PNFL

@Dean - why punish one coach's good decisions for another coach's bad decsions?

Dean-Atlanta wrote:As Lee Corso would say... Not So Fast...

When you reach that after 10 seasons, and you get the team that thinks a single 84 SP WR is enough or two of them and then gambles on having WR3-WR6 having 78-79 SP, and that same team has several 79 and 80 SP CBs plays that team with mostly 83+ SP WRs and mostly 82+ SP CBS... those small differences, as Jerry has reminded us, are significant, and bingo, we're seeing 56-7 type scores.

Let's slow down the pace of change, keep evolutionary, not revolutionary.

I do agree that the changes should be modest. In my ideal PNFL world this would be the SP POT distribution:

1st round 84 3 players
2nd + 3rd 83 6 players
4th-5th 82 6 players
81 max for everyone else

No one would have 4 guys with 79. If you remember Steve’s Strong WR in XFBS they had max POTs in everything but SP with a SP POT of 81 and no one would even draft them! I would keep all the other ratings same as now and just adjust SP. If you consider 10 seasons that’s 30 WR with 84 POT and 60 with 83. That’s 90 or 5 per team. Of course their other ratings may not be great but that makes GM’ing important. An 84 SP with 93 HA vs. 81 SP with 96 HA e.g.

Now do this for all positions, take the most important rating and spread it out more and teams will have some individuality. OL ST, DE AC, CB AG e.g.

Right now I have 7 WR’s with 84 SP POT that’s ridiculous. I have a 2 deep Jamaican Olympic relay team!

@ - Jamaican relay team

Think about this... If in 5 or 10 seasons the all MIN ratings were 90% of the MAX in all ratings, that means the MAX SP for a TE would actually be about the same as the lowest SP of a WR.

That would make Top End TEs even more valuable. This would happen in other positions as well: DEs and LBs, S and CBs

Mitch-Chiefs wrote:@Dean - why punish one coach's good decisions for another coach's bad decsions?

I do not see anyone proposing anything that does that.

Guys, I know many of you are itching to add more flavor to the league and adding more to GMing, roster building, game planning etc.; however, let us all remember that this is a 25 year old game that we have a finite set of people to play against. At times, we've struggled to keep the league full. Do we REALLY want to go making things more time consuming and complicated? I'd rather make moves to simplify things and keep it going twenty five more years.

We are in a pretty good spot Matt. Rolling with the good competition we have right now is not wrong

What we have is ok. I'm talking about adding additional stuff.

I was agreeing with you Matt.......

LOL...fair enough.