Make the game more interesing to watch.

[Dean-Atlanta]

Hendon Hooker was the 2nd QB taken in our 2043 draft and arguably the best if you don't want a 94 ST QB. And arguably the 2ndbest in his NFL draft class behind Bryce Young. The Tennessee Titans were stupid to pass over him.

And he's better than Caleb Williams in the upcoming draft.

[Mitch-Oilers]

Hendon Hooker was the 2nd QB taken in our 2043 draft and arguably the best if you don't want a 94 ST QB. And arguably the 2ndbest in his NFL draft class behind Bryce Young. The Tennessee Titans were stupid to pass over him.

And he's better than Caleb Williams in the upcoming draft.

I don't know about all that now...

[Matt-Jacksonville]

It's true. PNFL Caleb Williams stinks.

[Moxs - Patriots]

I am quoting Jerry's Mantra - we already have multiple global changes in the league happening.
We are changing the points allotment and thus pool.
We are changing the quality and distribution of the draft pool.
Then we changed the size of the draft pool.
We have yet to see the effects these changes will have on the league.
I am sure we are changing something else that i can't remember.

Anyone who does troubleshooting knows you change 1 thing at a time to see accurate results.
We have already thrown that premise out the window.
The things we are already changing hopefully do not overlap effects enough to turn this all into a muddle of inconclusiveness.

NOW, you want to start messing with the already recently renovated retirement process????

Let's just relax on the Mad Scientist "Lets just throw everything into the beaker and wait for the explosion" approach. This is not the Muppet Show. Yet.

[James-Eagles]

I am quoting Jerry's Mantra - we already have multiple global changes in the league happening.


Let's just relax on the Mad Scientist "Lets just throw everything into the beaker and wait for the explosion" approach. This is not the Muppet Show. Yet.

Ok, I agree we shouldn't change the retirement things at this time .

All this is about changing rating distribution which we already know what this will do. This would have no effect on any of the other things. Really all this is a speed up of the rookie rating distribution. That means the Jerry Mantra doesn't apply . Another things I posted this and I am one of the original ones who started "Jerry Mantra". Hell I probably was doing it before Jerry. In fact I felt so strongly about one of the changes I almost quit the league over it.

Also as the person who wrote the anti-aging and know the effects of all of it. I was against the transferring rolls from the start. Because it is too easy to abuse. I help close some of them but it still pretty easy to abuse.

We are now a league that watches games. This move would return us to NFL like game play as now game are very boring to watch.

Another thing I make this suggestion in way that doesn't effect any trades going or to be made since I propose to wait until 2047 draft. Those picks can't be traded until next season. I do not propose to change any current ratings. I even make the case why what we are currently doing needs to be sped up. Even if we speed this up like I have said these players who have lower ratings aren't going to see the field until 2053-2057. We are talking 4-6 years in real life years that is 8-10 seasons. I am not calling to retire FA or anything nothing is really changing except that the draft pull would actually be more spread out like it should be. If we continue the way we currently are we will be older than Charlie and some of us will not be a live.

[Dean-Atlanta]

Another thing I make this suggestion in way that doesn't effect any trades going or to be made since I propose to wait until 2047 draft. Those picks can't be traded until next season. I do not propose to change any current ratings. I even make the case why what we are currently doing needs to be sped up. Even if we speed this up like I have said these players who have lower ratings aren't going to see the field until 2053-2057. We are talking 4-6 years in real life years that is 8-10 seasons. I am not calling to retire FA or anything nothing is really changing except that the draft pull would actually be more spread out like it should be. If we continue the way we currently are we will be older than Charlie and some of us will not be a live.

Those who follow the "Jerry Mantra" won't like this, but... if we really do want the results of ratings differentiation, waiting 8-10 PNFL seasons or 4-5 years of our actual lives, is way too long.

The answer is an off-season global edit followed by re-calibration of the rookie pool model to be in line with the new ratings model.

Why play through 8-10 seasons before we get there when it can be done in an off-season? That is, IF we really want to do it.

If I get a copy of that utility I talked about on the show, I will do it on a spare copy of PNFL files and make it avaiable for testing.

I think we will see the difference, and probably want it now and no 5 years from now.

And I'm a convert to this cause, I have argued against it for a while as Mitch has been preaching it. After seeing what we're watching in the PCFL, I am now fully on board supporting increased ratings differentiation.

[Rich-League Officer]

It's interesting how many of you are suddenly slip flopping to wider disparity in the attributes.
But, before you call for global edits, which are never happening, there is a downside.
Go back and look at the 2002-2003 seasons and tell me if you are okay with me scoring 730 points in a season?
Week 5, 76-10....Week 13, 76-7...Is this really what you want?

Just because your college league looks more fun right now does not make it so.
College should look different than the pro game. High School games are even more wide open than college.
More mismatches because most of those players have no career after college.
The PNFL is the NFL game, close 7 point or less games is the norm.
Did you know the NFL had a record number of outcomes of 7 points or less last season?
You are not supposed to see WRs streaking down field wide open 5x per game.
Or HBs busing plays for 80!

Should the PNFL slowly widen things? absolutely and its slowly happening.
But in a controlled manner year by year.
Odds are most of us will be here in 5 years so what's the rush.
It would be malpractice to suddenly global edit this league just for the broadcasts.
I know Barney mentioned it and it's true. Be very careful what you wish for.
You widen the attributes, you also very likely widen the gap between top and bottom.
You combine a great coach and great GM and he will be impossible to beat.
Slow and steady is the way.

[Rich-League Officer]

Just want to give you some data before you all decide you want original vpnfl attributes tomorrow.

In 2044, from top to bottom there was roughly a 5.5 point gap between top and bottom team.
These numbers are rough because each team has a different roster makeup but 5 points is about right.

In 2003, from top to bottom there was a "hold on to your hat" 40 point gap!!!!!
The #2 team was 3 points behind. The 4th-7th were 10 points back.
Half the league was 12-13 points back.
The bottom 10 were 15-25 points back.
The 29th team was 26 points back
And the last team was 40 back.
Granted, the #2 team was only 3 points back and also had huge advantages and he went 9-7 and missed the playoffs.
So you do have to coach too.

This was the wild west of player attributes and if you were a smarty pants, you could do damage.
If you were a bad GM, you could easily be in a situation where you had no chance to beat the better teams.

So, I am in favor of widening, just not massively or all at once.

[Rich-League Officer]

Something told me those numbers I gave you were incorrect.
I had checked during the playoffs which means teams could have been allowed to cut players back then.
Which would hurt their numbers.

The week 16 numbers were :
Top to bottom was a 25 point difference.

I think my points are still valid.
5 points is too small, 25 is to big.
I think maybe a max of 10-12 if you had a great GM and horrible GM.

[James-Eagles]

It's interesting how many of you are suddenly slip flopping to wider disparity in the attributes.
But, before you call for global edits, which are never happening, there is a downside.
Go back and look at the 2002-2003 seasons and tell me if you are okay with me scoring 730 points in a season?
Week 5, 76-10....Week 13, 76-7...Is this really what you want?

Just because your college league looks more fun right now does not make it so.
College should look different than the pro game. High School games are even more wide open than college.
More mismatches because most of those players have no career after college.
The PNFL is the NFL game, close 7 point or less games is the norm.
Did you know the NFL had a record number of outcomes of 7 points or less last season?
You are not supposed to see WRs streaking down field wide open 5x per game.
Or HBs busing plays for 80!

Should the PNFL slowly widen things? absolutely and its slowly happening.
But in a controlled manner year by year.
Odds are most of us will be here in 5 years so what's the rush.
It would be malpractice to suddenly global edit this league just for the broadcasts.
I know Barney mentioned it and it's true. Be very careful what you wish for.
You widen the attributes, you also very likely widen the gap between top and bottom.
You combine a great coach and great GM and he will be impossible to beat.
Slow and steady is the way.

One Rich this is an exaggerated argument. We both know that you pick the 1 year you went nuts. If you look at the others you score slightly more point and give up less points.

Heck
2039
1 New York A 14 52 2 68 3 60 15 0 519
2 Oakland 23 25 3 51 1 49 26 1 437
3 Chicago 13 37 2 52 1 48 22 0 428
4 Washington 26 19 1 46 1 43 29 2 412
5 Minnesota 14 31 1 46 1 43 25 0 396
6 Carolina 23 24 1 48 1 46 15 0 381
7 Philadelphia 16 26 2 44 1 35 23 0 370
8 New England 21 20 2 43 0 42 22 1 368
9 Kansas City 18 24 2 44 5 32 17 2 361
10 Green Bay 15 24 0 39 3 35 25 0 350
11 Jacksonville 17 20 2 39 1 35 23 1 342
12 Cincinnati 19 20 1 40 4 34 16 0 330
13 San Francisco 12 21 3 36 2 32 19 0 309
14 New Orleans 12 21 2 35 1 31 14 1 287
15 New York N 7 23 0 30 3 25 18 0 265
16 Detroit 12 15 2 29 15 7 16 0 259
17 Seattle 16 6 1 23 2 19 22 2 231
18 Los Angeles 7 17 0 24 1 19 15 1 212

vs 2007
1 Atlanta 23 47 5 75 0 75 18 2 583
2 Denver 14 33 6 53 0 51 24 2 445
3 Seattle 23 25 4 52 0 51 23 1 434
4 Washington 22 23 6 51 0 50 20 2 420
5 Baltimore 12 37 2 51 1 46 20 0 414
6 New York (A) 20 28 3 51 0 50 14 0 398
7 Buffalo 16 28 4 48 1 46 20 0 396
8 Tennessee 19 26 3 48 0 46 20 0 394
9 Green Bay 16 29 3 48 1 44 14 1 378
10 Oakland 12 29 2 43 0 42 24 1 374
11 Chicago 19 19 2 40 1 38 27 2 365
12 Dallas 12 20 4 36 2 34 30 3 350
13 Cleveland 13 22 3 38 1 35 25 1 342
14 San Diego 14 24 2 40 0 39 19 3 342
15 Tampa Bay 13 24 1 38 2 36 23 2 341
16 Detroit 16 19 2 37 1 35 25 0 334
17 Philadelphia 12 22 2 36 2 33 24 0 325
18 New Orleans 11 23 0 34 0 33 23 2 310
19 Minnesota 12 23 3 38 0 35 15 0 308
20 St Louis 8 22 2 32 0 31 24 0 295
21 New England 6 23 2 31 0 29 23 3 290
22 San Francisco 13 18 2 33 1 29 18 1 285
23 Cincinnati 11 16 3 30 0 30 24 1 284
24 Pittsburgh 15 11 4 30 0 29 21 1 274
25 Kansas City 15 17 0 32 0 31 15 0 268
26 New York (N) 10 16 1 27 2 23 21 1 254
27 Carolina 8 19 2 29 1 26 17 0 253
28 Miami 7 17 0 24 0 24 15 0 213
29 Arizona 9 15 0 24 0 22 15 0 211
30 Jacksonville 4 14 0 18 0 17 25 4 208


The spread looks about the same. Rich you are not coaching in this league. You are not a GM in this league. I don't think we have to worry about teams dropping 700 on the league. If you think Justin and Thomas are impressive. Rich would routinely trade players at year 7 and 8 for a kings ransom to reload. The year I had all my picks you know who had the number 1 pick Rich. It isn't the player rating that were the problem. It was the Coaching gap and the GM gap that you brought to the league back then. Hell if we remove you. Suddenly 2007 is closer in scoring than 2039. I am sorry Rich the fact you had to cherry pick the one year you dropped that many points. You had 5 season back then you went nuts. The rest of them you were part for the course of what we have now. That tell me it was coaching not the ratings gap. The ratings weren't the problem.