I figured if a player took a snap in the 1st half, then they would be satisfied with the start.  Obviously there is more to the story.  Please give me the details on what it takes to record a start for a player.

I think its been whittled down to 50% play time.

I've got a player that has never played more than 36% and he has 4 starts.  Does anyone else have any thoughts?

It's playing time in the 1st half.

The players that were used the most in the formation that was used the most in the first half; or 60% PT.  See Knowledge Base article 674

Thanks mgm.  This is crazy.  I have 6 OL that have started every game.

Posted by tubby7242 on 12/12/2013 3:28:00 PM (view original):
Thanks mgm.  This is crazy.  I have 6 OL that have started every game.

This is a possibility given the 60% rule.

Thanks again mgm.  I read that later in the Knowledge Base article.  I'm not sure how I am going to figure out a method for satisfying freshman starts with the minimum amount of playing time.  It looks like the developers may have finally figures out a way to punish the use of freshman starts.

The player who plays the most in the formation used the most or anyone at 60%+ playing time. That's what is being said determines starts, but that clearly isn't what is happening. 

I can't say exactly how it's working, but to me it looks like any player who gets right at 30% playing time (maybe in the 1st half) is being given the starting credit. The formations that are being used are basically irrelevant with such a low percentage of playing time needed for the start. I don't know exactly what the number is, but it is obviously lower than the 60% being listed. I don't think that anyone can reasonably believe that the guy who posted above has 6 offensive linemen who have played more than 60% of his offensive plays in the 1st half of every one of his games. The number is a lot lower. His 5th and 6th offensive linemen are splitting time based on the formation he's using and as long as they're both getting over approximately 30% then they're both considered starters.

I will add that I actually like the way that starts are working right now. I have no problem with all players above 30% getting starting credit. That is basically how things actually work in college football today. I went to an Alabama game this season and before kickoff they introduced their starting lineups. They listed anyone who starts in any of their packages, so anyone who is in their base 3-4, their Nickel, or their Dime defense is announced as a starter, and the same with their offensive packages. This led to about 15 or 16 guys being listed as starters on offense and defense. 

Players in GD should get a small WE boost for starting games and that WE boost should increase the more PT that they get. So a guy who "starts" every game playing 45% of his team's plays may see his WE climb 3 or 4 points on the season where a guy who starts every game and plays 90% should see his WE jump up around 8 or 9 points. I think this is pretty close to how it is working now and seems just fine to me. 

If you're splitting time between 4 different formations - 35%, 25%, 25%, 15%, then the 35% formation will be the most used.

If a player is only in that one formation, and plays at his position longer than anyone else, he'll get credit for the start but still have less than 30% playing time.

A start is the player used the most in the formation used the most OR 60% PT, not and 60% PT.

That's fine, mgm, but that isn't how it's working right now. All of the players who play the most in the formation used the most may be getting credit for starts, but aside from that, the percentage is much lower than 60% for everyone else. It's more like 30%.

Using tubby7242 from above again as an example. He has 6 OL credited with starting every game. It basically comes down to his SO OL Hopkins and his FR OL Starks. Now if you want to assume that one of those two is playing the majority of the snaps in the formation that he uses most often every single game that's fine, that would explain why one of them is getting a start. The other has gotten a start every single game and has never reached 60% PT in any game this season. 

I use two offensive formations and I have the same starting RB in both formations. He starts every game. Now 3 times this season, out of 15 games, my backup RB has been on the field over 30% of the plays (31%, 31%, and 43%) all three games he was credited with a start. He would not have qualified for a start using either of the criteria you have listed.

Yeah, I think their definition of a "start" is a little crazy... I have (3) RB's, (2) WR's & (2) TE's who have all "started" 5 out of 5 games.