My problem with progression

[macbranson]

I'm playing an offline franchise and I was scrolling through the rosters to make sure everything is okay. As I go through all the rosters, I notice that a lot of teams have the same starters that they did when I first started and I'm four years into my franchise. I see guys like Knowshon Moreno still on the Broncos even though he's averaged 3.5 yards per carry over the last four seasons. Yet, he's still rated 87, which is pretty high for someone putting up subpar numbers.
Which leads me to the main problem with resigning logic and players on this game. Players progress, but they never really REGRESS. At this point, Moreno should be a backup or in free agency,not a starter. The CPU sees a running back in Moreno who's rated pretty high and they resigned him when his contract was up. Why is there so little regression for players who don't perform well or players who sit in free agency year after year? It screws up the game and leads to a whole bunch of good players existing in the franchise with very few scrubs. Then you wind up with too much parity because there is just a bunch of good teams. No really bad teams, no really great teams, just good teams. It takes away from the feel of having dominant teams and terrible teams that we have in real life. Player progression really needs work. Sorry, player regression, really needs work.

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by macbranson

Which leads me to the main problem with resigning logic and players on this game. Players progress, but they never really REGRESS. At this point, Moreno should be a backup or in free agency,not a starter. The CPU sees a running back in Moreno who's rated pretty high and they resigned him when his contract was up. Why is there so little regression for players who don't perform well or players who sit in free agency year after year?

Progression does need work, but there's many a washed up player that is just a high-60, low-70 shell of what they once were.

Ladarius Webb is notorious for it. Every non-Ravens franchise I have, he drops off badly and is never heard from again. Rothlisberger is on the street in the 70s. Romo was in the 70s before retiring. Eli is at 75, Dalton is at 70, Wimbly 68, Haralson 68. Talib fell apart after I let him go (he was in the 80s, now he's fighting to stay above 75).

All of these guys are in FA, some for several seasons or getting just "fill in for IR" signing and playing time.

Too me, the "too much parity" thing is from the drafts more than progression. That said, there's still bad teams so whatever it is that causes it just doesn't show up on OVR, which doesn't surprise me.

[Cre8]

Progression is such a sticky situation in this game.

Bottom line is that coaches and players that surround each player aren't being taken into account enough.

[macbranson]

@KBLover-I'm surprised to hear that there are so many low rated QBs in your franchise. You must be far along. I'm 4 years in and no team has a starting QB rated under 80. Same with Running backs. I guess the problem with progression/ regression isn't that there is no regression, but it seems to affect the wrong people in the same manner as progression.

For instance, Kyle Orton has been putting up a QB rating of 76 or less for the past four seasons and is currently rated 83. His awareness is 84 and his accuracies are 73, 83 and 90(deep, mid, short). For a player who really has no business being a starter, he's still rated pretty well and would be starting for a team had I not moved him down the depth chart.

On the other hand, I've seen many instances of players performing poorly and still progressing, and sometimes progressing by 5 or more points overall. So, it's not that there isn't regression/progression, they're just not being applied accurately.

[btemp]

Quote: Originally Posted by macbranson

@KBLover-I'm surprised to hear that there are so many low rated QBs in your franchise. You must be far along. I'm 4 years in and no team has a starting QB rated under 80. Same with Running backs. I guess the problem with progression/ regression isn't that there is no regression, but it seems to affect the wrong people in the same manner as progression. For instance, Kyle Orton has been putting up a QB rating of 76 or less for the past four seasons and is currently rated 83. His awareness is 84 and his accuracies are 73, 83 and 90(deep, mid, short). For a player who really has no business being a starter, he's still rated pretty well and would be starting for a team had I not moved him down the depth chart. On the other hand, I've seen many instances of players performing poorly and still progressing, and sometimes progressing by 5 or more points overall. So, it's not that there isn't regression/progression, they're just not being applied accurately.

My franchise in year 5 was definitely suffering from ratings creep. Two years in I couldn't trade Josh Freeman at 86 or Legarrette Blount at 87, even though both were very young players, because so many QBs and HBs were rated above them. Freeman was one of the worst (starting) QBs in the league.