Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUColonel
I am not trying to compare the sports, nor say that FM is better. I am saying the system it uses to identify how players are "viewed" in relationship to their roles, and weather teams may or not be willing to part wit them works well. Just because it is a different sport doesn't mean you can't take a few ideas about how the program goes about certain things. I am saying it's a bit easy to pry away players on the block, and that I agree with injury log about how which players should be on the block, why, and what the AI team's expectation should be. If you have never seen this system within FM, then you wouldn't know what I am talking about. Maybe you have...I don't know. I am sure there are other who would agree with me on this though.
|
Why not just post about that vs a thread about easy trading which just isn't true? If your claim isn't true then why go through the pretense? I have no problem with you advocating FM as a better model but don't make unsupported claims about a deficiency in OOTP that doesn't exist in order to bring up FM as a solution.
I do know how FM works and I cant see any equivalence in evaluating players. One sport is based on preparation. The other on actual game play. One is based on very few but critical accomplishments. The other ignores every day results but looks for long term consistency. One calls for quick replacement for being off-form. The other calls for riding out a down cycle without overreacting. Player evaluation is completely different, rosters are different, player age vs accomplishment is different, the importance of each win and loss is different and so on... ...