2037 Draft

[Sharkn20]

If the choices were between:

(a) Injuries 100 in Preseason and Regular Season

(b) Injuries 20 in Preseason, 120 Regular Season

I'd go with (a), hands down. That's 16 games plus playoffs at 120, which is not something I'd like just to have less in the preseason.

A) for me of course!

[Nemesis]

If the choices were between:

(a) Injuries 100 in Preseason and Regular Season

(b) Injuries 20 in Preseason, 120 Regular Season

I'd go with (a), hands down. That's 16 games plus playoffs at 120, which is not something I'd like just to have less in the preseason.

(c) Injuries 0 in Preseason, 120 Regular Season

^ that was my suggestion

And yes stockpiling happened.

[Guest]

Oops, fixed my post. I thought something looked weird.

[Delandis]

100/100.

The fix for not getting your starters hurt is to not play them, not edit the settings.

[Sharkn20]

100/100.

The fix for not getting your starters hurt is to not play them, not edit the settings.

+1!!!

Give time to the undrafted and free agents to show up like in the nfl!

[Guest]

Ok, I am curious what reveal takes place when. Most of my rookies made positive movement post-TC and some in the region of +4/+5. So I should not be excited about this, right? Does post-TC movement mean anything now?

[Nemesis]

Ok, I am curious what reveal takes place when. Most of my rookies made positive movement post-TC and some in the region of +4/+5. So I should not be excited about this, right? Does post-TC movement mean anything now?

It's hard to say really. There's so much fog anymore. I'm just gonna say anything +++ is a good sign in most cases. They'll probably go +++ in the PS2/PS3 stage as well. Being able to identify where they'll end up doesn't exist anymore, so you can pretty much know what ever they are at the end of their 2nd year PS2/PS3 movement will be what they are.

[Delandis]

It's hard to say really. There's so much fog anymore. I'm just gonna say anything +++ is a good sign in most cases. They'll probably go +++ in the PS2/PS3 stage as well. Being able to identify where they'll end up doesn't exist anymore, so you can pretty much know what ever they are at the end of their 2nd year PS2/PS3 movement will be what they are.

I'm not sure what the old tells were because I didn't play enough of the game, but I do know a guard that I drafted a few years back went from 24/55 pre-draft and is currently 48/64 (according to our scout) entering his 3rd after dropping to as low as as a 51 in potential.

So I'll have to agree with you.

[Nemesis]

I'm not sure what the old tells were because I didn't play enough of the game, but I do know a guard that I drafted a few years back went from 24/55 pre-draft and is currently 48/64 (according to our scout) entering his 3rd after dropping to as low as as a 51 in potential.

So I'll have to agree with you.

Basically the old tell was you take the + future rating a player had in TC, multiply the amount they went up by 3. The next offseason's FA stage, he'd move again. And usually if they went 2+ or more, it convinced me that he was a creeping player, and the result of the x3 multiplier was roughly gonna be his rating.

Example:
Player gets drafted, his rating is 10/30.
In TC he goes +8/+3 and is now 18/33.
Multiply +3 (his future rating) which is 9.
Add 9 to 33 (his future rating) and you get 42.
The players future potential will likely be around 42, barring vol.

Before the new game came out, I was in FFL and CyFL, and I was reaching back several seasons to find guys like this, and I tracked them because no one really noticed them because they kinda went under the radar, then looked for them in FA. I started to build some very solid teams that way.

Aston, here in this league and another perfected it by even getting value from the guys who would be solid that he'd have to cut, he'd simply trade them, push the pick forward, replace guys that he had, all while drafting insanely well, maximizing it all.

The above also goes for chuck. Building insanely talented teams.

Luckily those tells don't exist anymore it seems, and on top of that, maintaining teams like that now are also unrealistic because salary demands are so much more, so that's another aspect of it.

[Guest]

Thanks for the answers. I find this all very interesting... I guess it will take a while to get the feel for this stuff.

Another similar question. My 1st round RB is showing on my roster at 56/57 right now, 48/48 by the league scout. What if anything should I make of that?

I do note that it seems like most "creepers" actually show their value lower by the league scout and/or when you release them. I do not know if that is a hard and fast rule but I have seen it enough times to catch my interest.

[Guest]

The league scout is usually wrong because his Scouting ability is usually low (but not always). They'll see good players as replacement level while a good scout will see them closer to what they are.

[Delandis]

The league scout is usually wrong because his Scott no ability is usually low (but not always). They'll see good players as replacement level while a good scout will see them closer to what they are.

Me no understand.

[Guest]

Our league scout (Malcolm Hendon) is rated 73 in Scouting. That's... actually really good for a league scout. Fantastic, really.

My coaches rate somewhere around the same in Scouting. Your coaches come out under 25 or so. That's not good.

When you click on a player's ratings to see his ratings throughout the years the ratings you see are from the league scout. You can click on his name and see what his Scouting rating is.

The better the scout the more true you will see players. The league scout isn't a good scout usually so he sees players wrong most of the time. In our league, right now, the league scout is actually quite a bit better than your coaches, which means that the league scout sees players more realistic than your coaches. Normally it's the other way around, which is what I was attempting to say in my previous post. I didn't realize the league scout was so good.

[Guest]

Coulda saved myself some time and had you read this: http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/...ad.php?t=88534

[Aston]

From what I understand, your own scouts -- a combination of your coordinators and head coach -- are more likely to be way off if they are poor scouts. These are the ratings you see on their player cards.

When you click on a player's bars, you can see the league scout's ratings, which everyone sees. As garion notes, the league scout here is actually quite good. In the CFL, the league scout has a rating of 0.