed logos from each team and chose something that I thought looked neat that was at least from the 60s. I don't know what I'm doing, so they don't look as good as yours, but they work for now. I'll probably switch back and forth between them both as I play.

Have all done for 60-74 with this helmet format. 75-99 will be another version and 00-24 another.

Trying out different backgrounds. Example: Historical logos as background - these span 60 - 74

[NawlinsFan]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Sweet! I made some logos for my dynasty already. It's set in 1966, but there's a lot of fictionalized elements in it. For example, the Bengals and Saints are included -- it just let me make the divisions better. I just grabbed logos from each team and chose something that I thought looked neat that was at least from the 60s. I don't know what I'm doing, so they don't look as good as yours, but they work for now. I'll probably switch back and forth between them both as I play.

I am looking at setting up a modified league starting in 60 with the 32 team format and use nilidors rosters. I am going to rework some of the helmets to "fit" where needed.