The only problem I see with this is that you have owners with stacked rosters using the revolving door system and trading away players to other teams for 1st and 2nd round picks, most times its to new owners who have joined the league, I am also not saying they are making the proposals either. The rich keep getting richer and it would be even worst if they are getting 3+ players of 85-90+ skill every season because of this even tho it still is happening in good drafts. Its a very tough fix in all honesty.

If I was in their shoes, I'd be happy to give my picks away to an already stacked team if it meant that I was actually going to get some players worth having back in return. I know I'm not going to get them in the draft.

If the draft pools were better, owner's wouldn't necessarily feel the need to give up their top picks in order to get a good player.

The one thing jd has always tried too do is balance it out for us.It is like how much of a bump up in talent is overkill versus getting it just right in drafts.I am sure with a little patience jd will find the middle for all are drafts.So it keeps the leagues balanced and fair for all.Then in the end hopefully we can keep others playing after just 1 season.

I personally have been pretty happy with the first and second round talent level of recent drafts, despite usually picking at the end of the round. My concern with upping that talent anymore is that it won't be as much of a bonus to the teams picking at the start of the round versus those picking at the end. That is, winning teams will continue to be getting just as infused with young talent as losing teams.

My only real critique with the draft at this point is that the latter rounds are beyond pointless. After a few seasons of stabilizing a roster, no one from rounds 5+ ever make my roster, let alone UDFA. In the NFL, on average about two UDFA make a 53-man roster every season. On MFN? Never. Or close enough, anyways.

The only real solution I have to this is a suggestion I made a very long time ago in MFN-2, which had to do with implementing scouting (this actually inspired me to re-post it to the suggestion forum: http://mfn8.myfootballnow.com/community/5/836?page=0&x=sxw1f&y=cwl#4719.) This feature would allow for more late round prospects potentially slipping through the cracks.

+1

I definitely would support this feature, maybe even keep the 'draft' tab on the sliders for the whole season and have a tab under the draft tab where each week you can view one "college" game with some of the prospects in action.

I never really noticed this in the past.But does are draft classes have like junior prospects with seniors being drafted?Or are they all the same age in each draft class?

They're all the same age... I didn't see any compelling reason to make it more complicated than it is.

I have some tweaks in the oven with regards to the draft class, may be a few seasons away for most leagues but it's in MFN-1 now and is being tested in my sandbox environment. I think the biggest issue is the perception that a sub-60 rated player is below average, when the truth is that a sub-50 rated player is designed to be below average... I will probably bring that up just because it's only a number and perception is the true reality. I may also expand the draft pool to make the later rounds more compelling. What I don't want to have happen is make it really easy for everyone to have a stud roster where all your starters are in the 90's and your depth is in the 80's or something like that - it makes everyone feel good about their team, but then no one has an elite team and it's impossible to have one. That's also what I'm wanting to do with players asking for bigger contracts - if you have all your starters rated above 75 or 80, you shouldn't be able to continue to sign all of them. You see in the NFL all the time where a player wants more money than his current team is willing to give him, and so he ends up hitting FA and getting his payday often inflated above his value. I want to make you decide which of your stud players are your core that you don't want to let go, and then have to make the hard decisions about which of your stud players you are going to let walk. Right now that's my strategy as the developer to help get parity where teams are stocked with too much talent.

Yes...yes...David

This is the problem that is killing this sim. I see teams that have rosters full of 70-90 rated players. How they got them is troubling, but the big problem is what they are paying them. They have many players at 80+ all signed for 3 to 6 years at under 1 million a year. This should not happen and should not be possible. This needs to be fixed as it is the biggest problem in the game by far. It is a league destroyer and no one should complain when half the owners in a league with one or two of these teams exist. Why should other owners stay.

This should be a game about football. Not a game about taking advantage of software weakness.

I agree with what you're saying Pedro - and rest assured, I am paying close attention to it and am making incremental tweaks to it. I've already received some complaints the other way where people are beginning to have difficulty retaining a roster as you describe - which is closer to where I want it to be - it just will take some time for the existing rosters to come up for renegotiation enough to know if it's too much, not enough, or just right.

Thank you David, for all the work you do and for keeping us informed.

I went back and looked at one of the stacked teams with many 70+ players on cheap contracts. After taking a closer look I see that most of these players have very large bonuses. So the owner is paying more for them than I first thought.

Thanks again, Pedro11