How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

[Steve_OS]

The “fog of war” is a concept lots of video games use. Sports games have used...

Written By: Chase Becotte

Click here to view the article.

[Inverarity]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

I redshirt nearly everyone. The only exceptions are when I need the position filled because I'm close to (or below) a minimum. My theory is that the extra year of development is worth it, even if it's minor. But I'm only in year 4 of my dynasty so that may be incorrect.


On the subject of position changes: is development negatively (or positively) affected by moving a player to a position they rate well on? For example, moving a LT to a RG or some such.

[moTIGS]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

One area this article didn't really touch on (and one area where I'd somewhat disagree with the conclusions drawn) is WHY we see variance in off-season training.

There is an element of randomness to it. But that randomness isn't just "sometimes a player gets better, and sometimes he doesn't."

(What follows is based on some testing I've run, but it's not necessarily perfect)

Just as with in-season progression, I believe off-season training relies on each player receiving xp tokens to spend on upgrading their skills. We just don't see this happen. You might save/reload to try to reroll training results and notice one player gets a lot better sometimes and barely moves the other. But often, *he's still progressing the exact same amount*. The difference is in how he's spending his progression points.

If you go into the ratings section on a player card, you'll notice each position archetype has a different cost for different skill groups. Some are cheap. Some are expensive. Some archetypes don't really get any cheap skill groups and tend to progress slowly (see: hybrid safeties). Some are relatively cheap across the board (I believe slot corners are like this).

Sometimes, during off-season training, your player will spend all his training points in an expensive category that doesn't affect his overall rating much. If you have a corner dumping points into run stopping, for example, that's a costly investment for each level gained and also not one that's particularly impactful for his overall rating. So it looks like he just doesn't progress. He does, but he's randomly choosing to progress in an area that probably doesn't matter.

This is also part of why you can change a position, suffer a temporary overall hit, and see the rating bounce back in a year or two. Because the player is moved to a position where he's very bad, the cost to upgrade each skill level is typically going to be inexpensive. For the same training investment, he'll progress a lot more.

That's the part the article didn't really touch on. It doesn't matter *that* much because it's almost entirely outside of our control (other than going after recruits with cheaper upgrades in key areas).

The part I somewhat disagree with is that older players are less likely to progress.

The reason I disagree there is similar to the above: They often still get plenty of xp points to spend in off-season training, but because they're older, they've presumably progressed a decent amount already, so each upgrade will cost more. Or maybe they've already progressed as much as they can in the cheap ones so can only spend those points in the more costly areas. It's not that they aren't training. It's that training comes with diminishing returns.

However, if you have an older player who still has a lot of room to grow (maybe he had some unfortunate rolls earlier in his college career, where he spent all his points in expensive areas that don't matter much), you could still see him jump up a lot later in his career once he finally starts investing in the cheaper/more impactful areas.

So before you write off an older player as unlikely to progress, check his ratings page. Look at what areas he can still gain levels and—crucially—how much it costs to upgrade those areas. If, for example, you have a redshirt junior man corner who for some reason hasn't been investing in man coverage, but he has several levels he could still gain, that's a guy who is likely still going to get a lot better. Man corners get cheap upgrades to man coverage, so even a modest off-season training roll could see him get several levels there, which will help his overall quite a bit.

[Speedy]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

One area this article didn't really touch on (and one area where I'd somewhat disagree with the conclusions drawn) is WHY we see variance in off-season training.

There is an element of randomness to it. But that randomness isn't just "sometimes a player gets better, and sometimes he doesn't."

(What follows is based on some testing I've run, but it's not necessarily perfect)

Just as with in-season progression, I believe off-season training relies on each player receiving xp tokens to spend on upgrading their skills. We just don't see this happen. You might save/reload to try to reroll training results and notice one player gets a lot better sometimes and barely moves the other. But often, *he's still progressing the exact same amount*. The difference is in how he's spending his progression points.

If you go into the ratings section on a player card, you'll notice each position archetype has a different cost for different skill groups. Some are cheap. Some are expensive. Some archetypes don't really get any cheap skill groups and tend to progress slowly (see: hybrid safeties). Some are relatively cheap across the board (I believe slot corners are like this).

Sometimes, during off-season training, your player will spend all his training points in an expensive category that doesn't affect his overall rating much. If you have a corner dumping points into run stopping, for example, that's a costly investment for each level gained and also not one that's particularly impactful for his overall rating. So it looks like he just doesn't progress. He does, but he's randomly choosing to progress in an area that probably doesn't matter.

This is also part of why you can change a position, suffer a temporary overall hit, and see the rating bounce back in a year or two. Because the player is moved to a position where he's very bad, the cost to upgrade each skill level is typically going to be inexpensive. For the same training investment, he'll progress a lot more.

That's the part the article didn't really touch on. It doesn't matter *that* much because it's almost entirely outside of our control (other than going after recruits with cheaper upgrades in key areas).

The part I somewhat disagree with is that older players are less likely to progress.

The reason I disagree there is similar to the above: They often still get plenty of xp points to spend in off-season training, but because they're older, they've presumably progressed a decent amount already, so each upgrade will cost more. Or maybe they've already progressed as much as they can in the cheap ones so can only spend those points in the more costly areas. It's not that they aren't training. It's that training comes with diminishing returns.

However, if you have an older player who still has a lot of room to grow (maybe he had some unfortunate rolls earlier in his college career, where he spent all his points in expensive areas that don't matter much), you could still see him jump up a lot later in his career once he finally starts investing in the cheaper/more impactful areas.

So before you write off an older player as unlikely to progress, check his ratings page. Look at what areas he can still gain levels and—crucially—how much it costs to upgrade those areas. If, for example, you have a redshirt junior man corner who for some reason hasn't been investing in man coverage, but he has several levels he could still gain, that's a guy who is likely still going to get a lot better. Man corners get cheap upgrades to man coverage, so even a modest off-season training roll could see him get several levels there, which will help his overall quite a bit.

Really insightful and interesting. I'd never thought about badges vs just rating boosts.

[moTIGS]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

Some further info on my previous post. Figured I might as well include the data, which I already posted on another site in a discussion about reloading saves to try to get better training results. It's a relatively simple test to run yourself if anyone is interested enough into verifying the below or checking on different positions. Most time-consuming part was setting things up (verifying the upgrade costs for each level of each skill, setting up a basic spreadsheet to record the data and automate some of the calculations, which are basic addition but still annoying to do several times over).

The tl;dr version: players seem to be assigned skill points for off-season training, but we don't actually see it happen, nor do those players seem to keep any leftovers. How many points they get and how they spend those points seems at least somewhat random.

I happened to be on signing day with my main dynasty, so it was convenient enough. I looked at five zone-archetype corners through multiple saves so the data was the same across each player.

First I figured the cost to upgrade each level of each rating group (e.g. for a zone corner to go from 2 to 3 in man coverage, it costs 6, from 3 to 4 costs 7, so a corner going from 2 to 4 spends 13 xp points).

Then I noted each player's starting level in each category and simmed to training. After noting each player's new levels in each category, I calculated the total cost to the upgrades.

I did this four times with five players, so 20 data points for training progression.

(In each of the four trials, all five players gained the same physical attributes. I don't know if those are a factor, but they were consistent each time, so I'm ignoring that part.)

Player progression (total xp points used):

Corner 1: 7, 7, 7, 7 (average: 7)

Corner 2: 39, 20, 16, 16 (average: 22.75)

Corner 3: 9, 11, 9, 11 (average: 10)

Corner 4: 34, 37, 41, 39 (average: 37.75)

Corner 5: 33, 35, 31, 29, 32 (average: 32)

Looking closer at corner 2, in the first trial (his biggest gain by far), he added zero levels in zone, one in hands, two in man, two in power, one in run stopping, and zero in quickness. On the final two trials, he added one level each in zone, hands, and man, zero in the others.

So individual players can vary how many points they get to spend (the variance we see is not just a result of them putting xp toward more expensive areas), and individual players can also allocate those points in different ways.

I'm not quite a big enough dork to create a spreadsheet and run multiple tests for a full roster, but within this one archetype at one position group, there doesn't appear to be any firm rule about how many points they have or where they put those points. Sometimes they'll put points toward one category and ignore another. Others they'll do the opposite. Sometimes they get a ton of points and will use them efficiently. Sometimes they'll use a ton of points inefficiently.

Now, a subjective observation: It does seem like there are rough progression tracks for individual players. Through all of these tests (and a few dozen I didn't track objectively before I decided to put together a spreadsheet), I also looked at a five-star sophomore safety with elite dev. As a true freshman, he started as a 74. Throughout the season, he gained a few points and was now a 77. Every single time, his overall barely changed (either 78 or 79). I wouldn't be surprised if there was some coding on the back end that basically said "this player will progress a lot early then taper off" or "this guy will stay about the same for a few seasons then get a lot better as a junior or senior." (Note: He's a hybrid archetype, which has relatively expensive upgrades in all five categories, which probably plays a role.)

Also, for what it's worth, corners 4 and 5 above (the ones who consistently got 30+ xp points) were natural running backs who I moved to corner. Their overalls took a massive initial hit, but players tend to make up that hit in training in a year or two. They weren't anything special as recruits. Just how the game handles position switches for players who aren't athletes.

A bit more detail on those players:

Corner 1 was a redshirt senior with impact dev. He's maxed in everything except man coverage and run stopping, which are the two most expensive skills for a zone corner to upgrade.

Corner 2 was a redshirt junior with elite dev and high skill caps, but he had barely progressed through his first couple off-seasons. So he had a lot of room to grow. I assume this was basically him playing catch-up. (Those star/elite devs with high skill caps who don't progress a year or two will eventually explode in one off-season more often than not.)

Corner 3 was a normal dev redshirt sophomore. Like 1, he's capped in all skills but the most expensive ones.

Corners 4 and 5 were converted running backs (but not "athlete" running backs), and both were freshmen. Their overalls started at like 48 but then went up 35-40 points. Good way to turn mediocre running backs into impact players.

So the player with the most variance was an elite dev guy who had a ton of room to grow. The guys who were most consistent were already close to maxed out. Then there were two guys who were kind of in the middle but not exactly the "typical" player, so hard to say what exactly was happening behind the scenes.

[StormJH1]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

I don't know the specific answer to the question of whether off-season training can develop traits. I obsess over many areas of the game, but there are some I just to have to throw my hands in the air on and accept whatever happens as sort of random. For one thing, I can't control it, other than maybe giving the player playing time, which can only help their XP and development. But the game doesn't show what specific actions I can do to earn those points, nor is there any indication when an upgrade has occurred. Sorry, I have some extra time on my hands, but not enough to randomly thumb through the View Roster player pages for 85 players several times a season (in addition to recruiting and everything else).

Also, I think there's just a randomness and glitchiness to everything having to do with the ratings this year, but in ways that fortunately aren't game-breaking.

I know that recruiting gems means that I have a higher chance of getting players with better development traits (ideally, Star or Elite). And having a player with Star or Elite means that they should earn XP faster from playing in games, which should translate to higher ratings. We've also been told that Dev Traits and XP may not have anything to do with off-season training progression, though if that's the case, I don't know to recruit for that.

Still, I've seen enough weirdness to think that there is no direct formula to any of this. For example, I had a 3* Normal RB (Duane Awosika). He was basically 4rd on my depth chart as a redshirt freshman. I basically never played him and he probably should have transferred - except that feature is broken. He was jammed in behind several 4* and 5* underclassmen, all wiht Impact or Star development. Nevertheless, those RB's all saw an improvement of 1 or 2 points in the off-season, while Awosika shot way up to a 90 OVR as a redshirt sophomore (3rd season). Huh? I'm sure there is some way to explain that, but things just happen that you can't predict.

[DLev4552]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

I don't know the specific answer to the question of whether off-season training can develop traits. I obsess over many areas of the game, but there are some I just to have to throw my hands in the air on and accept whatever happens as sort of random. For one thing, I can't control it, other than maybe giving the player playing time, which can only help their XP and development. But the game doesn't show what specific actions I can do to earn those points, nor is there any indication when an upgrade has occurred. Sorry, I have some extra time on my hands, but not enough to randomly thumb through the View Roster player pages for 85 players several times a season (in addition to recruiting and everything else).

Also, I think there's just a randomness and glitchiness to everything having to do with the ratings this year, but in ways that fortunately aren't game-breaking.

I know that recruiting gems means that I have a higher chance of getting players with better development traits (ideally, Star or Elite). And having a player with Star or Elite means that they should earn XP faster from playing in games, which should translate to higher ratings. We've also been told that Dev Traits and XP may not have anything to do with off-season training progression, though if that's the case, I don't know to recruit for that.

Still, I've seen enough weirdness to think that there is no direct formula to any of this. For example, I had a 3* Normal RB (Duane Awosika). He was basically 4rd on my depth chart as a redshirt freshman. I basically never played him and he probably should have transferred - except that feature is broken. He was jammed in behind several 4* and 5* underclassmen, all wiht Impact or Star development. Nevertheless, those RB's all saw an improvement of 1 or 2 points in the off-season, while Awosika shot way up to a 90 OVR as a redshirt sophomore (3rd season). Huh? I'm sure there is some way to explain that, but things just happen that you can't predict.

I'm just circling back around to see if anyone has done testing to figure out several player progression hypotheses that have been thrown around in the past few weeks.

True or Debunked?:

1. Dev Trait only impacts in-season progression via XP earned from actually playing in games. Off-season training results not related to Dev Trait.

2. Off-season boosts from the Motivator Tree aren't functioning properly. The results aren't any greater than without any Tier 3 Motivator perks activated.

3. The in-season XP earned by individual players in Dynasty the same as each position in Road to Glory.

4. How many skill coins do you get for each player level-up? Is it static, or variable?

[ReturnoftheTmac]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

Is there anyway to make it so players don’t gain so much in the speed attribute from season to season? In my second season and the amount of guys with 99 or 98 speed ratings is insane.

[nawledg357]

Re: How to Understand Player Progression in College Football 25

Some further info on my previous post. Figured I might as well include the data, which I already posted on another site in a discussion about reloading saves to try to get better training results. It's a relatively simple test to run yourself if anyone is interested enough into verifying the below or checking on different positions. Most time-consuming part was setting things up (verifying the upgrade costs for each level of each skill, setting up a basic spreadsheet to record the data and automate some of the calculations, which are basic addition but still annoying to do several times over).

The tl;dr version: players seem to be assigned skill points for off-season training, but we don't actually see it happen, nor do those players seem to keep any leftovers. How many points they get and how they spend those points seems at least somewhat random.

I happened to be on signing day with my main dynasty, so it was convenient enough. I looked at five zone-archetype corners through multiple saves so the data was the same across each player.

First I figured the cost to upgrade each level of each rating group (e.g. for a zone corner to go from 2 to 3 in man coverage, it costs 6, from 3 to 4 costs 7, so a corner going from 2 to 4 spends 13 xp points).

Then I noted each player's starting level in each category and simmed to training. After noting each player's new levels in each category, I calculated the total cost to the upgrades.

I did this four times with five players, so 20 data points for training progression.

(In each of the four trials, all five players gained the same physical attributes. I don't know if those are a factor, but they were consistent each time, so I'm ignoring that part.)

Player progression (total xp points used):

Corner 1: 7, 7, 7, 7 (average: 7)

Corner 2: 39, 20, 16, 16 (average: 22.75)

Corner 3: 9, 11, 9, 11 (average: 10)

Corner 4: 34, 37, 41, 39 (average: 37.75)

Corner 5: 33, 35, 31, 29, 32 (average: 32)

Looking closer at corner 2, in the first trial (his biggest gain by far), he added zero levels in zone, one in hands, two in man, two in power, one in run stopping, and zero in quickness. On the final two trials, he added one level each in zone, hands, and man, zero in the others.

So individual players can vary how many points they get to spend (the variance we see is not just a result of them putting xp toward more expensive areas), and individual players can also allocate those points in different ways.

I'm not quite a big enough dork to create a spreadsheet and run multiple tests for a full roster, but within this one archetype at one position group, there doesn't appear to be any firm rule about how many points they have or where they put those points. Sometimes they'll put points toward one category and ignore another. Others they'll do the opposite. Sometimes they get a ton of points and will use them efficiently. Sometimes they'll use a ton of points inefficiently.

Now, a subjective observation: It does seem like there are rough progression tracks for individual players. Through all of these tests (and a few dozen I didn't track objectively before I decided to put together a spreadsheet), I also looked at a five-star sophomore safety with elite dev. As a true freshman, he started as a 74. Throughout the season, he gained a few points and was now a 77. Every single time, his overall barely changed (either 78 or 79). I wouldn't be surprised if there was some coding on the back end that basically said "this player will progress a lot early then taper off" or "this guy will stay about the same for a few seasons then get a lot better as a junior or senior." (Note: He's a hybrid archetype, which has relatively expensive upgrades in all five categories, which probably plays a role.)

Also, for what it's worth, corners 4 and 5 above (the ones who consistently got 30+ xp points) were natural running backs who I moved to corner. Their overalls took a massive initial hit, but players tend to make up that hit in training in a year or two. They weren't anything special as recruits. Just how the game handles position switches for players who aren't athletes.

A bit more detail on those players:

Corner 1 was a redshirt senior with impact dev. He's maxed in everything except man coverage and run stopping, which are the two most expensive skills for a zone corner to upgrade.

Corner 2 was a redshirt junior with elite dev and high skill caps, but he had barely progressed through his first couple off-seasons. So he had a lot of room to grow. I assume this was basically him playing catch-up. (Those star/elite devs with high skill caps who don't progress a year or two will eventually explode in one off-season more often than not.)

Corner 3 was a normal dev redshirt sophomore. Like 1, he's capped in all skills but the most expensive ones.

Corners 4 and 5 were converted running backs (but not "athlete" running backs), and both were freshmen. Their overalls started at like 48 but then went up 35-40 points. Good way to turn mediocre running backs into impact players.

So the player with the most variance was an elite dev guy who had a ton of room to grow. The guys who were most consistent were already close to maxed out. Then there were two guys who were kind of in the middle but not exactly the "typical" player, so hard to say what exactly was happening behind the scenes.

I'm super late to the party, but first I wanted to say thanks for your testing and I think that you're spot on in terms of the randomness being how much xp or skill points a player receives in the off-season and after doing some testing of my own I think I see how the skill points are assigned. During the season we see players upgrade the "lowest" costing skill group that they have compared to all of the other skill groups, but if we think about it differently it's the "highest" amount that they can purchase at that time. Fast forward to the off-season the training results only shows the outcome, but not the process of the progression. What happens is let's corner 2 in your example the first time receives 39 skill points. The logic for applying those skill points goes 1. are there any physical abilities that can be purchased if so buy those, 2. with the remaining skill points I have what's the highest (cost wise) skill group I can purchase 2.a repeat until I have nothing left to purchase. I only noticed this because after a number of seasons simulating almost always I would see the power/quickness skill group for my receivers and QBs always jump up. Then I was able to predict which skill groups would be upgraded for players I had an interest in keeping.

Tangent: The article mentioned "And your players do get in-season improvements. Those green arrows you see within the View Roster screen are legit and do show how your player has improved or is at least boosted right now." and that's not accurate the green arrows are from coaches upgrades in Tactician. Head coach and the coordinator for that side of the ball each give 2 points to the associated attributes and the coordinator for the other side of the ball only gives 1 point to the associated attributes