 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by Geodude |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Please someone tell me I am wrong if so, but I saw somewhere on here (dang, can't find the quote) that the Coaches union states that coaches cannot have ratings??
So until that changes (if true), then this great idea can't happen.
But yes, I would love to see ratings on coaches (like discipline, chemistry, play calling etc) and badges too (defensive Guru, QB whisperer), and have their ratings impact player development (a lot of players only blossom or bust based on coaching), FA, retention, team chemistry, individual chemistry and to have Coordinators who have lower ratings, but can rise up in a proper coaching carousel.
There should be a coach chemistry type factor/rating too... the more a team changes its coaches, the lower positive impact on the players as they have to keep learning new schemes, but then an incumbent coach (like BB) gets an impact boost for having schemes in place for so long.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
I guess technically coaches don't have "ratings", but they do have levels in the game. I'm it sure how that's different than a rating. I dont know, if seems like if you base progression off of just coaches, then teams with the best coaches, would have a significant advantage over teams with lesser coaches in terms of player development. That would be a huge flaw in a 32 man CFM.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk