Simulating Attribute Aging in the PNFL

[Matt-Jacksonville]

There is only so much we can realistically simulate from the NFL. With that said, my desire would be to make things simple and as easy on Coaches and Rich alike. We are playing a game well beyond it's intended lifespan. To ensure the longevity of the league, we need to make it easier to get involved rather than harder. This needs to be a driving force in the league. Keep it simple and appealing to new coaches.

[Charlie-49ers]

I will make it simple! Forget the idea, and sign and tag your players so we can start Free Agency.

[Donovon-Steelers]

Why does this have to be tossed aside or given up?

Starting next season, every player 7 yrs+ could get an END reduction by -1 (-1 DI/ST for K/P)

All the rolls, transfers, etc can be gotten rid of with this one easy change. Owners will cut players naturally as they become less viable due to the END reduction. The problem solves itself.

Simplification.

[Charlie-49ers]

Why does this have to be tossed aside or given up?

Starting next season, every player 7 yrs+ could get an END reduction by -1 (-1 DI/ST for K/P)

All the rolls, transfers, etc can be gotten rid of with this one easy change. Owners will cut players naturally as they become less viable due to the END reduction. The problem solves itself.

Simplification.

That was a possibility; maybe retirements, transfers, and even physical exams could be eliminated! Everyone is unretired, and the attribute reduction would make players less effective and subject to cuts. Oh, well.

[Dean-Atlanta]

Why does this have to be tossed aside or given up?

Starting next season, every player 7 yrs+ could get an END reduction by -1 (-1 DI/ST for K/P)

All the rolls, transfers, etc can be gotten rid of with this one easy change. Owners will cut players naturally as they become less viable due to the END reduction. The problem solves itself.

Simplification.

This is more simple than what Charlie suggested but if it FAR MORE drastic. A CB with 86 EN get reduced to 85 EN, he become worthless on my roster and goes straight into the FA pool to become a Wal-Mart greeter right after being reduced to 85 EN. Extrapolate this to other positions and other teams, and we will be dumping players into FA pool to be subject to the post-SB purge later the season at record rates.

I think the idea is too drastic even if simple.

Charlie is right. Sign and tag players. Draw up some new plays too. Get ready for the draft.

[James-Eagles]

I agree with Dean; besides, retirement was actually working, and the numbers actually match long-run data.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

Why does this have to be tossed aside or given up?

Starting next season, every player 7 yrs+ could get an END reduction by -1 (-1 DI/ST for K/P)

All the rolls, transfers, etc can be gotten rid of with this one easy change. Owners will cut players naturally as they become less viable due to the END reduction. The problem solves itself.

Simplification.

This is more simple than what Charlie suggested but if it FAR MORE drastic. A CB with 86 EN get reduced to 85 EN, he become worthless on my roster and goes straight into the FA pool to become a Wal-Mart greeter right after being reduced to 85 EN. Extrapolate this to other positions and other teams, and we will be dumping players into FA pool to be subject to the post-SB purge later the season at record rates.

I think the idea is too drastic even if simple.

Charlie is right. Sign and tag players. Draw up some new plays too. Get ready for the draft.

If we did reduce ratings, the simplist and most impactful way is by reducing EN in a step down for older players. It impacts everything except IN and DI. If a 10 CB goes from 86 to 84 E, but is still 83 SP 83 AC and 86 AG, I'll take him in a heart beat for a year or 2 as a stop gap as other players mature. He may no longer be a CB1, but will be a strong CB4, if not CB3 depending on my roster depth.

[Dean-Atlanta]

I agree, the EN reduction is VERY simple and minimum work to do it, but it is way too drastic.

Maybe it could be a percentage chance (based on rolling dice) of a 1-point reduction based on age.

Maybe something like:

1-2 yrs past peak = 33% change of 1 point reduced EN
3-4 yrs past peak = 67% change of 1 point reduced EN
5+ yrs past peak = 100% change of 1 point reduced EN

This would do it but would be less drastic.

That being said, the 86 EN CB on my team that falls to 85, is at best a backup if he has a year left on his contract, but he he is not signed, he's gone, released into FA. Not even worth 2.5 points or a tag for a 1 yr contract. He's more than welcome to be CB6 on the Dolphins.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

I agree, the EN reduction is VERY simple and minimum work to do it, but it is way too drastic.

Maybe it could be a percentage chance (based on rolling dice) of a 1-point reduction based on age.

Maybe something like:

1-2 yrs past peak = 33% change of 1 point reduced EN
3-4 yrs past peak = 67% change of 1 point reduced EN
5+ yrs past peak = 100% change of 1 point reduced EN

This would do it but would be less drastic.

That being said, the 86 EN CB on my team that falls to 85, is at best a backup if he has a year left on his contract, but he he is not signed, he's gone, released into FA. Not even worth 2.5 points or a tag for a 1 yr contract. He's more than welcome to be CB6 on the Dolphins.

The key term you used was "your team". If you prefer not to carry players below 86 EN, that's your prerogative. However, a CB with 85 EN is welcome on many other teams depending on his overall talent level.

If you are loaded with several CB at 9+ years of age, you would have to decide to keep the older players and increase your sub% or cut the older players and go younger to meet your ream specific requirements.

Then again, here we are debating over something that will likely never happen, so it's pointless.

[Dean-Atlanta]

It's pointless... so cynical.