CFM Draft classes impressions

[BenjiA]

names and faces are still horrible for the most part. It's really depressing we can't at least edit their names.

[BenjiA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yukon46

But you could edit your biggest gripe last year, and this year I believe. But if someone does have a problem with some of the names the game comes out with..... they cant change it. Or when a Rookie gets a Shaved head pic, and is wearing dreads in the game.... one of my big gripes from last year. One draft I had over 3 players with this problem, irritated me that I could not just fix it by choosing a different head !

Absolutely this!!

It's freaking me out we can't edit their names and appearances (head). Makes the draft classes so unrealistic and silly.

And this is year 2014. SMH

[mavfan21]

They are fantastic and the most realistic yet.

No more 76 SPD/ACC Hbs, WRs, DBs. I went through EVERY rookies ratings last night in my first draft and saw none of the nonsense we saw the last few years. All of the players had physical ratings that made sense.

Players play recognition or block shedding, etc, are now lower which makes MUCH more sense than lowering physical ratings to get them to play like rookies. My 7th round CB had 93 SPD and 92 ACC but low Press, Play Rec, and AWR....that's how it should be.

These are the best classes we've had since the PS2 Xbox days.

[bsurocksrule]

Scouting my first class. I need offensive lineman. While some are big, most of them have B's and C's in their blocking attributes. NOT what I need. Guess I'll have to look at the trade block or wait till next year to look for OL.

[mavfan21]

Quote: Originally Posted by bsurocksrule

Scouting my first class. I need offensive lineman. While some are big, most of them have B's and C's in their blocking attributes. NOT what I need. Guess I'll have to look at the trade block or wait till next year to look for OL.

They had that last year too. VERY few A's. Most rookies can't come in and block well right away, but they are still strong and/or quick. What I hated in previous editions was they would lower their STR to the 70s and ACC the 50s to get them to have lower OVRs.

[blackceasar]

Quote: Originally Posted by BenjiA

names and faces are still horrible for the most part. It's really depressing we can't at least edit their names.

I wouldn't complain so much about the faces. They are using the same techonolgoy NFL 2k5 used to generate rookies every year but morphing two pro players faces together or a pro player and a handfull of regular joes they photographed. It's not perfect but it keeps dev costs down for them because if you think about it, if you're going to play 30 years into a franchise which is 30 drafts with some 250ish players every year, on the uber end they would have to find 250x30 different people to shoot. They just arent going to do that right now.

They COULD go back to just having silouhettes instead of some kind of real face. Would you really want to go back to that? 10 years into your franchise and its like 95% silouhettes. Youd be on here griping about that more than what they are doing now with faces.

[tharding16]

I had really good luck in my first draft. Playing with the Cardinals, I needed OLB help after John Abraham retired and Acho went away in free agency. Boy did I get it. Drafted an outside linebacker who is a plug and play guy(currently 79 OVR) with Superstar development in the first round. His Physical was 95. Really the only thing bring him down was his awareness; which was like 40 something. Considering this is the cheapest thing to upgrade, I'm ok with that.

Second round I picked up an 80 overall tight end. Pretty well rounded. Big dude. Normal Dev.

Third I grabbed a 76 overall receiver. He is a big dude with pretty good hands, decent but not great speed. I like the matchups he will have in the slot. He will start this year.

4th I got lucky. I wanted a big back that I could pound the rock with on short yardage and run between the tackles. He was a 72 overall but had quick dev. and good trucking.

After that I don't really think there was anything in the draft really. Butttt... man oh man were the UDFAs good. Generally speaking they didn't show in the overall category all that much. But so many good raw prospects.

Picked up a back up LE, DT (which will move to right end), LOLB, CB, SS, LT.

Very good chance if I develop these players at least 3 of them will go over 90. 3 are already in the 70s and most of them are only lower because of their AWR rating. My plan for them is to develop guys that I need sooner quicker -- but maybe not as beneficial in the long run. If I give most of these guys even an average AWR rating they become very good players. But if in their first year I can focus on some of the other intangibles (Pass Rush, Cover skills) then come back to AWR the following year when other intangibles get more expensive. 2 years I will have at least 3 or 4 of these UDFAs starting for my team.

I guess the main take away is to check the Free agent pool very first thing in the preseason. I have never seen UDFAs like this in a draft. Maybe this was a one of thing but I doubt it.

Go to the position you want (only a certain amount will show up if you are under ALL positions), sort by their age. Look for physical specimens. You will get some studs for very low contracts. As long as that AWR lever stays really low you will likely be able to sign them to very cheap contracts too.

[Sheba2011]

Quote: Originally Posted by BenjiA

Absolutely this!! It's freaking me out we can't edit their names and appearances (head). Makes the draft classes so unrealistic and silly. And this is year 2014. SMH

I get that you want NCAA draft classes.

But how exactly is it unrealistic that you can't edit a guys name or appearance. If anything that makes it more realistic. If you don't like Ha Ha's name in real life you can't change it or edit his appearance. Real life GM's don't have that option.