Serious concern about the direction of the league

[James-Eagles]

With minor tweaks to the system it would have been easier to fix, but you don't do minor tweaks; you bastardize. I have been one of the more outspoken members about that very problem. It is best dealt with through the draft. You talk about the rare player making it to 13-14 years; well, the new system will drop to almost 0. That is why we discuss things, because solutions would have been found. This isn't rocket science, but for some reason you make it seem that way. This could have been fixed very simply.

1. Move physicals down a year. I should have realized it when I suggested the +1 year should have been taken into account when rolling.

2. Move the purge to 4+ with the 63 man rosters.

3. Only allow row transfers for players with the same age.

These would have all fixed most of the problems you have with the system, but no, you go to the nuclear options from the start. This is why we discuss things. When you want a system fix, you go to the person who created it and say you would like it to do this better.

The problem with the age systems is too many people are getting to age 9, not what happens after it. In fact, your points decrease will cause more people to keep younger players because draft picks are cheaper than resigning. That means players will have about half their roster, 28 players, 4 or younger on average. With the purges, you have a majority of the players retiring at year 4 and the starters making it to 8 and 9, where the physical system would work as it was.

[James-Eagles]

Here is the truth, you built your team and want to keep all your players (improving) till they are 15 years old.
You are biased because you run a team. You don't care about the league the way I do. You care about your team.

Actually, this is false; I had no plans to keep most of my roster to 15. I was thinking 9 or 10 but not 15. I might have transferred rolls to keep some players longer but not anywhere close to my team. As you pointed out before, if I were really biased toward my team, I would be all for this. My team won't hit a roll I care about for 2 seasons. I have already moved Smith and Oassi so my oldest guy is in year 7.

By the way, what happened to you don't care about the rules of the league? The owners can decide to change them how they want.

The reality is the only thing I don't support for team bias is a salary cap, and honestly any salary cap that isn't a salary cap program that can reject bids isn't really going to do anything. I would be against on it just ad work with no real benefit.

[Rich-League Officer]

James, your unhappiness with a few of these rules has been noted.
All coaches are allowed their opinion.
If it alters their desire to play on, I respect that too.

But this issue is not what makes this league great.
This is minutia of the larger picture.
The fun is drafting, custom plays, game plan building, you tube, discord and the trash talk.

I just cant get worked up because of
83 down to 75
75 down to 70
I am sorry, I cant do it.

All I can tell you is, IF, I see too many vets purged, it's easy enough for me to back off.
I could change % or I can pullback the purge after the SB.
It's no different than the points, I could change that course at any time.
The league and rules are fine.

See it as a challenge, be a great GM and do what needs to be done.

[Rich-League Officer]

And perhaps not stated enough, my biggest annoyance with the age of our league is not really the age at all.
It's the lack of aging attributes.
It's ignored and never addressed.
Coaches never want to talk about players possibly losing ability.
That's off the table.
That's a salary cap in baseball off the table.

But, it's for that reason players retiring earlier must happen.

Until we allow the game itself to age the players attributes, there must be an offset.

Perhaps James is correct that players play on longer and longer.
But, not at their peak abilities. None of them do. Not even Tom Brady.
This is where I come down on this issue.
If DE Myles Garrett wants to play 20 years, great....just not at max actuals.

So, lets let the game age the players at pre-determined age and no physicals are needed.

[James-Eagles]

James, your unhappiness with a few of these rules has been noted.
All coaches are allowed their opinion.
If it alters their desire to play on, I respect that too.

But this issue is not what makes this league great.
This is minutia of the larger picture.
The fun is drafting, custom plays, game plan building, you tube, discord and the trash talk.

I just cant get worked up because of
83 down to 75
75 down to 70
I am sorry, I cant do it.

All I can tell you is, IF, I see too many vets purged, it's easy enough for me to back off.
I could change % or I can pullback the purge after the SB.
It's no different than the points, I could change that course at any time.
The league and rules are fine.

See it as a challenge, be a great GM and do what needs to be done.

It is what it is. It just feels like every time I get excited about the league. Charlie and you do something from on high that makes the league less fun. It is clear you aren't looking for solutions because nothing you do has ever solved anything. Especially since we discussed this and you went completely back on what you said. I feel lied to and backstabbed. Right now I feel leadership is clueless and dishonest. You can be offended by that but everything I said is back by facts.

[James-Eagles]

And perhaps not stated enough, my biggest annoyance with the age of our league is not really the age at all.
It's the lack of aging attributes.
It's ignored and never addressed.
Coaches never want to talk about players possibly losing ability.
That's off the table.
That's a salary cap in baseball off the table.

But, it's for that reason players retiring earlier must happen.

Until we allow the game itself to age the players attributes, there must be an offset.

Perhaps James is correct that players play on longer and longer.
But, not at their peak abilities. None of them do. Not even Tom Brady.
This is where I come down on this issue.
If DE Myles Garrett wants to play 20 years, great....just not at max actuals.

So, lets let the game age the players at pre-determined age and no physicals are needed.

I get what you say, but how do you determine it? Darrell Green was still the fastest man in the NFL into his 40s. While what we had wasn't perfect, you blew it up because you could get it done the way you wanted. It really doesn't affect you so why make such a big deal. I think I have earned a level of trust in what works here because what I have suggested has improved the league.

[Rich-League Officer]

It is what it is. It just feels like every time I get excited about the league. Charlie and you do something from on high that makes the league less fun. It is clear you aren't looking for solutions because nothing you do has ever solved anything. Especially since we discussed this and you went completely back on what you said. I feel lied to and backstabbed. Right now I feel leadership is clueless and dishonest. You can be offended by that but everything I said is back by facts.


Wow, lied to, backstabbed, clueless, dishonest. But its not personal.
Luckily for me, you coach, or whatever it is that you do.
And Charlie and I run the league.
You are free to leave if you feel that strongly, the door is always open.
And if you do, I can shit out a PPP in 12 minutes that could do better than a 37.5 winning percentage.
Or you can stay and be tortured by my incompetence that has kept this league alive for 27 years and 50 seasons.
I can do that with or without your presence.

You can be offended by that but everything I said is back by facts.

[Donovon-Steelers]

For the relatively newer coaches, can someone explain what was the root cause of this process to begin with?

Was the game nerfing vet attributes too hard? Or owners complained about players being retired too randomly?

It seems like going back to the original game system would simplify things greatly for both Rich & owners. We could even allow each team to have 3 attributes (de-aged) if the game is too harsh. That could be 3 ratings restored on 1 player, 3 players with 1 rating, or a combination.

I would welcome not having to worry about transfers, rolls, physicals, etc. Plus it would make the draft more important. Just a thought.

[Rich-League Officer]

For the relatively newer coaches, can someone explain what was the root cause of this process to begin with?

Was the game nerfing vet attributes too hard? Or owners complained about players being retired too randomly?

It seems like going back to the original game system would simplify things greatly for both Rich & owners. We could even allow each team to have 3 attributes (de-aged) if the game is too harsh. That could be 3 ratings restored on 1 player, 3 players with 1 rating, or a combination.

I would welcome not having to worry about transfers, rolls, physicals, etc. Plus it would make the draft more important. Just a thought.

Donovon, it's very simple.
This argument has been going on since the 1998 season.
The game does a poor job of aging the players attributes and will retire players young and old.
The coaches of yesteryear and today do not want the game to do that job.
So, systems have been in place to keep players in the league longer and longer.
And to allow players to keep their attributes longer and longer.
James thinks this is the way to go.
I think it was necessary to take real steps to scale it back.

Forget the details for a moment...
But, if coaches want all younger players to never retire and you want all these vets to never have attribute declines, then something must be sacrificed.
In my mind, you sacrifice some longevity. There will still be players 10-11-12-13 in this league.
Is James correct that we may never see a 17yr vet again? It's very possible.
But, it's the flipside of never losing your 3rd year player drafted in the 2nd round.

[James-Eagles]

It is what it is. It just feels like every time I get excited about the league. Charlie and you do something from on high that makes the league less fun. It is clear you aren't looking for solutions because nothing you do has ever solved anything. Especially since we discussed this and you went completely back on what you said. I feel lied to and backstabbed. Right now I feel leadership is clueless and dishonest. You can be offended by that but everything I said is back by facts.


Wow, lied to, backstabbed, clueless, dishonest. But its not personal.
Luckily for me, you coach, or whatever it is that you do.
And Charlie and I run the league.
You are free to leave if you feel that strongly, the door is always open.
And if you do, I can shit out a PPP in 12 minutes that could do better than a 37.5 winning percentage.
Or you can stay and be tortured by my incompetence that has kept this league alive for 27 years and 50 seasons.
I can do that with or without your presence.

You can be offended by that but everything I said is back by facts.

Did you agree to something with me about physicals? Yes. Did you then do something completely different? Yes. What is it called when you say one thing and do something different? That would be called a lie. Facts

Are you a better coach? Yes, you are a better coach and running a million sims than I am.

The point I would make is who has done most of the designing of what we currently use. You are a better coach, but I am better when it comes to coming up with systems that work and are easy to use and making the league more fun.