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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

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.

I acutally disagree with you here. IMO, Potential should be invisible, and only through extreme means be able to change.

The reason I have is that the player can drastically alter the stats for a player. If you take Rex Grossman, and make him throw for 5000 yards, he is still Rex Grossman. Maybe if the game had a more advanced progression system and ratings that handicapped the player but until then, I'm a fan of progression caps.

[Calipup]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

I acutally disagree with you here. IMO, Potential should be invisible, and only through extreme means be able to change.

The reason I have is that the player can drastically alter the stats for a player. If you take Rex Grossman, and make him throw for 5000 yards, he is still Rex Grossman. Maybe if the game had a more advanced progression system and ratings that handicapped the player but until then, I'm a fan of progression caps.

Well I didn't mean that one huge season should completely change a player. Grossman throwing 5,000 yards shouldn't make him a 90 ovr, but it should at least bump up his ratings a bit.

If a 30 year old 80 rated player has a breakout year, nothing happens in the current system. If anything happens, his stats actually go down. If a 28 year old has 3 straight 1,600 yard rushing seasons, his stats should go up, not just stay the same like it does now.

[untrugby]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

I acutally disagree with you here. IMO, Potential should be invisible, and only through extreme means be able to change.

The reason I have is that the player can drastically alter the stats for a player. If you take Rex Grossman, and make him throw for 5000 yards, he is still Rex Grossman. Maybe if the game had a more advanced progression system and ratings that handicapped the player but until then, I'm a fan of progression caps.

the problems are progression caps as just assigned so threes no point to even try dealing with a D player. On filed performance IRL causes EA to change potential so why not on field performance in game? last year Arian foster started at a D potential but was an A by the end of the season. IRL pretty much every player in the NFL has B or better potential.

[KBLover]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

the problems are progression caps as just assigned so threes no point to even try dealing with a D player. On filed performance IRL causes EA to change potential so why not on field performance in game? last year Arian foster started at a D potential but was an A by the end of the season. IRL pretty much every player in the NFL has B or better potential.

I don't know if every player has B or higher potential. If they did, why do some guys not make it or develop much beyond average?

Potential shouldn't change unless it's originally scouted wrong and/or the scout has a new idea on it, or through *consistent* over/underachieving over a season at minimum, or in the case of repeated and/or severe injuries.

IRL Foster never was a "D" player. Just like Brady never was a "D" player IRL. That's the problem - IRL, there's scouting errors. In Madden - what errors?

Potential being hidden would add challenge, but I'd rather know what the scout thinks - just have the possibility of the estimate being off, or even way off, depending on the scout and other circumstances. To me, the problem isn't that you should have a reason to deal with a D potential player - it's the fact you know without a doubt he's nothing more than the 50th man on the roster, at best.

If your scouts say "D" and you cut him, and someone takes him and runs with him because he's really an "A" - THAT would be the Brady situation. Not a D QB throwing for 5000 yds a year then suddenly, he's Brady.

[Calipup]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

Or perhaps, why give us a players full out ratings? Like when you are scouting a player, it gives a ? for some ratings and such, meaning you never really know his full OVR until you use that last scouting day.

But if we want to be realistic here, why not make it so scouts give a player a rating, but it could be off by 5 or something. So the better the scout you have, the smaller the window.

In real life, they can't see that Vick has a 86 speed rating or something. So why not give us something like a Vick speed rating of 83(+/- 4) So it could either be a 79-87, you won't know.

And I suppose that the more you play with a player, the smaller the window will become. So playing with a player for a year or two will get the window smaller and smaller so it just is a +/- of 3.

This would help with the whole potential thing. Rookies coming in could have large windows, and by playing with them or keeping them on your roster it will make it so you can eventually find out their true rating. If you draft a QB, it may say that his THP is a 74(+/- 15) along with some other stats. He could be a diamond in the rough and end up with a 89 THP that you took a chance on, or he could be a complete dud with a 59 THP. This rookie could look like he is a 56 OVR player at first, but if all his important attributes are at the top of their windows, then he may become a 82 OVR player that can then progress to a 90 or something.

As for showing potential or hiding it, I would not be sure. A high potential could signal to the user that the player's ratings will be at the top of their windows, while a low potential may be at the lower part of it. Or you could just hide it outright.

I don't know, just an idea. If there is anything wrong with it, just say something.

[untrugby]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

I don't know if every player has B or higher potential. If they did, why do some guys not make it or develop much beyond average?

thats the difference between potential and reality. there are a few C players in the NFL. Career special teamers and such but they usually dont stay in the NFL long because teams only spend time on guys with the physical potential to be good.

[RGiles36]

Re: Single-Team Franchise Owners

I'm a player who plays most every week in my franchise. In that respect, I normally only go 3 seasons (5 seasons max) deep into a franchise.

I attempted a 32 team league. But hell, it's not worth it in the end for how I play the game. Even if the CPU makes stupid cuts, it's not enough to ruin a franchise in a 3 season period.