2036 Season?

[Dan-Cincinnati]

To Williams point about all the players being the same, that is HUGE imo. Don’t know why I forgot to mention it. It seems that the ratings have been fine tuned through the years and we have been resistant to change because this league has been the only one to last...BUT I would be a huge advocate for messing with the attributes and making the players much different. Probably couldn’t be done with a salary cap so that would have to go I think? But it would add a ton more excitement as far as team building goes. Right now that part is incredibly boring.

[Jerry-Redskins]

I think the Commish is headed in the right direction the last couple of drafts. There is more value at the top and difference in players is better. Just takes multiple seasons to get there

[tmurph-Jets]

I have also been less active and "mailing it in" a lot more than usual but getting lucky.
I also play in a weak division and can get away with it.
But I also have weeks where I do sim a lot of games, more than most I suspect.

I'm good for 2036 but we do need to focus on how to improve the experience for who we have but also make it easier or new coaches to join.
I think we should at least consider eliminating all the contract part of the league.
No worries about signing, caps, points and maybe even enough of the anti retirement stuff.
Let players retire when they retire in the game. It forces teams to need new younger less developed players.
Maybe each team gets X amount of players to keep as is and that's it.
But I agree the attribute differentials are abysmal in this league.
There really is no difference between any of the 18 starting QBs in this league.
We need a league where if you want a real upgrade, you must trade for this upgrade.
And if there are no contracts then coaches have far more time to focus on just coaching or learning to coach.

[Mitch-Oilers]

This maybe considered a bit out of the box, but I believe it's something we should explore in some fashion...

I mentioned having a "bye week" would be appreciated during the season. What if we moved to 2 weeks between games? That would give coaches extra time to fit PNFL activities in between "real-life". Hopefully, this will reduce coaches mailing it in due life/PNFL balance. Also, for someone like me who gets frustrated with gameplanning techniques, it will allow teams to make planning adjustments during the season a little easier due to less pressure for a gameplan each week.

If not 2 weeks between games, maybe a bye week after every 4 games. That would be like a "quarterly assessment" for teams.

Those are few thoughts I believe merit discussion. Also, I agree, I wish there was more differentiation between players.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I would be in favor of doing away with the salary cap stuff and just having a draft and trading and a way to sign a guy if you have an injury during the season. Also, if we could somehow widen the differences a bit more in the ratings, it might make things a bit more interesting. Then we could really dig in and game plan as we would actually see more mismatches. However, I think that would take more time to do gameplanning, etc. which is probably part of the problem....just throwing it out there.

[Steve-LA Chargers]

Sounds like everyone wants to turn the PNFL talent into the XFBS talent with trading allowed.

There might be some merit in this. XFBS has its blue chip players and then the rest. Justin's team (Wyoming) is practically unstoppable partly because his team is built far better than any other team in the league. In fact, I just had a tough season because I decided not to recruit a blue chip QB in the last offseason (after my previous blue chip graduated) and my pass attack literally died. If you need an example of how much a divergent set of skilled players impact FBPRO game play, the XFBS is a good one because we use the PNFL max/min player ratings.

[Rich-League Officer]

Steve, I have never looked at XFBS files/players but yes if you are using the min-max table and actually creating players with lower attributes then that is exactly what I am thinking. It cannot be done overnight though but it can be done.
In conjunction with new rules on aging and retirement, we could achieve a more diverse group of players.

That is also assuming that this issue is a problem for the PNFL coach.
A few guys say yes, maybe others don't care.
It stands to reason if all the players at each position are similar, trading becomes much more difficult.
If trading is non existent, communication and participation is down.

I can still remember days when I and others used ICQ and we would talk trades on there.
It really was fun.

[Justin-Chicago]

That is also assuming that this issue is a problem for the PNFL coach.
A few guys say yes, maybe others don't care.
It stands to reason if all the players at each position are similar, trading becomes much more difficult.
If trading is non existent, communication and participation is down.

I can still remember days when I and others used ICQ and we would talk trades on there.
It really was fun.

I don't say yes, or that I don't care, but that I much prefer the way we have it now, with less trading.

Because in the past there was WAY too much. And it was frustrating to see a competitor building up an unrealistic juggernaut with frequent wheeling and dealing. I like making a trade that works for both teams, and it's easier to identify when that is (or is not) the case now.

We can have a league that mimics the NFL if we stay the course, and that encourages participation. New owners have similar talent and positioning to those who invest heavily in GM stuff. Let the current system play out!

[Andy - Buffalo]

I knew this season would be tough for me due to Real Life from August to December and my plan was to use it as a spring board into next season to be more comfortable with everything.


That said - I am not sure what decision you make - just not been here long enough

[Jerry-Redskins]

The most mentioned issue seems to be talent. The player talent distribution is already being done. It will take a few more years for the new draft classes to move through the rosters. People may want larger differences, but Charlie has been disbursing the talent more. It's just an incremental change with each draft.

I also posted a question last week. I proposed eliminating the dollar part of the cap and going back to just the points. Its easier to understand, is only a soft cap, but still provides a simple yet solid way to control players signings for FA. It has minimal influence on trading. I was wrong about the dollar cap and admit that. We do need to step back a step to simplify a little