Matrix Games Forums

One thing that I think this game really needs to give it more flavor is a movement of players from team to team besides the draft. In other words, there needs to be some sort of free agency.

However, free agency becomes very complicated, with the need for salaries, a salary cap, and free agent negotiations. This is a very daunting task for a utility maker to try to program in and emulate - perhaps far too difficult...

With this in mind, I have come up with an idea that helps to capture the spirit of free agency, but doesn't need salaries nor free agent negotiations, and is perhaps very "doable" by those that have programming talent (unfortuantely, this would not be me [:(] ). Here is my idea for a workable quasi-free agent system:

Part 1 - Free Agent Selection

At the beginning of each new season, the utility randomly chooses 3-5 players from each team that will become "free-agents". Now, additional critera could be added, such as no players younger than 26 (which would allow a team to keep it's young players for a time).

Part 2 - Franchise Tag

Of these 3-5 players randomly choosen, allow the human teams to, if they wish, remove 1 player from the selected list. This prevents a human team from losing that star QB or star RB or the player that he would never be release in real life, if it could be avoided.

Part 3 - Free Agent "Bidding" and the Free Agent Draft

Now, there is no "bidding" per se as there is no player salaries nor direct bidding competition between teams. All the utility determined free agents are placed into a free-agent pool, but to try to at least emulate much of the uncertainty behind free agent acquistion, there is a special 4 round draft. Now how this draft works is as follows: the team's draft order is randomly determined for each of the 4 rounds (meaning that the order changes each round - a team that gets first pick in round one will not likely get first pick in round two, etc.). Also, the draft order for each round is kept hidden until the start of that individual round. That way you won't know ahead of time where you will be picking down the road - this adds some uncertainty.


...well, there you have it - my idea for a quasi-free agent system that helps to add yearly player movement from team to team that does not need the complications of player salaries nor bidding between teams. This makes it much easier and I think this is even possible for a programmer with some talent to do as a utility.

(P.S. Maybe even David could throw us a bone and do something simple like this for a version 2 upgrade. [;)] )

Interesting concept, redwolf. I certainly like the 'randomness' of it all.

I know this would certainly be adding to the complexity of it, but I would also like to see a player consider his position on the team. for example, if I already have a stud running back, when I go to sign a second stud runner, the guy will basically laugh at me, as there's no way he would get enough playing time.

It's also pretty rare for teams that have consistently been at the bottom to have a chance at signing top end talent, so maybe a team's record over the previous 2-3 years could come in to it. That puts the onus on a bad team to draft well to get their talent, which is realistic.

A success rating - (wins over 8) would be a good modifier
Trajectory rating  ( trending upward or downward) this is why nobody joined Schottenheimers teams, it always means playing in the playoffs but WATCHING the SuperBowl

PLAYING TIME -A system that would track snaps on the field would be huge , this is the most accurate way to break up dynasties, because they cant play everyone, and you can juggle slots and promise a guy the world, but if hes not playing EVER, he wont want to stay no matter how much you pay him. This is the fastest way to FAIRLY dissolve Dynasties that develop in CPU game leagues.

Free agency generation
Rather than random, I would prescribe a stat bell curve, and guys at the bottom (guys who rode the pine) and hyper achievers -who outperformed their contract) would be more susceptible to flaring up.
This way coaches coach MANAGE their team, its a lot of factors to juggle, using your bench and not riding one superstar to death (i.e. Larry Johnson (KC)- 400+ carries= holdout), but in real life using everyone does truly engender chemistry and roster stability.

Performance Formula considerations....
QB  dont usually hold out for performance, rather contract duration
see Culpepper  (MIN/MIA/OAK)

starts+1 / yrs rem on contract   result = disgruntled factor (cumulative w other factors)

...starts     16    12     8      4      1
yrs       
 6            2.5    2    1.3    .69   .16
4             4      3      2      1    .25
2             8      6      4      2    .5
1            16     12    8       4     1

with this formula the full season starter with a 1 yr deal (16) is pissed
and the guy with a 6 yr deal  to hold a clipboard (.16) will never make a peep
far better than random, because there is a reason, or at least a tendency/rationale

RB  <600 yds      =   ^holdout rating
RB    >1500 yds    =   ^ holdout rating
      < 60 carries  =   ^ holdout rating
      > 350 carries =   ^ holdout rating

WR  <35 receptions  = ^ holdout modifier
WR  >100 receptions   = ^ holdout modifier

TE   they never hold out but
     <25 receptions  = ^ holdout risk
     >80 receptions  = ^ holdout risk

any offensive player >10 tds ^ holdout risk
cumulative with other factors

DL   < 4 sacks  = ^ holdout risk - either they suck and cut themselves by holding out, or they
                           ride the pine and want to go elsewhere
     > 15 sacks = ^ holdout risk  -see Michael Strahan(NYG)

LB   < 15 tackles =^ holdout risk - suck/pine
LB   > 130 tackles= ^ holdout risk - see Lance Briggs (CHI)

DB   <2 int      = ^ holdout risk
DB   >8 int        = ^ holdout risk   - see Charles Woodson

for individual volatility simple formulas added in i.e.
(absolute value of (total talent pts  - APR)) / (-5 + Years in League)
(APR= Avg Player Rating = (# of player attributes x 70)
TALA- talent above league average
              
( my shorthand is probably off, but you get the idea)

heres a proof to illustrate

----- Holdout modifier 
YRS in LEAGUE      0     2      4     6     8     10+             4-6 yrs players peak
formula yrs         -5    -3     -1     1     3      5
TALA .. 100+ |   20   33   100  100   33    20   most talented guys hold out at their peak value
              80+ |   16   27    80   80    27    16 
stars      60+ |   12   20    60   60    20     12 
              40+ |    8   13    40   40    13      8 
              20+ |    4    6     20   20     6      4     happy to to cocky to hanging on
guys....      0  |    0     0      0    0      0      0     scrubs know better than to hold out
              -20  |    4     6    20    20    6       4
bench     -40  |   etc
              -60  |                                            
guys this bad you dont want back, but they  represent the negative cancer type guys who
detract from chemistry, and in truth you hope as many of these guys take the bullet so you dont break up your core, (see the Patriots)

wins             v holdout risk
blowout wins  v holdout risk
super bowl     v holdout risk

"Winning is a great deodorant" only goes so far, but there should be consideration of these factors, and from what I just listed a simple off season step could be run, generating players morale/loyalty rating and flagging the outcroppers for holdouts.

just a few thoughts, I only had an hr.
The main thing is there would be no math for owners to complain over complexity,
just realistic factors to gauge which could be easily seen by reviewing your stats,
it would reward balance and using your roster
and penalize guys who run 1 player into the ground, the give the ball to Earl Campbell
strategy is not a strategy, and it killed Earl and Bum Phillips for trying it, AND THEY DIDNT WIN
that shortsightedness should not be rewarded in cpu games either
and above all it wouldn't be random

How would you like to have your team ruined if Brady and Moss held
out the same year and you could only save one of them?, when you
know that would never happen (both of them) because they are
so interdependent
this formula would also prevent multiple defections from the same position group
which could randomly wreck a team if 3 RBs happened to strike at the same time

I would love to add something...but you pretty much covered it. It seems like a sensible way of figuring out guys who might be itching for more money. I would maybe add in a factor related to what a guy's position mates are being paid. for example...you have a third year guy who has not really established himself, then suddenly jumps up and has a dozen sacks. Meanwhile, 2 other D-linemen are paid more, because they've become eligible for a new contract before him (they've been around longer). Chances are, that guy is going to stage a holdout.

Good suggestions. To clarify, my objective was to just propose something very simple that could probably be easily implented for v.2. I do like the added qualifications though.

Anyways, it is likely just a pipe dream as I doubt David has intentions for this for v2, nor have we attracted any 3rd party utility developers over to MaxFB (with the exception being a possible few who are tied up in beta testing) - and guys, I've honestly been trying. [:(]