How does player regression work?
 

So question here. How does the game determine whether a player regresses? Is it just a random dice roll during training camp that is weighted to be more likely based on their age and injury history? Does it take last year's performance/playing time into account?

Just odd to see a guy turn 30 who just had a double digit sack season and within two years he's gone from mid 60s to high 40s, to high 30s (this last one after a 9 sack season as a high 40s player) and being completely out of the league.

I feel like I've seen guys in their late 20s regress significantly as well even if they performed well the season before and my relevant coach has somewhere between 80-100 player development (not sure if the latter matters).

Just trying to understand the mechanics of how the system works so I can make more informed decisions when signing or trading for a player.

I think it is but position has a big influence too. There is an aging curve for every position. Quarterbacks obviously will regress way later than running backs for example. this aging curve is in accordance with real life data.

Young players are not exempt from regression either. One of my players, a defensive end, pulled a Jevon Kearse and dropped from 75 to 50 after his rookie year.

Isn't that connected with the player's volatility rating? I believe higher volatility indicates a greater chance for the player to develop above expectations, but also a higher likelihood of sudden regression. Personally I avoid drafting and trading for players with high volatility. Especially for players with already high ratings I would like them to have low volatility.

That would certainly make sense.

I'm just trying to get a feel for everything that goes into the calculus. For example, "if a player started more than half the games last season and had good stats then the chance of a negative dice roll is significantly reduced" and anything else of that sort. That way it's easier to make more informed decisions and/or gambles on players.

It's also still not really clear to me where the aging curve really begins to impact people. I know another commenter said it depends on the position, which totally makes sense, but even within those positions it seems to be all over the place.

Just frustrating to not really understand why someone regressed and what the factors are that go into the calculation. I guess maybe I could dive into the code and try and find something, but I'm assuming if it was that easy someone would've figured it out by now.

There's definitely an aging curve for players depending on their position. For example, you would expect running backs to start declining in their mid-20s, while quarterbacks can remain strong until their mid-30s or even later. I believe this holds true for players with low volatility, as they tend to age better and regress slower when they reach their peak. However, it's difficult to predict exactly when they will start regressing.

A general rule of thumb is to avoid giving long contracts or trading for aging players, especially those who have already peaked and have several years remaining on their contract, particularly if they have high volatility. It's probably safer to give long contracts to young, highly developed and low-volatile players, as they are less likely to regress anytime soon.

I would suggest running a test save. Take note of players on different positions and with different volatility ratings. Simulate one season at a time and observe how they progress or regress over time. It will give you a vague idea of how the aging curves work, but there's definitely a lot of unpredictability involved, just like in OOTP.

I personally aim to trade players who show significant regression in the offseason, regardless of their age. While there's a chance they may bounce back next season, it's less likely they will return to their previous standards. If I can get anything of value for them then I would certainly make that decision.

That's what I have found too. Hate that period after the draft and after late free agency before EXH Wk2 when the ratings can dive.

Yup: that period has demotivated me to the point of not wanting to play far more many times than I care to admit!

The best one I've had so far is a 1st year CB drafted in the first round go from like 40 CUR high 50s FUT to like 20 CUR high 20s FU after a whole season of starting and playing well with zero injuries. Just makes zero sense.

All sorts of things cause players to change.

When a player goes -10/-20 to curr and future, that's usually a Volatility dice roll, unless they're old for their position and it's likely just age.

Young players who are developing move all over the place, but a lot of the -x coming off future is what we call unmasking. A lot of players have future bars above where they will actually land. Your coaches Scouting helps to see the true bars. Low Scouting will show you fake bars all the time.

Honestly I love the mechanic. Makes pre-season interesting. Makes finding guys with low volatility compared to high much safer, makes high volatility guys more risk reward and seems realistic to me. Lots of NFL players seem to just drop off out of nowhere IRL. Russell Wilson went from being an MVP candidate to probably not even worthy of a starting job. Lots of times high draft picks don't pan out and low draft picks surprise. Riq Woolen had a DROTY calibre season and then didn't look nearly the same this year.

Agreed it’s realistic, just very disheartening when your plans go awry!

Yeah my scouting is 90, so hence why I asked the original question because it seemed pretty crazy to me that it's basically just a random dice roll