|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by JoshC1977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm incredibly biased towards the early 90s as it is when I grew up and fell in love with the game. So yeah, 1991 is right in my wheelhouse.
1985 is interesting as well. BUT, what I do like about 1991 (vs 1985) is that there is a bit more diversity in offenses. Atlanta, Houston, and Detroit all ran the RunNShoot, a few teams were into the West Coast (old school WC), you had teams like Buffalo/Cincy using significant hurry-up models, while others were still heavy into the power run style. I'm no expert on mid 80s, but I think teams were a little more "samey".
As far as draft classes....this is what got me most excited about the feature dropping; the thought of using your rosters with a few years of classes....OMG!! Now, philosophy on the classes....how to do it?
Take the 1992 Class. Remember Steve Emtman? He was a BEAST in college but injuries killed his NFL career before it started. How will you rate him? As a guy with a ton of potential or as a guy who wound up being more of a bust? Do you rate them based on how they were assessed coming out of the draft or based on what they ultimately became? I think there could be some opportunity to enlist a little 'creative license'. Sure, 'Touchdown Tommy' Vardell was a bust....but I'd love a chance to give his career a "do over". There isn't a right or wrong way to do this....just thinking about it
Very happy to hear you're doing another year of rosters!! We're still loving the crap out of the ones you previously did!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
The mid 80s is when I started watching and caring about football. The 85 season especially, the Bears were just soooo good defensively. However, in 1986 I became a die-hard Browns fan.
You are right, the early 90s had more variety in offensive systems that is true. The mid-80s had some variance but not as much. You had power run teams like the Browns (Byner and Mack both had 1000 yards!) San Fran and Cincy ran the West Coast. San Diego was Air Coryell and Miami was Dan Marino (lol)
As for draft classes:
I plan on using some creative license but trying to be accurate as well. I want to balance what guys were expected to be and what they turned out to be. So, a guy like Emtman should be rated to be really good, but lower injury numbers to reflect his struggles, but not overboard because he did not have those issues in college. So perhaps, he becomes the superstar he should have been. Truly, when he was on the field he was good, just could not stay on the field.
With draft classes this early there are few actual combine numbers to use to create ratings so I will use my "best judgement" in most cases. The main thing for me is that the ratings match the style of the main roster itself.
I will try to throw in a few surprises here and there too to add some intrigue in the draft class.
Then there are guys like Tommy Maddox, drafted in the 1st round, but could not stick behind John Elway. But then reinvented his career later on.