dude if you are preaching get rid of caps you can not then use them to try and prove me wrong. potential equals caps. so without caps they are all the same.

Potential does not equal caps... it just does in HD. This is why I think it needs to be changed.

right and since we are talking about hd you can't make the statement you did differentiating d3 and d1 players. this is how potential is implemented now we have to figure out how to make it work with what we have.

Quote: Originally Posted By bradshaw3001 on 2/11/2009

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 2/11/2009 without caps all players are equal from d3 to d1 their starting rankings are there only differences.

That's not really the case when D3 players have significantly lower potential

Potential is the cap, Bradshaw! Please stop with your argument, it is growing tiresome.

I think the clear cut issue for most of us is the fact that a player with a 60-70 in an growable skill (i.e. passing, BH, PE, etc.) would just stop getting better in the peak of his college career.

Hey guys, this has been a great discussion, but I'm going to have to hop out for now. I scheduled a developer chat for Tuesday at 1pm. Go to http://www.whatifsports.com/devchat/devchat.asp?chatid=77 to submit your questions.

zhawks:

I read the entire thread and I'm not sure that your argument fro "soft caps" is really any different than what seble has proposed.

If I understand the new system, it will allow for growth between all four years, but I assume that as players reach their caps, they will slow. Isn't that essentially what you're asking for?

The only thing that would make sense is to increase current players' potential by a few points until this new system has been implemented so that out current players can continue to grow, albeit a small amount, over the next couple of years.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 2/11/2009right and since we are talking about hd you can't make the statement you did differentiating d3 and d1 players. this is how potential is implemented now we have to figure out how to make it work with what we have.

You said all player are equal D1 to D3 and the only difference would be their starting ratings. I then said that D3 players have lower potential than D1 players... which is true in HD right now. How exactly is this statement invalid? I refuted your assertion that all players are equal outside of their original ratings. As potential exists at the moment, D1 players have more green than red, and D3 players are a sea of red. I'm fine with that... but I'm not fine with caps. My solution is to eliminate caps and make a player's potential more of a rate of change than a maximum ability.

yes as you see if they were to institue what i said today players would not quite reach their current desired potential when they were created by increasing that slightily 5-10 percent then they would get just below where they cap today and slowly work k

they would slowly work just barley past it in a few cases.

right but bradshaw you are refuting me with the very thing you are campaigning to eliminate. it makes it very hard to respect your opinion along with your argument.

Caps are good for the game, it's just the whole cut and dry this is this player's rating and there's nothing you can do about it that people don't like. You need caps. It's stupid if a D3 player can reach the same numbers that a D1 player can really. If that's the case then he would have gone to a D1 school.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 2/11/2009right but bradshaw you are refuting me with the very thing you are campaigning to eliminate. it makes it very hard to respect your opinion along with your argument.

I never said I was arguing against you... I just had to bring my theory to the table... it was never in response to what any one person said.

It might be time to overhaul the entire rating scale for players. Durability is a meaningless rating that probably meant something when severe injuries were more prevalent. Now WE is becoming more meaningless since high potential players have improved by 100 or more in one season, regardless of WE. I guess it still helps with O&D, but it is much less meaningful than before potential and especially with caps on player ratings.