Suggestion - GM/Scout Ratings

DanP68 · 02-01-2014, 08:21 AM

First off congratulations on bringing this new game to market! I can't way to see the 2D representation, and to start building my own leagues.

I think it is vital that each team have GM/Scout ratings which have a big effect on the accuracy of their team's scouting reports.

The way I see it is, if there is a salary cap and revenue sharing like in the NFL, all teams will tend to gravitate toward .500 winning percentages. The reason that the NFL has teams which tend to be above or below average more years than not (think New England and Pittsburgh vs Buffalo, etc) is because there are big differences in the quality of the front office scouting accuracies.

Add in GM/Scout ratings, make them have a noticeable effect, and allow us to Edit them to customize the league. Or give us a button to turn the salary cap on and off. Either way it is important to ensure differentiation between the teams beyond random chance in the draft.

Just my thoughts. I'd be interested in other people's thoughts on this.

Cryomaniac · 02-01-2014, 01:30 PM

Scouting and GM ability certainly make a difference in football. As you say, the Patriots are the obvious example, although some of that might also be down to Belichick being good at using what he has to the absolute best.

goalieump413 · 02-03-2014, 02:45 AM

Well, my thought is that there should not be JUST a noticeable effect, there should be a quantifiable effect. In other words, as game players, we should have a ratings system for head coaches, assistants, training staffs, GM's and Team Presidents (if applicable). Each team's front office and coaching staffs differ in real life, and should also be customizable to model how each of the 32 NFL teams organize themselves.

Another thought: My Seattle Seahawks just won the Superbowl tonight, so I'm on an admittedly higher high than usual... But one of the biggest reasons the Seahawks are Champions, is that their front office (GM and scouting staff) have been better than other teams finding gems in lower rounds, or even undrafted talent, that has paid bigger dividends than other franchises have. Taking a chance on a player, when other teams would not, finding the proverbial diamond in the rough, is a team changing experience, and fun too.

DanP68 · 02-04-2014, 07:58 PM

Yes. Now that I have read your comments, I think Coaching abilities should also play an important role.

SmoothGentleman · 02-05-2014, 08:43 AM

I do hope there are complete coaching staffs, training staffs, Scouts, and GMs are all included. Coaching is underrated in Baseball there's no question that Coaching and Evaluating talent is a major influence on football so this area should be on the top of the list of features to address.

Not even just having Coordinators would really capture the importance of coaching.

Pacoheadley · 02-05-2014, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanP68

Yes. Now that I have read your comments, I think Coaching abilities should also play an important role.

An extremely important role I hope, this is one of the biggest things I am hoping for. I'd also like many coaching ratings to be somehow hidden, or have to do with matching players in schemes or something like that, so it isn't too easy to just go get some hotshot coach.

rancer890 · 02-05-2014, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmoothGentleman

I do hope there are complete coaching staffs, training staffs, Scouts, and GMs are all included. Coaching is underrated in Baseball there's no question that Coaching and Evaluating talent is a major influence on football so this area should be on the top of the list of features to address.

Not even just having Coordinators would really capture the importance of coaching.

It would be great to have O/D-coordinators in the game as well as position coaches. And like Pacoheadley said, there should be a big emphasis on schemes instead of just attributes. (eg. a defensive coordinator with a 3-4 philosophy won't do so well with personnel of a 4-3).

And for scouts as well, they have to be able to analyze how possible draftees and free agents fit with a specific philosophy, with better scouting attributes assumed to be better at determining a player's effectiveness with the current personnel.

SmoothGentleman · 02-06-2014, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancer890

It would be great to have O/D-coordinators in the game as well as position coaches. And like Pacoheadley said, there should be a big emphasis on schemes instead of just attributes. (eg. a defensive coordinator with a 3-4 philosophy won't do so well with personnel of a 4-3).

And for scouts as well, they have to be able to analyze how possible draftees and free agents fit with a specific philosophy, with better scouting attributes assumed to be better at determining a player's effectiveness with the current personnel.

This. Whether is college or pros this is a very important feature as changing a defensive scheme does take awhile to adjust, Coordinators have preferences on what skill set they would like players to have on both sides of the ball.

goalieump413 · 02-07-2014, 12:39 PM

In OOTP, there are already sliders for coaches (hit and run, aggressive---conservative) etc., so I don't think it'll be much of a stretch to take that code and change the titles of the sliders, and the parametric effects to football. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it would be an easy suggestion to ask Francis.

But you are all correct: In football, there is a stronger emphasis on schemes vs other team sports due to the complexity of each roster, each play, etc. Some coaches prefer physically larger players, while others seek pure skill, regardless of size. Some coordinators prefer a pass heavy attack, spreading the ball to every receiver, while others want to control the clock, running the ball, playing a power game.

This has a tremendous impact on how a roster is built, and there should be a reflection of this impact on coach and player ratings. While a particular coach or scout may be excellent in teaching one style of offense, he may be poor at another. Likewise with players. While a RB may be excellent at running between the tackles, he may be poor at catching the football out of the backfield.

drewst18 · 02-16-2014, 02:57 PM

I am sure I am in the minority, but especially scouting/drafting I'd like to see ratings done away with. I personally find them to be completely unrealistic especially in football. Drafting should be done based on college results, combine results help give you an understanding of speed, strength, quickness, jumping, reaction time and then maybe have an interview section for mental type categories.

I'd much rather us get a number of combine drills and scores in those drills. For the drills you can't give a definitive answer to you give a grade as a real life scout would. Dependant on your scout the more accurate the grade would be.

It should be only after training camp that you start to see a players attributes and they would be determined based on the results of practice and the accuracy vary based on the scheme and coaching staff skill level.

But with the amount of skilled players that come from UDFA or late in first rounds, we shouldn't be able to get a concrete reading through a scout as it is a little unrealistic and probably more fun to draft.

goalieump413 · 02-16-2014, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drewst18

I am sure I am in the minority, but especially scouting/drafting I'd like to see ratings done away with. I personally find them to be completely unrealistic especially in football. Drafting should be done based on college results, combine results help give you an understanding of speed, strength, quickness, jumping, reaction time and then maybe have an interview section for mental type categories.

I'd much rather us get a number of combine drills and scores in those drills. For the drills you can't give a definitive answer to you give a grade as a real life scout would. Dependant on your scout the more accurate the grade would be.

It should be only after training camp that you start to see a players attributes and they would be determined based on the results of practice and the accuracy vary based on the scheme and coaching staff skill level.

But with the amount of skilled players that come from UDFA or late in first rounds, we shouldn't be able to get a concrete reading through a scout as it is a little unrealistic and probably more fun to draft.

If you remove a scouting and drafting rating system, there would be no discernible difference between two or more organization's scouting results for the inbound draft class. A QB would have the same series of ratings across the entire league, meaning that there would be no subjective assessment of his skills, relative to the team.

One of the big attractions of any entry draft, regardless of the sport, is the knowledge that a player may fit one organization better than another. Not just on a best available or team need basis, but how that player's skills will be used differently from team to team. Therefore, I don't think we should sanitize the experience.

But I do agree with you that a player's attributes become more clear the more time they spend with the organization. OTA's, mini camps, training camp, etc. Further, since a highly touted rookie could flame out so soon, and in contrast, an undrafted invitee may shine, all the more reason to retain a drafting and scouting rating system. My reason: Better scouting can find better talent, up and down the draft, reducing the likelihood that a player will flame out due to an improper team fit, as long as the coaching and training remain steady.

Many players have, over the years, been busts. Sometimes it's due to the organization's rather blind approach to drafting, seeking some attribute above all others, like the Raiders' devotion to pure speed. How's that worked out?

senorcoo · 02-24-2014, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rancer890

It would be great to have O/D-coordinators in the game as well as position coaches. And like Pacoheadley said, there should be a big emphasis on schemes instead of just attributes. (eg. a defensive coordinator with a 3-4 philosophy won't do so well with personnel of a 4-3).

And for scouts as well, they have to be able to analyze how possible draftees and free agents fit with a specific philosophy, with better scouting attributes assumed to be better at determining a player's effectiveness with the current personnel.

The soccer game, Football Manager, has an attribute for the personnel called Adaptability. Maybe BTS could use something similar.

rancer890 · 02-24-2014, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by senorcoo

The soccer game, Football Manager, has an attribute for the personnel called Adaptability. Maybe BTS could use something similar.

Yeah I think that's a good idea. There should be an adaptability in different schemes, but it shouldn't be too hard to figure out. If we have information about what scheme each NCAA team uses it should be easily found out through scouting.

I think scouting should also include adaptability in different positions. Guys like former NFLer Antwaan Randle El and Denard Robinson used to be quarterbacks in college and were/are receivers in the NFL. Undersized DEs who have good 40 time might make good OLB. It would be tricky to code (well tricky to me since I don't know anything about coding!) but I think it's a realistic addition to BTS since the position college players play is not always the position they play in the NFL.

02-01-2014, 08:21 AM	#1
DanP68 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 151	Suggestion - GM/Scout Ratings First off congratulations on bringing this new game to market! I can't way to see the 2D representation, and to start building my own leagues. I think it is vital that each team have GM/Scout ratings which have a big effect on the accuracy of their team's scouting reports. The way I see it is, if there is a salary cap and revenue sharing like in the NFL, all teams will tend to gravitate toward .500 winning percentages. The reason that the NFL has teams which tend to be above or below average more years than not (think New England and Pittsburgh vs Buffalo, etc) is because there are big differences in the quality of the front office scouting accuracies. Add in GM/Scout ratings, make them have a noticeable effect, and allow us to Edit them to customize the league. Or give us a button to turn the salary cap on and off. Either way it is important to ensure differentiation between the teams beyond random chance in the draft. Just my thoughts. I'd be interested in other people's thoughts on this.

02-01-2014, 01:30 PM	#2
Cryomaniac Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2007 Location: Hucknall, Notts, UK Posts: 4,902	Scouting and GM ability certainly make a difference in football. As you say, the Patriots are the obvious example, although some of that might also be down to Belichick being good at using what he has to the absolute best. __________________

02-03-2014, 02:45 AM	#3
goalieump413 All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 765	Well, my thought is that there should not be JUST a noticeable effect, there should be a quantifiable effect. In other words, as game players, we should have a ratings system for head coaches, assistants, training staffs, GM's and Team Presidents (if applicable). Each team's front office and coaching staffs differ in real life, and should also be customizable to model how each of the 32 NFL teams organize themselves. Another thought: My Seattle Seahawks just won the Superbowl tonight, so I'm on an admittedly higher high than usual... But one of the biggest reasons the Seahawks are Champions, is that their front office (GM and scouting staff) have been better than other teams finding gems in lower rounds, or even undrafted talent, that has paid bigger dividends than other franchises have. Taking a chance on a player, when other teams would not, finding the proverbial diamond in the rough, is a team changing experience, and fun too.

02-04-2014, 07:58 PM	#4
DanP68 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 151	Yes. Now that I have read your comments, I think Coaching abilities should also play an important role.

02-05-2014, 08:43 AM	#5
SmoothGentleman Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 394	I do hope there are complete coaching staffs, training staffs, Scouts, and GMs are all included. Coaching is underrated in Baseball there's no question that Coaching and Evaluating talent is a major influence on football so this area should be on the top of the list of features to address. Not even just having Coordinators would really capture the importance of coaching.

02-07-2014, 12:39 PM	#9
goalieump413 All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 765	In OOTP, there are already sliders for coaches (hit and run, aggressive---conservative) etc., so I don't think it'll be much of a stretch to take that code and change the titles of the sliders, and the parametric effects to football. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that it would be an easy suggestion to ask Francis. But you are all correct: In football, there is a stronger emphasis on schemes vs other team sports due to the complexity of each roster, each play, etc. Some coaches prefer physically larger players, while others seek pure skill, regardless of size. Some coordinators prefer a pass heavy attack, spreading the ball to every receiver, while others want to control the clock, running the ball, playing a power game. This has a tremendous impact on how a roster is built, and there should be a reflection of this impact on coach and player ratings. While a particular coach or scout may be excellent in teaching one style of offense, he may be poor at another. Likewise with players. While a RB may be excellent at running between the tackles, he may be poor at catching the football out of the backfield.

02-16-2014, 02:57 PM	#10
drewst18 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 164	I am sure I am in the minority, but especially scouting/drafting I'd like to see ratings done away with. I personally find them to be completely unrealistic especially in football. Drafting should be done based on college results, combine results help give you an understanding of speed, strength, quickness, jumping, reaction time and then maybe have an interview section for mental type categories. I'd much rather us get a number of combine drills and scores in those drills. For the drills you can't give a definitive answer to you give a grade as a real life scout would. Dependant on your scout the more accurate the grade would be. It should be only after training camp that you start to see a players attributes and they would be determined based on the results of practice and the accuracy vary based on the scheme and coaching staff skill level. But with the amount of skilled players that come from UDFA or late in first rounds, we shouldn't be able to get a concrete reading through a scout as it is a little unrealistic and probably more fun to draft.