Some GM Questions for Offline Franchise Folks

[JHeyBraves]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

This is turning out to be great stuff. I'm 100% going to implement some form of the holdout system, as that would add a really key element of the two sides being "close" or "very far apart" in negotiations, which is what we always here on ESPN. It definitely puts the onus on owners to pay up and not try to be cheap. It puts an onus on the player too because after a certain point if they're not playing and getting decent stats then they're ratings and market value decrease. I tagged the hell out of Stanford Routt because of his age. I didn't want to mess with a 7 year deal for a 28 year old CB whose salary would begin around 7 mil and escalate to about 12. I stuck him with 10 mil and I'm gonna let him play that contract out to see if he stays even or drops. That gives the all the time I need for my rookie CB to mature and take the #1 spot and my 3rd year guy with B potential to crack into the 80s and take the #2 spot. That, to me, is the real fun of it--trying to manipulate salaries and ages and contract lengths to produce a team that has the right balance of youth and vets to peak for a limited window. I really want to get rid of McFadden, who gets injured and fumbles too much for a guy who is supposed to carry an offense, but I won't trade more than one good player a year. I already shipped out Wimbley because I drafted a stud who made his high salary prohibitive to keep. Here's a question for you guys: how many of you focus on depth seriously, and at which positions? It's hard from a salary cap situation to have #2 guys who can step in and play for extended periods of time without huge drop-offs in play relative to the starter's ability. I have good backups on the OL, but not great ones at QB, HB, TE, DT, OLB, and S. Granted, I'm at the beginning of year 2 with Oakland with just one good draft under my belt and I'm dealing with their cap situation, but I'd still like to have a little more depth in the 70s range as opposed to the 60s.

Agreed. This thread has already given me some new ideas to implement in my fast-approaching off-season.

I am really enjoying franchise mode without draft guides. It makes my drafts suck so I have to sign vets and manage the cap. I am finally feeling the youth/veteran balance you are talking about. I am becoming a franchise junkie.

Oh man, I couldn't agree more about McFadden. In my Raiders franchise, he would always get hurt for at least 3-4 weeks. I remember one year he got hurt after a few games, came back in week 17, then re-injured himself and had to be put on IR. I was not very happy. He would have major trade value if you decide to break that rule. Otherwise, you could unload him in the off-season.

The positions I usually have depth for are LB (way ahead), CB, S, WR and HB.

The only position I REALLY focus on adding depth for is LB. I have different roles for each guy and since I usually have 4 on the field at once, there is a need for depth. When trying to get backups for these guys, I try to find similar attributes in the key areas of need (ex. TAK/PRC/AWR for middle guys, SPD/BSH for the outside guys). Each player has an independent role, so I look for a guy that can take over that role only for a few plays at a time. My D-line usually needs a breather frequently, but I think I am better served to spend on LB depth.

I have good backups for LB, DE and S on defense. I probably should have concentrated more on DB depth and less on DE because my secondary backups were downright bad and it was much more costly. My nickel corner couldn't cover a snail (my old guy wanted Routt-like money, which is laughed at as I kicked his butt out the door). I always have to leave a safety over the top when he is in. LB is the only position I have an 80+ backup for. I actually keep 9 LB's on the roster, 8 of which play in every game (some more than others).

On offense, I don't have much trouble keeping guys fresh, other than HB. I have decent backups at HB and WR. I usually get 150+ carries for my #2 back so he needs to be decent. I like to mix it up in the gun, running 3-5 WR sets. My backups at these positions are in the low to mid 70's. I usually like those guys to have roles too, like a speed guy and possession guy.

My O-line doesn't have much depth but I am confident I can turn that around in the draft. Had two of my long-time starters retire recently, so I am a little thin there. Just about all of my backups are in the 70's with a few 60's sprinkled in.

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

I would go in and set him to a cold streak (confidence of 1).

Good thinkin'

[DJ]

^ I haven't used any guides for scouting/drafting, either. I just try and do the best I can, even though scouting isn't the most user-friendly in terms of trying to figure out how many guys you can scout and what weeks you can scout players.

I really love the contract holdout idea. I'm going to keep that in mind. I just started a Tampa Bay Franchise (using the final roster update. I picked TB because they were the lowest-rated team) and am almost finished with the pre-season, so it'll be a while before I get to my off-season.

[Ueauvan]

i do things in a confused manner, mainly cos im getting old.

qbs ive had 2 or 3, hb 3 or 4 with #4 usually the return guy. 2 fbs, one primary a blocker one who can catch a bit better but block better than te. 2 tes, the most important thing for me is cat/cit/rte followed by rbs/f. i have 5 wr atm but really only use 3-4. ol usually 12, 2c 5 t/g.

running 3-4
de 4
olb 6
mlb 3
dt 3
cbs 5
s 5

i should only worry about 2 qbs, 3 hbs, 2 fbs, 2-3 tes, 4 wr, 12 ol

4 de/ 8-9 lb/ 3 dt/ 5 cb 5 s

now if one of the hb/cb/s/wr is the returner thats great, if the 5th cb or 4th wr or 5th safety or 3rd hb is the returner it fits.

if i found a great te who blocks well and catches solidly id take as 3rd te over 2nd fb. if i have a 2nd/3rd string lb who could be a stand in de then maybe 3 de.

[Robo COP]

A little off topic, but after reading this thread you guys actually got me excited for madden 13. I skipped 12 because I was so fed up with the franchise mode not even being as good as it was on old gen that I refused to buy 12, even with the upgrades said to have been made. Now with RFAs, scouting, and practice squad implemented it sounds really good.

[RogueHominid]

Yeah, Robo Cop, the offline franchise is surprisingly good. You just need the right sliders and it's pretty amazing, especially if you go in honest with the draft. I had a pretty lucky one where I landed a B potential in the 1st round,2 A potentials in the 2nd, 3rd, and 7th rounds, with the 5th and 6th rounds yielding D potential players. I was stoked, needless to say, because all but one of those guys made the final roster. Watching these guys compete through the pre-season was a TON of fun.

Uevan, that roster breakdown is really interesting. I run:
3 QB
3 HB
1 FB
3 TE
2 OL @ all positions
5 DE
4 DT
5 OLB
3 ILB
5 CB
5 S

I think depth at LB is pretty important, and I have noticed that my #4 DT almost never plays, so I'm wondering if I even need that extra guy. I could maybe use that spot elsewhere. I also think DE is an important spot for quality depth in the event of injury.

[zarmstead2]

My two cents on the draft:

I ALWAYS draft needs, unless there is a STUD available. (i.e. The MLB from Arizona "Gibson", that monster RE from some Missisippi school, you get the point.)

And by stud, I mean guys who stand out even though Im not really scouting that position a lot. Once I see a stud early on, I continue to scout him. In my Panthers 'chise, I drafted that MLB from Arizona even though I had Beason. He was just too good to pass up. Just ask anyone on the "Your Franchise" thread .

I also limit myself to one (if any) trade-down per draft. I hardly draft Top 5/10 players, from my experiences they always seem to come out with a B potential. So I find myself in situations where I CAN trade down, however I take the guy that I want but is projected in a lower round, anyway. This helps me from stockpiling picks. Because believe me, you can easily have 10+ picks per year if you trade-down too often. I don't know if someone has said this, have only read most of Page 1.

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Uevan, that roster breakdown is really interesting. I run: 3 QB 3 HB 1 FB 3 TE 2 OL @ all positions 5 DE 4 DT 5 OLB 3 ILB 5 CB 5 S

I use pretty much the exact same thing. I believe I only run 4 OLBS and add on a 6th corner though.
-zarm.
BTW, this thread is rockin' .

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Uevan, that roster breakdown is really interesting. I run: 3 QB 3 HB 1 FB 3 TE 2 OL @ all positions 5 DE 4 DT 5 OLB 3 ILB 5 CB 5 S

I have:

2 QB
4 HB
1 FB
6 WR
3 TE
10 OL (1/3/2/1/3)
5 DE (3/2)
4 DT
9 LBs (2/4/3)
5 CB
4 S (2/2)

[RogueHominid]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

I have: 2 QB 4 HB 1 FB 6 WR 3 TE 10 OL (1/3/2/1/3) 5 DE (3/2) 4 DT 9 LBs (2/4/3) 5 CB 4 S (2/2)

I'm liking the breakdowns of the different roster builds.

What I really need to do is start using the back end of the roster more explicitly for special teams. I can't believe I didn't figure this out before, but you can sub guys in/out on special teams, so instead of making my starting ILB a ST guy, I'll just grab a 3rd stringer with decent pursuit and tackling and throw him in there.

You can also find receivers and backs who tackle well (Reece for OAK is a VERY good ST guy), so the offense can contribute too.

I've just been gathering/re-evaluating talent at the starter level in year one and trying to add a little bit of depth to a roster that was a bit thin for my liking.

I like the idea of having more LBs and fewer Ss. My LBs tire and rotate out a little more frequently, and since they're the teeth of the defense, I'd rather have depth there than in the backfield, where a player is less likely to be directly involved in the play on a regular basis. Good philosophy there.