Draft Thoughts....what'd ya get?

[Guest]

Pairs are kinda pointless anymore. They might sometimes exist, but sometimes they don't exist.

Kind of like how static bars aren't the tell all anymore like they used to be.

I'd put masked pairs much less useful than static pairs, though. For sure.

The thing with this QB is that he had great combines, great SR, second highest unranked rate in the class and not anything else, but when you couple it with his development being at 10% (super low) and all his bars above 0 there is an outside chance he may pop. If so, he would be the first I've ever seen pop quite like this.

[Guest]

Pairs are kinda pointless anymore. They might sometimes exist, but sometimes they don't exist.

Kind of like how static bars aren't the tell all anymore like they used to be.

I'd put masked pairs much less useful than static pairs, though. For sure.

The thing with this QB is that he had great combines, great SR, second highest unranked rate in the class and not anything else, but when you couple it with his development being at 10% (super low) and all his bars above 0 there is an outside chance he may pop. If so, he would be the first I've ever seen pop quite like this.

I have trouble trusting combines much at all anymore. Or anything that indicates anything about a player, TBH. haha

[Delandis]

I for one am happy that combines are less of a tell. It makes scouting the driving factor when it comes to draft selections, as it should be.

[Sharkn20]

I for one am happy that combines are less of a tell. It makes scouting the driving factor when it comes to draft selections, as it should be.

I have a little bit of a problem with this. As we don't have any kind of control whatsoever signing our Coaches, this 39 combine accuracy stuff gives advantage to the teams with better Scouting Bars Coaches. The ability to draft is no longer necessary. Too automatic. I did enjoy a lot more in the past with at least 50 combine accuracy.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Nemesis]

Pairs are kinda pointless anymore. They might sometimes exist, but sometimes they don't exist.

Kind of like how static bars aren't the tell all anymore like they used to be.

I'd put masked pairs much less useful than static pairs, though. For sure.

The thing with this QB is that he had great combines, great SR, second highest unranked rate in the class and not anything else, but when you couple it with his development being at 10% (super low) and all his bars above 0 there is an outside chance he may pop. If so, he would be the first I've ever seen pop quite like this.

This guy has a LOOOOOONG way to go.

[Guest]

I have a little bit of a problem with this. As we don't have any kind of control whatsoever signing our Coaches, this 39 combine accuracy stuff gives advantage to the teams with better Scouting Bars Coaches. The ability to draft is no longer necessary. Too automatic. I did enjoy a lot more in the past with at least 50 combine accuracy.

I'm the complete opposite, I'm glad we threw out MalcPow's charts as that had grown tiresome.

In-game definitely needs a better mp coach draft feature though. For sure. Those sliders are terribad.

[Guest]

I have a little bit of a problem with this. As we don't have any kind of control whatsoever signing our Coaches, this 39 combine accuracy stuff gives advantage to the teams with better Scouting Bars Coaches. The ability to draft is no longer necessary. Too automatic. I did enjoy a lot more in the past with at least 50 combine accuracy.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Agreed. Plus you get what, 7 scouting interviewers?

[Sharkn20]

Agreed. Plus you get what, 7 scouting interviewers?

Indeed

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Delandis]

I have a little bit of a problem with this. As we don't have any kind of control whatsoever signing our Coaches, this 39 combine accuracy stuff gives advantage to the teams with better Scouting Bars Coaches. The ability to draft is no longer necessary. Too automatic. I did enjoy a lot more in the past with at least 50 combine accuracy.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

You shouldn't be able to look at a player's combines and know whether he is a good player or not. The most recent #1 overall pick is what "should" happen from time to time in our drafts.

Before 39 combine accuracy, that almost never happened.

[Cory]

The way I see it, we traded in one broken system for another. We traded the draft being too predictable to having no control over how predictable it is. Shark's right. Making the draft a dice roll outside of your scouting, which you have very little control over, isn't any better than being able to accurately predict where each draftee is going to end up. The staff draft and subsequent real draft is the worst part of this game, which is a shame because it really ought to be the best. This is a GM game, and you have very little control over who you hire and fire. I would think that by the seventh iteration these things would have been worked out by now.

I enjoy the game overall but the staff and drafting portions I'm not a fan of at all, and those are a pretty big part of a game like this.

[Aston]

Drafting in FOF6 was solved to a kind of absurd degree. In FOF7 it was still a little bit predictable. Now it's the wild west, which is both liberating and frustrating.

I like the randomness. I just want the rules of the game to be known. It's a little too opaque right now.

[Sharkn20]

You shouldn't be able to look at a player's combines and know whether he is a good player or not. The most recent #1 overall pick is what "should" happen from time to time in our drafts.

Before 39 combine accuracy, that almost never happened.

I am absolutely agree that we should relay more in Scouting, but unfortunately we don't have tape or control over our scouts. That's one of the things I love from OOTP. But unfortunately the MP version of the FOF7 is rubbish in this aspect, at least the combines from Malcpow made that up. However the SP version is much better in this aspect.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Nemesis]

Drafting in FOF6 was solved to a kind of absurd degree. In FOF7 it was still a little bit predictable. Now it's the wild west, which is both liberating and frustrating.

I like the randomness. I just want the rules of the game to be known. It's a little too opaque right now.

Damn, you got involved with FOF6? That's why you did so well while all of us were playing FOF2k7. ;)


And by the way, not all of us figured out drafting in FOF2k7, just mainly you and Ben MalcPow to an absurd degree.

[Aston]

Sorry, FOF6 = FOF2k7. I guess I should've said 6.3 or 6.4 or whatever the specific version number was.

You did, too, Nem! I mean, IMO you may as well just give the percentages that a player will be great/good/bad on each player profile, and have those be the literal dice rolls. Maybe scouts can skew the numbers one way or another. But have it be understood that it's really a TC dice roll.

QB Buttface is at 14/45 after TC, so that's a +10 from where my scout saw him before. The charge begins...?

[Sharkn20]

Sorry, FOF6 = FOF2k7. I guess I should've said 6.3 or 6.4 or whatever the specific version number was.

You did, too, Nem! I mean, IMO you may as well just give the percentages that a player will be great/good/bad on each player profile, and have those be the literal dice rolls. Maybe scouts can skew the numbers one way or another. But have it be understood that it's really a TC dice roll.

QB Buttface is at 14/45 after TC, so that's a +10 from where my scout saw him before. The charge begins...?

Jared Goff...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk