Maybe this has been pointed out. Has anyone taken into account that there are a couple of new ratings that might be worked into the equation now?
Also that this could mean that there's more of a gap in overalls than there has been in the past (which I think a lot of people were hoping for).
I feel as though the high experience costs may be a sign of that. It would be unreasonable for the 90's attributes to cost so much experience if the stock rosters had too many players with ratings in the 90's - the draft class players would never reach those levels, so the players from the 2012 season at their peak would always be better than the future players. Speculation of course.

Comment