It was bound to happen in the untested mess that is 4.6: https://bigdata.myfootballnow.com/box/292

The last time that this happened in the NFL that this version was "supposed to be the closest simulation of ever in the history of simulations" (to paraphrase the 4.6 cheerleaders) was 1943: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_scores_find.cgi?pts_win=0&pts_lose=0

We weren't far away the Jets and Steelers ended up 3-0 in the SNOW and the jets had -45 yards! never saw a game like this?........................................MM

It wasn't 'untested'.

MFN-1 is and always has been a League for testing the limits of the software.

Victory, Legends and the roster only Franchise Football moved to BETA and played several seasons. These were not 'test' leagues per se but they gave real life data with humans at the controls.

All four Leagues are well established and you yourself, Seth, have played in some of those leagues.


What was not tested was a brand new league. It points to a dispersal draft being too weak. This (poor dispersal draft) was also a problem in 4.5 and is a major factor in the majority of leagues folding within 3 or 4 seasons.

The 0-0 scoreline in MFN is super rare, but has happened in 4.5 (I recall seeing it in a dispersal draft season in one of the leagues I've played in) and probably in prior versions of the game too (I wasn't here then).


Statistically, it's an outlier and thus would generally be ignored. With the caveat to keep an eye on it and make sure it isn't commonplace.


On the plus side, it's another kick up the rear for JDB to put some more development into the next iteration of the game.

BETA has had no code changes/tweaks/patches/updates since 21st December last year!.

I pointed out all of the current problems with beta in November of last year and got ignored then. Because people like you and Ray were like "this is the bestest game and surely no one will quit because we can only run the ball." (I paraphrase in jest because you're not the ones that should have been determining whether or not the game was ready -- it was not -- and if a realistic test bench that simulated competitive leagues instead of default weights and playbooks was used, these would never have been issues.)

Look at my posts from 11/10 on: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/forums/6/2132?page=19

Before I played around on beta this time around, IoT was pointing out all of the problems that I was and being ignored because you and Ray were like "just ignore IoT because this is the bestest most accurate simulation of NFL football because we can only run the ball and passing is non-existent and NFL QB don't throw the ball anymore." (Again paraphrase.)

And when people like fred, or greg, or wareagle, or any of the other players point out issues with the game they get ignored because you and Ray are like "just ignore these guys because this is the bestest most funnest most accuratest simulation of NFL football today where QB leaders don't ever ever ever throw the ball more than 200 yards a game or more than 24 TDs a season and never never never never never throw the ball more than 10 yards in the air and if they do throw the ball more than 10 yards in the air WRs always always always always always always drop the ball because it's this weird round soccer ball shape that prevents you from throw it long." (Paraphrase.)

The fact that there were no changes in a year despite people pointing out problems with passing, and running, and defense is a cause for concern not that this game was ready for competitive leagues.

But we'll all continue to play (for awhile).

Just for clarity, I don't know JDB, I've never met him, I don't even live on the same continent. I have no influence on what he does or doesn't do with the game.

What I did do was ask if my leagues could use the BETA engine to help to speed up development of the game (more data from more leagues should help that scenario).

As you're aware, I record a lot of statistical info from my leagues and make that info available to all owners and JDB. Whether he looks at it, or acts on it has nothing to do with me.

Do I prefer 4.6 yes, but let's be real, I've said throughout the passing game needs a complete overhaul. My opinion is that all other aspects that he was addressing have been improved, (not to the point where it's the bestest ever b/s) therefore I was expecting to see some tweaks/patches/updates to evolve the passing game. That hasn't happened but (again, my opinion) should be an absolute priority for the next version of the game.


I applaud what you're doing with Big Data and hope you're passing on your findings (good and bad) to JDB.

I want the game to evolve and improve and sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. You're certain you have the solutions (and you may well be right) For some reason JDB is reluctant to move in that direction or even try anything else.


But hey, if it makes you feel better put all the blame on me.

Admiral, I appreciate that you deployed beta code in leagues to gather more data. I think where we get cross is how you gather the data and what you make of it.

When JDB, after ignoring reported problems for a full year, raised the possibility of deploying this garbage, you were the biggest cheerleader for 4.6, even though it was well documented that passing was broken, drops were too high, running was over-amped, and speed was nonsensical (particularly in terms of pass rushing and WR release). That makes you the easy target — especially since you continue to dismiss the obvious, crippling problems with the game. Your latest defense: Everything gets better as a league ages. I see no evidence to support such wishful thinking.

We will see more results like this. Fewer people will play. Where is JDB?

This is revisionist history at its best!!!!

Admiral went far and wide on every forum with a clear cut agenda to first convince everyone to switch to Beta and second when JDB posed the question about releasing it as 4.6....Admiral picked up the banner and campaigned for everyone to be forced to switch to 4.6.

Things were perfectly fine like they were...4.5 was the stable version while 4.6 is clearly a Beta version....it fixed some issues but created many others meaning it was a broken version with no changes in a year.

4.6 is similar to 4.4 but worse because 4.4 was released without must testing and everyone hated it....it lasted 1 season before 4.5 was released. 4.6 had a ton of testing and the data clearly showed how screwed up it was but JDB ignored all of that....ignored the majority opinion and when he found any support (Admiral/Captain Defender)....he washed his hands of it and released 4.6!!!

The funny thing is blaming allocation drafts....I've participated in at least 20 of them and regardless of the level of talent available.....it's distribution is the same so no matter the overall level of talent....it all comes down to who drafts best and who fails to draft a complete team.

I haven't had a losing season following any allocation draft and my 9-7 record in Big Data was clearly and obviously my fault! I drafted defense first which I do around 10% of the time during allocation drafts when you need to draft offense first in 4.6 because the sim skews to the defense regardless of roster.

If any lesson can be learned here....it's that the elite owners with continue to be elite because they know how to successful game plan and understand the player weights needed to get the most out of that game plan.

The same owners will keep winning with the only difference being the games are boring!

Why anyone would play a season of 4.6 and think....."yes this is good, hooray!".....is completely beyond comprehension!!!

https://www.footballperspective.com/distribution-of-passing-and-rushing-yards-by-play-in-2019/

When I left this game/sim....the "Roster" game was in it's infancy......probably still is LOL.

If JDB can seperate the dynamics of the game (roster vs roster & gameplaning).....then you would have to imagine a scope/argument could be made for the type of league you would like to be in ???

1. Beta
2. Mixed
3. Offence
4. Defense

Meh...I'm not doing a great job of explaining myself......but if I want to pass like Dan Marino back in the day...then I'd like to have that option in looking for leagues....same thing with Jim Brown....86 Defense etc.

Oh, oh, oh, I love when stat articles prove my point for me.



Big Data

Net Yards Per Attempt: 4.24
Adjusted Net Yards Per Attempt: 3.5
Rushing Yards Per Attempt: 4.03

USFL

Net Yards Per Attempt: 4.24
Adjusted Net Yards Per Attempt: 3.45
Rushing Yards Per Attempt: 4.21

The YPA is 2 yards lower in Big Data and USFL from NFL standards while the rushing yards are "in line" with NFL standards, I think they are low from teams not adjusting to exploit the broken runs in 4.6 yet. IoT is averaging 5.59 yards per rush, for instance, and my team is averaging a measly 4.91 (I obviously have a lot of work to do here).

I even reproduce the graph for passing below:



Note that I didn't bin these by percentages, so you'll have to do some math to find equivalencies. In the PFF article, NFL teams hit 15 yards per completion around the 88 percentile. The equivalent 15 yard per completion for MFN was at the 95 percentile.