As far as prospects - I would like to see a tweak to how scouting budgets work. As of now, anything under $15M is near-useless. I would rather that your scouting budget determine the amount of prospects you see, rather than ratings. Then sign scouts the way we sign coaches.
In MLB, if Team A has a $10M scouting budget, they're going to scout less talent than Team B with a $20M scouting budget. But the ratings they get on players they scout will be determined by their scouts, not by their budget. If I only have the budget to scout one player in the world, he may not be a stud, but my assessment of that one player should be pretty damn accurate.
Right now, it's basically that teams scout a similar number of players, but scouting budget determines how much "time" is invested in scouting each player in order to compile accurate ratings. In reality, that would never happen. A team with a limited budget would choose to scout 250 players in more detail, than do a half-*** job scouting 500.
3/2/2017 12:26 PM (edited)