NBryant wrote:A couple of outsider comments. First, I will begin with IMO one of the worst aspects of this game are the financials. With that he will never satisfy everyone and there will be these discussion after every updated/upgraded version of the game as he moves it forward. In a multiplayer league you, the GM, will determine what that player is worth by bidding on him during FA. This could end up exceeding his expectations but at some point should also have them be able to settle for less compensation later in the FA rounds if no one wants to pay for them early on. More so though in both Multi and Single player settings you must manage your CAP. That may mean you can't afford them and have to pass while finding someone else you can afford. This should not be uncommon. In that other game, FOF ,which has an amazing CAP system, there are multiplayer leagues in which highly rated and valued players sit because you cannot afford them. That or you pay for them and cut your rosters value somewhere else. Even so these "other" leagues have accepted it for what it is and roster management and the financials has become a major component in the enjoyment derived by playing the game. Are some of the requests astronomical? Absolutely, again though, that is what it is.
My point, it changed. Brooks explained the change. It is what it is. Again I have appreciated Brooks response to feedback and his desire to try and create a foundation that satisfies his market. I have seen him do this from the very early days of PFS when it was first introduced on the old TWS site. There is a point though where the designer can only do so much based on their design decisions and the consumers have to just use it as is.
Thanks for the added thoughts to this topic and welcome the different viewpoints you have made here. While I do agree with some points here, I also disagree with some that I'd like to comment on. First, I am 100% on board with idea that being a game developer is a challenging job and one that you 100% right in noting that "he will never satisfy everyone". With that said, boards like this exist so we can point out our thoughts on game issues so the developers can consider them and hope my data presented has brought a level of detail to what I believe is a major issue but if the game developers view the data differently, that is okay. Secondly, I think the best thing a game can do in cases where it's "hard to please everyone" is give the user the ability to have more control (more settings) which is a big thing requested here. That way I can help our league achieve financial balance and other leagues can achieve their version of financial balance in terms of demand. First I think a balanced financial system and player demand is an extremely important thing to 'get right' in a sim/GM type game like this. An unbalanced financial system is killer for a league. Every single mid to lower-rated player hitting free agency is a huge deal IMO.
So you noted free agency. And yes, free agency is the great equalizer where demands really mean nothing and it becomes a market-based system that players here will eventually get paid essentially what the market tells them they are worth. So what is my issue with players hitting free agency and just getting paid the correct amount there? Imagine a league where every player after their rookie contract (or any contract for that matter) hits free agency. Why would I waste my time drafting players in rounds 2-7 and developing that talent if not a single player will eventually talk extension with me and come back with realistic demands. By the time these drafted players finally start to develop in year 3 or so, they'll ask for way too much money and all hit free agency. And then once they hit free agency, the market will correctly pay them WAY less than they originally requested. Given how the game currently works in our league, essentially every player rated lower than 85 OVR (which is essentially all round 2-7 picks and late 1st round picks) will hit free agency. If I'm a GM, I am trading away every pick I have after pick 20 because why waste time developing them. I'll just use those picks to acquire win now talent and later just build up my roster in free agency with 25-26-year-olds as it'll be STACKED with young talent. It 100% devalues drafting and developing talent outside of free agency.
To be clear, I'm not asking for a system where every player can be extended on the cheap. In fact, I don't want cheap extensions at all. I just want extensions to reflect how players in the league are currently paid. I thought in '21 player demands were somewhat high but within reason and reflective of how similar talent is already paid around the league. Now player demands are 50+% higher than '21 and based on my data, not at all reflective on how similar players are paid. How is a system where career backups are asking for top 10 money at their position as a norm a good system? But yes, there should be 'flavor' with the system where players on average ask for the higher range of what similar players are paid as a norm but occasionally venture away from this norm. In rare occurrences, players should give hometown discounts and on the other side of the spectrum, a small percentage of talent should be more greedy and ask for way too much money. But as a norm, every single player should not be asking for way more than the market says they are worth is near game-breaking. As noted, player demands in real life (and also historical free agency contracts in our league), do not work off a linear line. Most elite players get paid much better than an average starter. Career backups don't ask for 40% of a the best player. As noted earlier, the best WR cap hit is $22 million. In this game, it seems like a high 70s OVR type (backup in our league) is asking 40% of the max, or nearly $9 mil. $9 mil would make a player the 15th highest-paid WR. So we have backup WRs asking for top 15 money as a norm despite not a single similar WR currently making near that much? As with many things in society, there's a top tier of players that tend to get paid very very well and then quickly players start to be more "replaceable" and their market values plummet. This is the case in the NFL, case if you look at free agent contracts in our league, but not the case in contract demands in '22