[Vanilla_Gorilla]

Quote: Originally Posted by Thegafferuk

I agree with a lot of what's said here, but I don't think tying a reduction in OVR to age for the majority of players 100% reflects the NFL and the lack of players over 30 on rosters. Yes, age is a factor - but so is overall ability not being quantified in the first place. Teams will draft players with only a rough idea of whether they're good enough to make it. A number of players don't make it past (or to) the end of those contracts because they weren't good enough in the first place. I don't think Peterman (and other players like him) won't be on a roster at 30 because of his age, but because he threw 12 picks in 68 pass attempts. And so is money. Obviously older players are more expensive, even on veteran minimum. Therefore teams are going to balance keeping a 6-year vet on the roster against the fact they could get two younger players at the same price. And these two factors combined make it worse. You know what you're getting (to an extent) with a veteran, and it's more expensive. Most general managers will roll the dice on getting someone they can develop for less money. I get what the game is trying to do, but a blanket approach of saying every player who hits 30 gets worse isn't that accurate for me.

My sentiments exactly. I can understand physical attribute drops. Mother nature changes your body every year you age but not THAT much and certainly not that drastic. With exceptions being injury of course.