[CharioTitan]

This is something that I think a few of us have noticed in Madden franchise mode. Over the long term, the CPU teams get very mediocre. All of the good players are all old and all the younger players are rated in the mid 80s. There are no new superstars. There are no new Peyton Mannings, no new TOs or even Jevon Kearse's. All of the teams are rated in the mid 80s with a few teams having a really good defense or good offense. BUt with the exception of the User controlled team, the Superstars get old, retire and there are no new ones to replace them. Even guys like Reggie Bush or Mario Williams who are great players when imported from NCAA never really become superstar players.

There are numerous factors for why this happens.

#1: THe CPU doesn't really start guys who should be starting. For instance, in my franchise mode, the CPU drafted Reggie Bush #1 overall then proceeded to have him back up some 30 year old running back who was rated like one point higher than him. ANd he stayed that way for like 3 years. A #1 overall pick, especially a RB who is rated 86 as a rookie is probably going to start. What is so bad about this is that the starting RB wasn't even putting up good numbers. It would make more sense if the starter was very productive, that you wouldn't start the rookie over him, but the CPU just does this competition for the starting spot and I guess randomly selects a guy who wins the competition and he's the starter. THis is going to be a difficult issue to address because the CPU can't think like a person. THe programmers would have to make some sort of formula factoring in things like age, overall rating, productivity and how high a player is drafted to determine who starts. Players should be given labels that determine where they factor into the team. The Importance attribute apparently isn't enough.

I suggest labeling players and teams. We don't have to see what they're labeled, it would be only for the CPU to use in order to help them determine what they're doing. Here's an example of the labels: High potential, moderate potential, role player, productive, superstar, declining veteran.Here are the team labels: Playoff contender, Moderately competitive, rebuilding. Here's an example. Say the CPU is the Tennessee Titans who drafted Vince Young. He would be high potential. Then you have Steve McNair who presents sort of a dilemma for my proposition because he could be considered a superstar or a (being an Icon) or a declining veteran. The Tennessee Titans would be a team considered to be Rebuilding. Therefore, you would start the young high potential player and cut McNair have him backup Vince Young. This is clearly a little complex as indicated by my example, but I think it could work with a good amount of labels for players and teams.

#2 This point touches on my last point. High potential players would have to be high potential for at least 2-3 years. So a highly QB like Phillip Rivers being on the roster would prevent the team from drafting a highly rated QB in the next few drafts. Also, it would push the team to cut or bench the starter if he is starting to decline or if he is using up to match cap room. This way, you would have good veteran free agent players like McNair and Drew Brees. If this concept were implemented on the game, the New Orleans Saints would probably cut or trade (this would require CPU/CPU trading) Deuce McAlister because he's a superstar who is getting paid like $50 mil and then they are adding a high potential player who is getting paid $50 mil in Reggie Bush. Of course at some positions, you could have a superstar and a high potential player. Like you could have one veteran Superstar like Randy Moss and a high or moderate potential guy in Jerry Porter. Speaking of Jerry Porter, another good label would be Rising Potential. That could apply to a guy who wasn't drafted real high, but plays better every season and is still young. I think this feature is very important because if you look at franchise mode in 10 years, most teams have like 10-12 guys who are over 30. If you look at NFL rosters now, most teams have like 4-5 guys who are over 30. So in Franchise mode, the best players are the guys who were good when the game started.

#3 This point follows up on my last point. The only good players in 10 years are the old guys. Obviously, the problem is that the game doesn't make new superstars. Even the guys who are really good as rookies never become superstars. ANd most average players stay average. This issue needs to be addressed with more rapid player progression. While I don't want to see every top 10 draft pick go up to a 95 in two seasons, a few players need to go on to become superstars. Look at Jeremy Shockey. In his rookie season, I believe he was rated like 80, after a great rookie performance, he was rated over 90 on the next Madden game. But if I were to draft a rookie WR who was rated 80, then took him to the Pro Bowl, he would probably only go up like 5 points all season. Player stats need to have more impact on their progression. If a player goes to two straight Pro Bowls, he should be rated over 90. He should also be on his way to becoming an Icon. RIght now, I am completely baffled by the way the CPU handles the Icon thing. I have at least 3 players on my team who have been to 3 or more ProBowls but are not Icons. Meanwhile, a guy who put up like 50 tackles and 2 sacks a year and no Pro Bowl appearances became an Icon. That makes no sense at all.

So take a few guys each year and make them Superstars so there are some stars in the future. Also, some players never really progress. There are a lot of guys who started out as role players and 5 years later are still role players. Just because a guy is young doesn't mean he is going to improve. He may even regress. The game would need to balance out more progression with more players who regress of just don't improve at all. OTherwise, the game would probably wind up with too many superstars.

#4 I'm finally going to finish off this long thread with one last thing. Cap room and salaries. Each year, salary caps go up too much. There is always a team that is forced to cut key players because of salary cap space. BUt on the game, it's never really a problem. Especially because of another reason, player salaries. Players just don't get paid enough in future franchise years. For instance look at the salaries of the top 5 Cornerbacks in the NFL right now. They range from like $60 mil to $40 mil. 10 years into franchise mode , the top 5 CB salaries top out at like $30 mil. SHouldn't salaries be increasing and not decreasing? In fact, they should be increasing a lot more because of the large increases in cap space. The game needs teams who are willing to shell out huge salaries and signing bonuses for coveted free agents. And longer contracts, too. No one who isn't the #1 pick has over a 4 year contract. That's BS. There are always guys who get long contracts just because the team wants them so bad. Look at Peyton Mannings 8 or 9 year contract. He's already 29 years old and they signed him for that many more years. Same for Marvin Harrison, he's 33 and got signed to a 6 year contract. So when you have more free agents generated by this new player/labeling system, you should have more teams throwing out tons of cash to take them from Rebuilding to Playoff Contender. Also, contracts should be loaded like they are in NFL 2k5 and more importantly, real life. Players should have front loaded, back loaded or balanced contracts. And while we're on the subject, can I increase player salaries a little faster? I swear if you want to increase a player's salary during the resign period, you have to hold the up button for like 10 minutes.

So for the few guys out there who love franchise mode like me, these are my suggestions for improving CPU competitiveness. What do you think?