Over Populated Free Agent pool

[James-Eagles]

My thoughts not sure how possible this is.

This season if a player isn't on a roster at the start of the playoff and is 4 years or higher in the game file Delete them from the Free Agent pool.

It could make cuts an Free Agency more interesting since there won't be 30 copies of the players we are cutting.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

Could this also get us closer to where we want the ratings to be by forcing people to sign more of the younger guys?

[Donovon-Steelers]

Seems like an easy solution to help propel the overall ratings to the desired range. Plus, most older FAs are probably 95-98% as good as guys on rosters - this is unrealistic. Most unsigned NFL guys are nowhere near as close to this - there's a big dropoff in skill. Following James' proposal would make our roster decisions, later-round draft picks, trades, etc all have more meaning because there's no huge FA vet safety net. Its a good idea.

[Rich-League Officer]

I am not opposed to this and if you pull back and examine where we are today vs only 6 seasons ago, it's night and day.
I have already deleted many free agents, mostly the terrible ones from the game.
Last season I deleted 332 players from the universe.
The new retirement system has been a huge success as well.

In 2040, if you did an export file there were 4053 recorded entries.
In 2046, there are 2082 recorded entries.
We are a leaner meaner league file than we used to be.

I could take this further if that's what the coaches want.
It does make sense that if a veteran player is not on someones roster, he's done with football.
It would make all the incoming rookies more important.

[Dean-Atlanta]

Given that teams can sign players to their PS (from FAs or later round drafted players) that can serve as injury insurance, I suspect you could delete 90 percent f the remaining FAs quite easily and do most of what James suggested.