Single-Team Franchise Owners

[red1rkulous]

Hey Guys,

Getting frustrated with having to control all 32 teams in franchise mode.

What are the drawbacks of controlling only one team in franchise? Other than not controlling who the computer cuts, what else is there?

Thanks

Mike

[KBLover]

You can't change their coaching sliders - which can help with certain aspects like play calling. You can still influence it, but it's not as direct as changing everything.

It can still work, though.

[CatMan72]

I was an all 32 team guy, cutting UDFA's etc... but then I realized it was seriously impacting my enjoyment of the game so I just went back to a 1 team franchise with the mindset that it's all fantasy, so it's not worth getting hung up on who the computer cuts, etc.

Having much more fun now that I'm just running my team.

[CatMan72]

Having said that, I really hope they do away with the UDFA's next year. It was an interesting idea but it was poorly implemented. CPU has to be much smarter about who to cut before something like this will work.

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by CatMan72

Having said that, I really hope they do away with the UDFA's next year. It was an interesting idea but it was poorly implemented. CPU has to be much smarter about who to cut before something like this will work.

Noooooo, don't do away with it. That's the problem, stuff gets yanked instead of refined and fleshed out. They need to build more around it (larger draft classes so there are "natural" UDFAs, generate UDFAs in the fa pool, and let teams invite who they want).

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

Noooooo, don't do away with it. That's the problem, stuff gets yanked instead of refined and fleshed out. They need to build more around it (larger draft classes so there are "natural" UDFAs, generate UDFAs in the fa pool, and let teams invite who they want).

I agree it is a nice feature...for year 2 and beyond. Year one is sacred. I agree with increasing draft class sizes, but also crappy FAs need to retire more often.

Not to mention the whole way the system works by giving useless ratings, essentially meaning either cutting players blindly or cutting your third string guys just because the UDFAs cant be worse.

Honestly, I'd rather see potential becoming invisible again, or atleast for the first few years. It sucks knowing your guy is a bust the moment he steps onto the field.

[Calipup]

As a casual player, I see no problems at all except for one.

The only problem I have is the progression system. I believe there should be no progression caps (A, B, C, D, F) and should be mostly based on stats.

All players should have the ability to progress to an All-Star player. The CPU predetermines if a player will be good or not. Look at Tom Brady.

[Nza]

I like to address the UDFA issues and also do some coaching slider adjustments mostly for sim stats (I can't for the life of me agree they make any difference whatsoever in game. Priotity sliders - maybe, but not the top coach ones). 32 team control is required for me.

It's a bit of work but required to keep the franchise balanced. If my lowest rated guy under my own management is low 60's, it stands to reason having CPU teams with 10+ players under 60 means they are weaker and the games will suffer because of it. There already is a poor balance between injury frequency playing games and simming games (50% of my games seem to be against the CPU's backup QB, which is lame), let alone while allowing them to have terrible depth.