GroupThink for FOF4?

[QuikSand]

I wonder if the timing might be good to try to get another FOFC project off the ground - perhasp to try another "GroupThink" franchise here among FOFCers.

By way of background, the "GroupThink" concept has originas back in FOF 2001, when several forum members worked together on one career. Rather than taking turns (a la the so-called Village Challenge), we worked together, sharing the game file at various points, and made our decisions via this forum. There were about 6 or 8 people who assumed formal roles with the organization (Off/Def Coordinator, Scouts, GM, etc) and there were several more who just piped in thoughts along the way. It was, for me, a pretty entertaining experience.

I found it interesting that with several people involved, and enough time between steps - we started really looking closely at verious things in the game - really studying the players we were thinking about signing or drafting, really thinking seriously about contract extensions, etc. We also ended up with a few interesting personalities from our first team (QB Julio Riddols, WR Riddick Fonseca) - and got to celebrate together when we finally won the championship with our Wyoming Wildfire.

It might also be a good way to get a more detailed look at some of the subtle things in FOF4 than we are inclined to on our own (we'd have a base of players to discuss - look at the QB proficiencies, look at various types of players with different skills, look at personality conflicts, agent representation, etc. Who knows?

I'd be willing to play a role in doing something like this again. The way to set it up is pretty wide open - we could again do some sort of role-playing (each person has a particular job), or we could just make it a team that is run by a committee of the whole, with various people taking turns reading and implementing the will of the people. I don't have very strong feelings.

Regardless... just curious... does this sound interesting to anyone here?

[Fritz]

Sign me up sir!
-------
~ The first group think was run at a fast pace during the day. A similar scenario would limit what roles I could play in a future incarnation.

[wade moore]

I wanted to bring this up, however I killed the last group think .. I got this new job and my time completely dropped off to be available for it and left the ball hanging..

on that note, I think it was a GREAT thing and would love to see it happen again. I'd love to help, but I do not know that I can handle the time necessary to be the filekeeper for it...

[Anrhydeddu]

Any chance that we could add the flavor of using the historical roster/drafts? Even though most of the players will be unknown (as well as the X factor of the known players), it might add an interesting dynamic to the group synergy.

[strait8]

I'd be interested in this! Please call on me. I do travel a lot with my job but do have a mobile wireless e-mail so I could keep up.

[Bee]

I think it's a good idea to bring it back.

[Easy Mac]

I'd be willing to do some analysis, though I don't think I'll have time to partake in any swapping of files and such, if that occurs.

[primelord]

I'd be interested in getting involved again too. It's a shame the last one we tried died out. Would it be a similar setup where only the file keeper had access to the red and green bar data and everything was done off of stats?

[Fritz]

Originally posted by primelord
I'd be interested in getting involved again too. It's a shame the last one we tried died out. Would it be a similar setup where only the file keeper had access to the red and green bar data and everything was done off of stats?

This is one of those places where a snarfing utility would be handy

[primelord]

Originally posted by Fritz
This is one of those places where a snarfing utility would be handy

Whats a snarfing utility?

[Bee]

Originally posted by primelord
Whats a snarfing utility?

It's a utility that snarfs.

[McSweeny]

this sounds like fun, i'd be interested. i wouldn't have to won FOF4 would it?

[Fritz]

http://www.pcwebopaedia.com/TERM/S/snarf.html

Initially, in the realm of programming languages, snarf meant to grab a large document or file and use it without the author's permission. Since the development of UNIX, the UNIX community -- since there is not the same sense of proprietary ownership as there is in the commercial computer industry because it is based on an open source idea -- uses the term to mean the acquisition of a file or set of files across a network. It is a command line resource grabber, transferring files through the HTTP, gopher, finger and FTP protocols without user interaction.

----

There are other usages.

In this case I mean to automate the retrieval of selected data. We can snarf the stats and not use the game itself.

I might need to get out of my cube more

[cthomer5000]

I'm definitely interested. not interested in historical files though.

[Doug5984]

I would be interested in being part of something like this.

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by primelord
Would it be a similar setup where only the file keeper had access to the red and green bar data and everything was done off of stats?

I'm open to this, but there are trade-offs. If we want to try to play blindly (like the GT2 idea) things go much more slowly, and we really don't end up with the FOF experience, per se. That's not necessarily a bad thing, it's just a different thing. (It's also extremely labor-intensive on the file keeper - everything falls apart of that person cannot keep up)

My vision would be more like the first time. We just work together, and basically play the game. I think the relative dearth of FOF4 dynasties out there make this fairly palatable... I think there is more to be learned about the game itself, even without the clever twists of playing blind or whatever.

[Bee]

What "roles" would need to be filled?

GM - I'd assume Quiksand

Headcoach - someone who will do the playcalling? Input into players.

Off Coord - sets up the offensive gameplan? Input into off players.
Def Coord - sets up the defensive gameplan? Input into def players.

Scouts - Using TCY Imports? Could have college and pro scouts for the draft and free agency.

Filekeeper?

And of course a team astrologer...

What other roles would need to be filled?

[primelord]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My vision would be more like the first time. We just work together, and basically play the game. I think the relative dearth of FOF4 dynasties out there make this fairly palatable... I think there is more to be learned about the game itself, even without the clever twists of playing blind or whatever.

That sounds fine to me.

[primelord]

I kind of like Quik's idea of just making all the choices as a group. In GT2 the coordinators and the GM ended up being the ones who did the bulk of the playing. Which was fine for those 3 people (myself included) but it kind of seemed a lot of people got left out for a good portion of each season.

Or maybe as a compromise instead of making one person the DC a group of people handle the defense and group handle the offense etc.

[QuikSand]

Last time we did this (the Wyoming team) we had, by my recollection:

Owner
General Manager
Off Coord
Def Coord
Rookie Scouting
FA Scouting
Financial/Cap Manager
Promotions

... and a few others whose roles I cannot recall off the top of my head. We rotated the management of "the" file so each person had it for a while... GM would manage coach.scout signing, then Rookie scouting would enter in the draft stuff based on collective input, and then the OC/DC would actualy sim the games, and so on.

I don't feel too strongly about any particular role... I really liked chipping in on the rookie draft (those were some of the most fun debates) and in assessing players for new contracts. But I'd be happy to play any role - if we decide that formal positions are needed. (I'm not wedded to steering the ship)

[IMetTrentGreen]

we could have reional scouts and everything

[Grid Iron]

I'm in.

Let me know what to do.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
Any chance that we could add the flavor of using the historical roster/drafts? Even though most of the players will be unknown (as well as the X factor of the known players), it might add an interesting dynamic to the group synergy.

I'm a huge fan of the historic rosters, but I would be a little concerned about the edited files causing game balance issues. I wouldn't be completely opposed to it, but I'd lean towards not using them.

[Fritz]

[Bee]

Originally posted by primelord
I kind of like Quik's idea of just making all the choices as a group. In GT2 the coordinators and the GM ended up being the ones who did the bulk of the playing. Which was fine for those 3 people (myself included) but it kind of seemed a lot of people got left out for a good portion of each season.

Or maybe as a compromise instead of making one person the DC a group of people handle the defense and group handle the offense etc.

My concern with group decisions would be it could get a little convoluted (sp?). I'm thinking about the Role playing thing that WSUCougar did with Sol the thief. The idea was solid, but the execution just wasn't organized.

[Fritz]

Bee - the final decision was in one person's hand, but a decision was often preceded by lively conversation.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Fritz
Bee - the final decision was in one person's hand, but a decision was often preceded by lively conversation.

That's why I'd lean towards some type of organization. GM/Headcoach/Coordinators/etc. Everyone would have input, but final decisions would be made by whoever was in charge of that portion. I just think "group decisions" generally don't work well.

[cthomer5000]

in GT2 it eventually boiled down to everyone chiming in. I think It was very orderly and people brought different perspectives. I'd like to do everything as a group.

[Bee]

I think everyone should have input and decisions should be discussed, but I think you need to have someone with final say over each area.

[Daimyo]

I don't want a major role or anything official, (I don't even own the game), but if you post screen shots like we did before, I'd try to participate in a very minor role when I could.

[jamesUMD]

Could I be Special Teams coach???????

[Bee]

Originally posted by jamesUMD
Could I be Special Teams coach???????

Sure. Just make sure the kickers keep their mouth shut and don't do interviews.

[Doug5984]

What about having Off. Coordinators be the guys who had the final say on the offense and then coaches like:
QB Coach
RB Coach
TE Coach
WR Coach
OL Coach
(and the same for D)

These people would rank the players in their positions, move them from L to R, SE to FL and so on...and would tell the Off. Coordinator who they think should start and they % of time they should have. If we wanted we could also have it that the QB coach was in charge of scouting the NFL QBs, and would help in scouting the Rookie QBs? something like this would seem to be much more fun to me and could get more people involved (if not enough people wanted to, we could doulbe on our jobs me be WR & QB Coach...) just an idea...

[QuikSand]

Originally posted by Doug5984
What about having Off. Coordinators be the guys who had the final say on the offense and then coaches like:
QB Coach
RB Coach
TE Coach
WR Coach
OL Coach
(and the same for D)

These people would rank the players in their positions, move them from L to R, SE to FL and so on...and would tell the Off. Coordinator who they think should start and they % of time they should have. If we wanted we could also have it that the QB coach was in charge of scouting the NFL QBs, and would help in scouting the Rookie QBs? something like this would seem to be much more fun to me and could get more people involved (if not enough people wanted to, we could doulbe on our jobs me be WR & QB Coach...) just an idea...

If we have a sufficient number of people interested (seems possible) then this sounds like a nice idea to me - definitely the first part, and perhaps even the second part.

[Bee]

As long as people don't feel like they can't comment about players outside their position, I like the idea. It would allow us to concentrate on specific positions, but still be part of the discussion about other positions.

[Fritz]

A possible problem with "position" coaches is that they really don't do that much, but they can be a source of a slowdown.

I think there might be better ways to include people.

[DolaBump]

I think the position coahes is actually a good idea, with Off, Def coords, a Head Coach and a GM (with scouts, cap analyst etc if there are enough interested). Decisoins would be made collectively, but the Head Coach and Coordinators would ahve final say and could step in if any position coach disappeared. there could also be something of a voting system, with possibly the GM, Head Coach and Coords getting more say. I don't think most of us would have a problem contributing input and allowing a few people to have the final say (as long as its more than one person).

[wade moore]

I agree with DB, because keep in mind -- you may be the OL coach.. but you see the offense run, you know where holes are, so you might have something to say about how the running game should be designed.. what passing style should be used, etc.. just as I'm sure it is in the NFL, you are not tied solely to your position..

[QuikSand]

Okay, here's a proposal. I think there is enough interest to make this thing work. I'll suggest we follow a plan like this:

-Someone will start a one-player-universe career back in 1970 or 1980, and sim forward tothe current time - so we can take over in a mature league, with the 2002 expansion team.

-We'll assemble a staff of people similar to the original GT staff... key positions will be assigned, and the key leaders will be responsible for assembling their subsidiary staff (the DC may appoint a DL coach, a LB coach, etc).

-I'm willing to take a role in helping to assemble the original staff... and am open to taking one of the leadership positions if that makes sense.

I think my goal will be to select a few people to help out as the core front office, and then have that group in turn decide on the rest of the staff positions.

So, at this point, I think the next thing to do is start soliciting interest for the various positions to be filled. I'll ask in this thread... should this be an "open" process (like a thread full of inquiries)? Or a closed one - by email or PM? I can work either way.

[wade moore]

I think just make it open?

I would love to either take a position or do rookie scouting.. Due to my time, I don't want to commit to a coordinator position -- plus I believe there are those who know the game better than I.. On that note, My order of preference for the positions would be:

RB
WR
CB
LB

[Alf]

Like last time, and like wade moore this time, I'd like to do some TCY scouting (if the thing goes with TCY draft files).

positions:
QB
TE
P/K

[cthomer5000]

Things I wouldn't mind doing:

TCY scouting
Cap Manager
Pro Scout (scouting potential FA's, our own team, etc...)

[Bee]

Originally posted by QuikSand

-Someone will start a one-player-universe career back in 1970 or 1980, and sim forward tothe current time - so we can take over in a mature league, with the 2002 expansion team.

I'm not sure if I follow about the expansion team. If we start a career in 1970, the actual 2002 expansion team will start in 1970 or are you suggesting something else?

BTW, I like the idea of a mature league. You may want to start in 1986 or so with a salary cap of $5 million +/-. That might put is in 2002 with a salary cap in the ballpark of what we have in the NFL (I haven't tested it out yet, but was planning to when I had time). It should also give us sufficient history (with 15 or 16 years played). I just think it might be a good idea to keep the salary cap in a reasonable ballpark, so that everyone who is playing can adjust easily to understanding the contracts (if that makes sense). That way we aren't dropped into a world where the backup TE is wanting $10 million a year in 2004.

Edit: Just realized you can't have less than 20 mil in salary cap.

2nd Edit: If we start in 1986 with 20 mil salcap, we would be around 100 mil in 2002 (I think). As long as we are the Redskins that should be realistic.

[primelord]

Since it is what I wanted to do last time I would like to handle the defensive coordinator duties, but really I am open to just about anything.

[Bee]

I really don't care what my job duty would be as long as I don't have to keep track of the data files.

[WebEwbank]

I like the thought. I was a part of the Village Challenge II and loved it.

If I can't get the Cheerleader Coordinator spot, I'll take what's left, possibly something in scouting, either college or free agents.

[QuikSand]

I think there's a divergence here, of sorts.

If we play with TCY files, then we probably don't want to do a truly "fictional" universe - since (I am told) tha TCY draft files create better players than the game itself does - all the young players would be out of balance.

However, using TCY files does add a good deal more background to the scouting process - which I think could add depth to this exercise.

My inclination is to go with TCY draft files, and that probably means dumping the "mature OPU" idea. We'd either play with the NFL players, or else with the original unaltered list of players - I'm pretty indifferent. Do you all concur?

Or are there other consistent options that I'm leaving out?

[DolaBump]

If we have additional positions in the front office beyond GM, I wouldn't mind oneof those positions. Beyond that, I'd like be one of the defensive coaches, preferably working with the secondary.

Also, will we be using TCY to generate our draft classes? Seems like it will add depth, but I've ehard there are a LOT of good players when TCY is used.

[Easy Mac]

I'd do some rookie scouting.

If you do an OPU and mature it, there will always be 32 teams, so it would be hard to take an expansion team.

[wade moore]

Too bad we can't go into the past with TCY..

Jim? you out there? ...

We could start with a mature league to 2002, then sim up to 2017 or so with TCY files and start fromt here? I know that's really mature and salaries will be all whacky.. but idano... or hell.. why can't we start an OPU in 2002, use TCY files, and go ahead 15 or 20 years?