FOF7: Misfit Skins - Page 2

MalcPow · 09-25-2015, 11:41 PM

Larry Szalay is the 2nd Team Center.

It does seem like our defense played better after Ernest Conley came back from injury down the stretch. We looked much more like the unit that was a force last season. We clearly missed Korey Upshaw this year, but the passing game regressed to awful and not all the way to the otherworldly turd machine we ran for most of the early seasons of this career.

We took care of the ball. We had very good special teams play in everything from our returns to our coverage to our P/K performance. Our defense was bad early and then rounded into form as the season went on and some guys came back from injury. We do have exceptional coaching as well.

We made the playoffs five straight years and lucked into a Bowl with maybe our third best squad. We were probably better in '21 and '24, but there's no denying this group had the really good shit working in a way that we probably haven't seen yet. I think I learned a thing or two. I'm not ashamed to admit this was an exciting Bowl win for me, may have even let out some kind of half-yelp, half-cackle noise that's difficult to really describe. Pretty sure I clicked the sim button with no small amount of desperation.

The Misfit game takes a lot out of you.

MalcPow · 09-29-2015, 11:28 AM

I might run another couple years on this one. Or transition it into some kind of other quirky thing. Anybody have any particular curiosity in seeing where more of this goes or a direction to take it?

corbes · 09-29-2015, 12:47 PM

Any particular attention being paid to chemistry?

QuikSand · 09-30-2015, 08:45 AM

As much as anything, I'd be interested in a little of your thought process in looking at this lot of players. Are you doing a filter on your combine constraints, and trying to add those guys, in general? Are you focusing on certain bars? Just eyeballing them for a quick interesting-profile appearance in the bars? Using position familiarity and/or percent developed?

If you're willing to share, even in broad strokes, that would be the most interesting thing to me.

TheRivals40 · 10-19-2015, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

As much as anything, I'd be interested in a little of your thought process in looking at this lot of players. Are you doing a filter on your combine constraints, and trying to add those guys, in general? Are you focusing on certain bars? Just eyeballing them for a quick interesting-profile appearance in the bars? Using position familiarity and/or percent developed?

If you're willing to share, even in broad strokes, that would be the most interesting thing to me.

Bump! Please share some of your tips!

perez24 · 10-20-2015, 12:10 PM

When does the QB Controversy start?

MalcPow · 10-21-2015, 06:46 PM

It's hard to really offer much in the way of tips. I was looking for some combination of these things:

1) Combine information - Either guys who cleared all or key constraints for their position. When you're trying to land decent starter types in the 40s, you're rarely getting guys with across the board good combines. I ended up being pretty flexible on bench scores for a number of positions. A few other positions have combine categories that aren't killers if they're low.

2) Cur/Fut - We did get a chance to get extra information by dealing with the draftees as free agents. I talked about it earlier in the thread, but guys who are undrafted rookies with identical current and future overall ratings tend to have untapped potential. I was frequently paying close attention to anybody sitting there at 30/30 or 27/27 as an undrafted rookie.

3) Bars - I was trying to target some specific bars at times. This got tougher or was less effective as I realized that it can be difficult to find the true crappy specialist. We had most success with special teams types, and they tended to play a role for us. A lot of the other one bar wonders ended up being not so wonderful in that one bar when it was all said and done.

4) Playing Time/Development - These guys needed to play to develop, even into backup-looking types. The semi-amazing thing at this point is how not cheap we are for the lack of talent. We haven't had any tough decisions, but our players all demand to be paid like starters for being starters. The fact that these crappier guys seem to retire earlier as well makes the window seemingly smaller. As discussed a bit in the thread as well, these guys are also at a level where a bad -10 or -15 camp is basically a career-ender. I still can't believe Korey Upshaw retired when he did.

5) Chemistry - We weren't doing much here. When we'd get a warning that the guy would be a conflict, we usually didn't sign him. If it was the one or two guys each year really worth signing, we took a look at the value of the leader first. Net effect here is that we basically never had conflicts but only had 5-6 affinities of varying strength each year.

I'll look to fire this thing up a little later. I might turn injuries off completely or something. It was basically just a chore the last few seasons.

09-29-2015, 11:28 AM	#52
MalcPow College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: San Diego	I might run another couple years on this one. Or transition it into some kind of other quirky thing. Anybody have any particular curiosity in seeing where more of this goes or a direction to take it?

09-29-2015, 12:47 PM	#53
corbes College Benchwarmer Join Date: Nov 2003	Any particular attention being paid to chemistry?

09-30-2015, 08:45 AM	#54
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	As much as anything, I'd be interested in a little of your thought process in looking at this lot of players. Are you doing a filter on your combine constraints, and trying to add those guys, in general? Are you focusing on certain bars? Just eyeballing them for a quick interesting-profile appearance in the bars? Using position familiarity and/or percent developed? If you're willing to share, even in broad strokes, that would be the most interesting thing to me.

10-20-2015, 12:10 PM	#56
perez24 Mascot Join Date: Oct 2000	When does the QB Controversy start?

10-21-2015, 06:46 PM	#57
MalcPow College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: San Diego	It's hard to really offer much in the way of tips. I was looking for some combination of these things: 1) Combine information - Either guys who cleared all or key constraints for their position. When you're trying to land decent starter types in the 40s, you're rarely getting guys with across the board good combines. I ended up being pretty flexible on bench scores for a number of positions. A few other positions have combine categories that aren't killers if they're low. 2) Cur/Fut - We did get a chance to get extra information by dealing with the draftees as free agents. I talked about it earlier in the thread, but guys who are undrafted rookies with identical current and future overall ratings tend to have untapped potential. I was frequently paying close attention to anybody sitting there at 30/30 or 27/27 as an undrafted rookie. 3) Bars - I was trying to target some specific bars at times. This got tougher or was less effective as I realized that it can be difficult to find the true crappy specialist. We had most success with special teams types, and they tended to play a role for us. A lot of the other one bar wonders ended up being not so wonderful in that one bar when it was all said and done. 4) Playing Time/Development - These guys needed to play to develop, even into backup-looking types. The semi-amazing thing at this point is how not cheap we are for the lack of talent. We haven't had any tough decisions, but our players all demand to be paid like starters for being starters. The fact that these crappier guys seem to retire earlier as well makes the window seemingly smaller. As discussed a bit in the thread as well, these guys are also at a level where a bad -10 or -15 camp is basically a career-ender. I still can't believe Korey Upshaw retired when he did. 5) Chemistry - We weren't doing much here. When we'd get a warning that the guy would be a conflict, we usually didn't sign him. If it was the one or two guys each year really worth signing, we took a look at the value of the leader first. Net effect here is that we basically never had conflicts but only had 5-6 affinities of varying strength each year. I'll look to fire this thing up a little later. I might turn injuries off completely or something. It was basically just a chore the last few seasons.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)