 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by SpyPirates |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with a lot of that, until you said "Production should also be incorporated into progression". What exactly do you mean by that? I think a lot of us would like to see the two decoupled. Progression (getting better) should lead to production. Production should not lead to progression, as it does now.
The rookie class generation system seems to be based on 4-5 player "types" per position with slight randomness adjustments made to each guy so that they come out a just a little bit different. The best prospects come from the 2-3 types that are worth anything that have lucky dice rolls on the randomness adjustments. This isn't the worst system, but in its current form, it doesn't leave much to imagination during the scouting process. If they insist on keeping this format, they should at least add several new player types per position so that you can get some overlap between them so that it's not 100% obvious what kind of player you're looking at after scouting a couple of ratings and looking at the player's height/weight. They should also have a few players per draft that are just completely random and could have any combination of skills/size, for better or worse. This is where you could get interesting guys like Gronkowski, who is a perfect combination of everything, or Tebow, who has a skill set the game hasn't really seen before, but it doesn't really translate to the field. Anyway, just an idea for a more specific way to fix draft classes, would be interested to hear other ideas that get into specifics.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Yeah actually, now that I think about it, you're right about progression should not equal production. I was thinking of madden 12, where you could have a great season with a guy, but it wouldn't matter because of set potential. I'd like to see practice and training camp matter a lot more, especially for young guys.
Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk