http://mfn26.myfootballnow.com/

Tough to really compare this draft with a regular 7-round draft, but this gives a taste of the newer draft distribution. The first 7-round draft to have the latest player gen logic will be CUST-10 which is only in pre-season week 4.

http://mfn27.myfootballnow.com/ has teams populated with the same distribution. A side effect of expanding the top tier quality is that there is a greater ratio of bottom tier quality as well, with the middle-of-the-pack players reducing a bit - so I'm interested to see if this is a good thing or a bad thing long term.

Can't wait to test this out.

MFN27 really is going to be a league of 'Haves-and-Have-Nots'.

I'm going to take the plunge I think in MFN26, see what its like.

Some initial thoughts after looking over it using the default settings:

It feels like there's too many top tier QBs. 7 are rated in the nineties, a further 10 in the 80s. No team will (reasonably) be starting anyone under 70 rating, as there's another 22 that fall into this category, leaving a grand total of 39 rated 70 or over. Maybe this is as intended? However, I can't think of any back-up QBs in the NFL who I'd rate in the 70s on here, and there's even quite a few starters in the league who I'd struggle to see cracking the 60s.

This may be a fluke, but guards seemed to outclass the tackles (there were zero 85+ rated LTs). Since prototypical body size isn't taken into account, positions are totally fluid from guard to tackle, so I expect almost all of those top tier guards are destined to becoming LTs. So ultimately this is mostly an aesthetic concern, but it'd make more sense for the initial gen to favor creating top tier tackles rather than guards (which would also help the CPU since I don't believe they swap player positions around?).

Can Kickers and Punters be toned down to the normal distribution levels of every other position, and just tinker with the code to make the gap between a 99 and 70 rated k/p less significant? Because it's kind of pointless when 3/4ths of the league will be starting a 90+ rated player at that position, and there's literally none gen'd under 80.

Only 12 CBs were gen'd over 70, with zero above 87. While NFL WRs do tend to be better than the DBs covering them, the paucity isn't that significant (although this may of course be a statistical fluke). Top tier safeties, on the other hand, were significantly more numerous at both SS and FS, which is totally counter to the NFL, because if you're a capable DB you're almost always slotted over to CB in college, so it's much rarer to see high-skilled safeties than it is CBs.

I think much of the statistical anomalies are just with the small sample size, even with an allocation draft there's not enough players generated to really get a good indicator on anything - but your points are all valid. The kickers and punters I'm going to look even more at. Initially they did get the same skill distribution as the other players, but teams started playing linemen as kickers because they had just as good of skills as some of the kickers - but I do think you're right in that they are in general too high and too easy to get. I'll continue to play with those positions.

Highly rated QBs and low rated CBs, can only mean one thing ... basket ball scores. Ha ha the steroid league

you ever heard of the seahawks? lmao

Have you heard of the other 31 teams in the league?

Of course i have, they are the teams that get their arses kicked by the seahawks bahahahahaha

Not been a 'hawks fan for that long then ;)

Yep, he's a new bandwagon hopper, everybody loves a winner, at least for one season!! ha!

Change your team every year, then claim you're undefeated in Super Bowls!!! I think people would buy that, eh?? Er wait, they lost? Pete should be fired for that call!!!!!

Are you sure you're not a Patsy fan now??