NFL retirement numbers

[Brian-Broncos]

For curiosity's sake, I pieced together NFL retirement numbers going back to players that started in the league in 1995. Numbers should at least be close. Since our players don't age, these percentages won't make sense for us, but if the point of adjusting the physical percentages was to mimic the NFL regarding how many seasoned veterans are in the league, this should give us a target. And once the number of veterans are close, there should be a way to calculate the percentages to use for physicals to keep us in the ballpark.

If the league wants, these numbers could be used to come up with a total player arc so that the draft, aging, and retirement all work together to mimic these numbers. But that would mean making roughly 3 out of every teams' draft picks bad enough that they'd be out of the league in two seasons. That might not make the late rounds of the draft very exciting.

If there isn't interest to replicate the full arc, at minimum, I'd love to see the league use these numbers to determine the free agent pool size and number of retirees each season. Based on these numbers, NFL teams average 10 rookies per season (9710 players/32 teams/30 seasons = 323 rookies/season and 10.1 rookies/team) and just as many players leave the NFL every season. If we use the same number of rookies per team, 180 rookies should make it into rosters and the free agent pool every draft. And that means before the draft, exactly 180 players should be purged from the FA pool, including the latest retirees. Any additional players from the draft pool beyond the commish's formula for the top 180 should be purged - the PNFL wasn't interested. I know some coaches want more choice in the FA pool, but these players aren't good enough to be playing for your team - that is why they are in the free agent pool. They are now teachers, have a goat farm, are working at Home Depot, or are NPCs in GTA5. For example, it makes zero sense for any free agent to be good enough to plug-and-play into your roster halfway thru the season.

season retired_n at_risk_n retire_pct
1 2591 9710 27%
2 1479 7119 21%
3 1101 5640 20%
4 828 4539 18%
5 705 3711 19%
6 572 3006 19%
7 530 2434 22%
8 483 1904 25%
9 409 1421 29%
10 348 1012 34%
11 238 664 36%
12 171 426 40%
13 97 255 38%
14 69 158 44%
15 38 89 43%
16 23 51 45%
17 11 28 39%
18 10 17 59%
19 2 7 29%
20 2 5 40%
21 1 3 33%
22 0 2 0%
23 1 2 50%
24 1 1 100%

30 seasons of data 1995-2024

[James-Eagles]

I think the data is good, but I think it is important to understand the data.

It is just my opinion, but I think the younger people are retiring because they don't make rosters, not by choice.

This does back what I said: the problem isn't in the later years but in the number of players getting to years 9-11. I wish we had these numbers by position. I couldn't find it

[Dean-Atlanta]

I think James is right, we are seeing more players retiring early if they do not make it and they probably give up the NFL dream and go into coaching or what they studied in college, or going back to school to finish college, etc.

We are seeing it in college FB as players jump into the transfer portal repeatedly if they do not get enough playing time with their current team.

We can't be THAT realistic in the PCFL or the PNFLK in simulating some of this. WE just need to accept that limit to realism in our game.

[James-Eagles]

If we used these numbers as rolls of not retiring

8 -75%
9 71%
10 66%
11 64%
12 60%
13 62%
14 56%
15 57%
16 55%
17 61%
18 71%
20 60%
21 67%
22 100%
23 50%
24 0%

[Mitch-Dolphins]

I'm a little confused...

It says 40% of 12 year players retired after year 12. However, wouldn't we want to add up all the players in column 3 and divide it by 426? That would show 1% of players make it to year 12.

[James-Eagles]

I'm a little confused...

It says 40% of 12 year players retired after year 12. However, wouldn't we want to add up all the players in column 3 and divide it by 426? That would show 1% of players make it to year 12.

426 reach year 12 and 171 retired so 255 went year 13

The rolls are only for the next year, so it isn't the percentage of all the players that played. It really just players who made it to that age that don't retire.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

Got it

[Brian-Broncos]

I think the younger people are retiring because they don't make rosters, not by choice.

Correct. Bad column header label.

Seasons played is based on the season of their last player record (based on their contract) combined with when they last played a game, to knock off any extra contract seasons that they didn't actually play. There's no real official "retirement" data that I'm aware of.

[Brian-Broncos]

If we used these numbers as rolls of not retiring

8 -75%
9 71%
...

I think these percentages only make sense if we were replicating the entire NFL player arc (draft, aging, and retirement) or at least aging and retirement. We can't really mimic the draft without ruining it for us: three players drafted by every team would have to be so bad that they'd be out of the league within 2 seasons (i.e. rounds 5, 6, and 7.)

If an updated aging process is able to get us to cut veterans so that the number of players approaching retirement is on par, relatively, with the NFL, then these physical percentages would be great.

[James-Eagles]

I wasn't saying to use those numbers. I was just flipping it because when I first scanned it, I read it the other way. I don't think realism is something we should try to match. When I look at something, it really is about whether it adds more fun to the hobby vs. how much work and frustration it adds. Once frustration and work outweigh the fun, then I leave the hobby. I don't want too much realism.