Jump to content

Hoosier Daddy?

The last undefeated team in the Big Ten is... Indiana?!?! The Hoosiers went on the road and dominated Wisconsin en route to a 31-17 win.

Wegrets as QBs Wheeled Out For Season

Jets QB Erik Wegert severely ruptured his PCL on TNF, and Titans QB Thomas Wheeler tore his rotator cuff Sunday, significantly hurting the hopes of both teams for 2023.

Horned Frogs SteAMRALled

#6 Oklahoma State took it to TCU, going up 28-7 at halftime and winning 38-14. RB Amral Brown came up huge with 142 rushing yards and 2 TD.

100-yard Curse Blackballed

The Colts hadn't had a 100-yard rushing game since Tony Peaks posted 150 and 2 TD in Week 17 of 2018. 2 games of JB Blacknall later, a 5-year drought is broken.

Catch Or No Catch?

Bengals WR Adrian Jankowski was furious that this catch on MNF didn't count, and it led to a tantrum and fine. Was it a catch? Depends on the perspective.
Soluna

Elite Prospects (Sim Rules Discussion)

Recommended Posts

Here's something I've been considering for a while but never really got past early draft stage in my preliminary work.

 

How would you guys feel about an elite talent going above 5.0 skill and/or potential. Something like 5.5 or 5.0* that would assure that the player is a very low bust/high readiness potential and entirely sure thing? The range on the quality of 5s is known to be quite extreme.

 

What is your guys thoughts on this?

Anything else you would like to see that could be done with skill ranges? I did have someone suggest changing them to be out of 10 to provide more information or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the fact that a 5.0 could be a bust or that a 3.5-4.0 can be better, it allows for a bit more balance for teams and makes them strategically recruit vs dumping all points into that high floor guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, taffyowner said:

I like the fact that a 5.0 could be a bust or that a 3.5-4.0 can be better, it allows for a bit more balance for teams and makes them strategically recruit vs dumping all points into that high floor guy

I agree. I don't think that having guaranteed high floor players would really benefit anyone but the teams that are already dominate, and it could end up killing the potential for major upsets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather see a 5.5/5.0 than a player with 5.5 potential. Having it be unknown, thus unrecruitable and more "fair" in a sense, would be more palatable when it happens to other teams and not your own. You'd just have to tie it to NFLHC ratings, so like an 83/84 would be a 5.5. "Slam dunk" prospects like Solomon would definitely fit the bill.

 

I wouldn't complain about a 10pt scale, I just don't see all that much point in doubling our scale. If others want it, go for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll go opposite and say I think one or two players a class above a 5.0 would be fun and interesting. While I would have been against it in prior seasons where location of the player would matter the switch to 5.0s not having any bonuses makes it viable.

 

The idea of an essentially gauanteed generational player would not only be fun to watch in recruiting even if you aren't in on them but would also just be cool to see their progression through college and the pros. It would make whatever team they end up on essentially must see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How would you guys feel if the 5.5 skill is never announced but one or two of each class have the potential to reach it. So you might suddenly have a 5.5/5.0 player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Soluna said:

How would you guys feel if the 5.5 skill is never announced but one or two of each class have the potential to reach it. So you might suddenly have a 5.5/5.0 player.

I'm defiantly for that, I think it would also have more teams trying to reach for 5.0 players and make recruiting more exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Soluna said:

How would you guys feel if the 5.5 skill is never announced but one or two of each class have the potential to reach it. So you might suddenly have a 5.5/5.0 player.

 

There's been discussion in the past about low rated players being secret gems. Maybe this could tie into it? JJ Watt was a 2-star, as a famous example. That way it's not limited to just the top talent, but a random 3.0 someone grabbed could suddenly turn out to be the next great college QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rome said:

 

There's been discussion in the past about low rated players being secret gems. Maybe this could tie into it? JJ Watt was a 2-star, as a famous example. That way it's not limited to just the top talent, but a random 3.0 someone grabbed could suddenly turn out to be the next great college QB.

 

Oh this is a pretty good idea actually. I could create a little module for potential to grow for specific players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Soluna said:

 

Oh this is a pretty good idea actually. I could create a little module for potential to grow for specific players.

 

QB Joe Random Tall Fat (Fr) School (Town, ST) 2.5 of 3.0 [Pocket]

 

gaijin4koma_peersblog_1200684654.jpg

 

QB Joe Random Tall Fat (So) School (Town, ST) 3.5 of 3.0 [Pocket]

gaijin4koma2_peersblog_1200684608.jpg?1307579749

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Rome said:

 

There's been discussion in the past about low rated players being secret gems. Maybe this could tie into it? JJ Watt was a 2-star, as a famous example. That way it's not limited to just the top talent, but a random 3.0 someone grabbed could suddenly turn out to be the next great college QB.

That is a great idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like 5.0 being 5.0, and being the top of the scale.

 

Some 5.0 might perform like a absolute stud.  Some may perform less than some 4.0 or 4.5 players.

 

Not sure if it is a completely separate thing, but I'd actually prefer that some 5.0 potential players fall to a 4.0 or 4.5 after a year or two of underwhelming play (or through poor coaching) and some lesser players suddenly bump up their potential from a lower number after some great performances or through great coaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Rome said:

 

There's been discussion in the past about low rated players being secret gems. Maybe this could tie into it? JJ Watt was a 2-star, as a famous example. That way it's not limited to just the top talent, but a random 3.0 someone grabbed could suddenly turn out to be the next great college QB.

Love this. It would make teams that can’t necessarily compete with TCU croot wise, suddenly have a shot if things fall the right way. Would be awesome to see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Soluna said:

How would you guys feel if the 5.5 skill is never announced but one or two of each class have the potential to reach it. So you might suddenly have a 5.5/5.0 player.

I like that idea the best, although I think it would go hand in hand with increased depth of the high school camp posts that are new this year. I know they must be a fair amount of work to generate but I think they become even more valuable and impactful if people will be scrutinizing to get hints of who could be the over-performing star.

 

Or even if one year you have camps in "hot-spots" like the southeast/california and prospects from like the dakotas don't get any potential bumps from going to camps but also have a higher chance of being those "gems", kinda like real life.

 

Probably V hard to implement stuff like that but that would be my pie-in-the-sky cool idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it'd be great if players could go +.5 of their potential as a gem, on the other side of the same coin, some players should be prevented from ever reaching their potential too. Think of the big recruits that never seem to live up to the hype (Tate Martell).


That said, it kinda feels like we have this in a since already, it just isn't shown.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think having both versions implemented would be more realistic, 5.5/5.0 (as sometimes the magic doesn't show itself until college, Manziel is a great example) and having an occasional croot with 5.5 potential for everyone to fawn over and push way too hard to try to sign.  

Of course, in CFBHC recruiting economy, having a 5.5 potential in a skill position is pretty much handing him to one of 3 or 4 teams.  So I can see that side of the argument too.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, rabidsnowman said:

Of course, in CFBHC recruiting economy, having a 5.5 potential in a skill position is pretty much handing him to one of 3 or 4 teams.  So I can see that side of the argument too.  

I think this is the biggest reason why I'd prefer to have the +0.5 be on the skill-side (e.g. 4.0 of 3.5) instead of potential-side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if it was included in potential, but Soluna could change the line when he updates the team page? Have the recruit say 1.0 of 3.5, but when he's on campus, the coaches realize he's a 1.0 of 5.5?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rome said:

What if it was included in potential, but Soluna could change the line when he updates the team page? Have the recruit say 1.0 of 3.5, but when he's on campus, the coaches realize he's a 1.0 of 5.5?

I would love this, but can't you imagine the number of people who would bitch about it because some other team was picked, and accuse Soluna of playing favorites?  Even if it was a completely random draw?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the most likely thing I would implement after reading your guys comments is randomly converting some recruits up after they've been recruiting or as they progress in their career and allowing for skill to go over 100% (i.e. 5.5 out of 5.0).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Soluna said:

How would you guys feel if the 5.5 skill is never announced but one or two of each class have the potential to reach it. So you might suddenly have a 5.5/5.0 player.

My only issue is who would know who is a 5.5? 

 

I would love to see it more as recruits has the chance of earning that extra .5 in progressions either in skill or potential. 

 

I also have thrown in my head not being able to see potential in recruiting before.  Only being able to see Skill.  So it isn't tied directly to who gets the #1 class or whatnot.  But there are more issues with that option than benefits I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other side of this, I would love to see lower potential guys who kill it in the college ranks earn more than their rankings.  Like imagine if a 3.0 recruit got to a 4.5/3 skill.  That would be insane to see.  Rare, but insane.  So then we are accounting for those Khalil Mack type guys who were 2 star recruits in High school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. Players should be capped at 5.0 shown potential, but some croots should be able to grow .5 or maybe a full 1.0 past their potential (with 5.5 being the cap). But a 4/3 guy be possible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, acewulf said:

I also have thrown in my head not being able to see potential in recruiting before.  Only being able to see Skill.  So it isn't tied directly to who gets the #1 class or whatnot.  But there are more issues with that option than benefits I believe.

 

I'm not sure if I would agree with this. But here's something I just thought of:

 

What if some recruits had a base potential, but also had a range shown to their potential.

 

So let's say there's a 1.0/3.5 potential recruit. The current potential for this recruit is set to 3.5. If a range is added to the potential, here is what it would look like:

 

1.0/3.5 (+/- 0.5)

 

Once this recruit has been recruited, the range would be calculated and once the player is officially on the roster, the potential would be set to either 3.0, 3.5, or 4.0.

 

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, TuscanSota said:

 

I'm not sure if I would agree with this. But here's something I just thought of:

 

What if some recruits had a base potential, but also had a range shown to their potential.

 

So let's say there's a 1.0/3.5 potential recruit. The current potential for this recruit is set to 3.5. If a range is added to the potential, here is what it would look like:

 

1.0/3.5 (+/- 0.5)

 

Once this recruit has been recruited, the range would be calculated and once the player is officially on the roster, the potential would be set to either 3.0, 3.5, or 4.0.

 

Thoughts?

Soluna considered this with NFLHC draftees having a rating range such as: OT Marc Allen 6-6 281 R Western Michigan [Pass Blocking] [-1/C] (74-80), but it got scrapped.

 

I think the problem with the variable potential is that most people are inherently risk-averse, and hate getting less than they thought they would.  Let's pretend that all 1.0/3.5 (+/- 0.5) players have the following probabilities:

 

20% of getting 1.0/3.0

60% of getting 1.0/3.5

20% of getting 1.0/4.0

 

I'd wager that the joy coaches will get from landing a 1/4 will be far outweighed by the disappointment and salt from getting the 1/3, and the coaches who land normal 1/3.5s will probably just feel relief at not getting Zonked.  The payoff doesn't seem worth the potential headaches; I think that the majority of the playerbase would rather have a highly variable ceiling than an uncertain floor when it comes to their croots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...