production based progression

[kcarr]

I have several times on here argues against the idea of production based progression. I can not see how such a system makes any sense. I just want to know can anyone in here give me any real life example of a player's career stats showing this stat based progression that you all claim is so realistic? Just one example. I have given dozens that go against this idea but is there even one out there to support it?

[MRxAmazing]

Are you saying that players that have a good year, don't necessarily deserve a ratings increase?

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by MRxAmazing

Are you saying that players that have a good year, don't necessarily deserve a ratings increase?

Yes, are you saying that they necessarily do?

[MRxAmazing]

Yes. Goodnight.

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by MRxAmazing

Yes. Goodnight.

Simple and to the point, but noone can give me any real life example of why this should be the case.

[Glorious Arc]

Quote: Originally Posted by kcarr

I have several times on here argues against the idea of production based progression. I can not see how such a system makes any sense. I just want to know can anyone in here give me any real life example of a player's career stats showing this stat based progression that you all claim is so realistic? Just one example. I have given dozens that go against this idea but is there even one out there to support it?

lol wow MrxAmazing good stuff.

The thought process behind it all kcarr is if a player has good stats he should be able to produce and if he doesnt then his stats should drop. If he keeps producing then his stats stay the same.

I dont want to bother looking for a real life example when the theory is of sound principle. There are more complex things that are involed like coaches, mentors, ect ect and they should be involed but if a guy can put up numbers constantly why shouldnt he have the stats to back it?

[Hellisan]

Progression based on stats is patently absurd. Assuming people are competing against each other... All they have to do is force-feed their players the football to make them better?

Players should improve independently of their stats based on a combination of their overall ability, potential, response to coaching, PLAYING TIME (the only thing we should have a say in) etc.

I'll never play in a franchise (or even dynasty) where you can get your players better by racking up stats with them. Awful way to go about it.

And thinking that you have to put in your backups every game just to get them some stats so they won't all fall off a ratings cliff is equally stupid.

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by Glorious Arc

lol wow MrxAmazing good stuff. The thought process behind it all kcarr is if a player has good stats he should be able to produce and if he doesnt then his stats should drop. If he keeps producing then his stats stay the same. I dont want to bother looking for a real life example when the theory is of sound principle. There are more complex things that are involed like coaches, mentors, ect ect and they should be involed but if a guy can put up numbers constantly why shouldnt he have the stats to back it?

I understand the theory. If a player plays really well he improves. If he plays decent he maintains. If he plays poorly his ratings fall.

The problem is this is not a sound principle. It in no way follows what happens in real life.

If the player is constantly putting up those numbers he already has the ratings to put up those numbers. How can he not. His ratings were the ratings used while putting up those numbers. Therefore his ratings already back those numbers.