CAGLS: Madden 13 Gentlemen's League - We Finished! Thanks for Playing!

Yep, I am definitely a big Panthers fan! I have been watching them since we moved here when I was young in 2000 (actually from Nashville, lol). I like Newton to an extent, but my favorite era of the team was definitely the 03' Super Bowl run.

The only problem is that the Panthers have never been a good style fit for me. I will just have to see the rating and decide between a more Madden friendly team or my favorite team.
See, that's almost what's kind of sad though. Having to think about not wanting to use your favorite team because they might not be "Madden good". Almost seems like selling out a little bit, haha. If we were all just concerned with winning at Madden, we'd all be fighting over the 49ers.

One thing that might be a good idea with a trade cap is the idea of franchise players. When an owner takes over a team, they have to designate one of their five highest-rated players as a franchise player. That player can only be dealt for another franchise guy, or two first-round picks (the equivalent of one franchise guy, since you can't predict where a pick will end up, etc). That might help curb some of the craziness.
The system we had in Madden 12 was very similar to this. It didn't require that owners designate someone as a franchise player, but there was a limit on how many "core players" could be traded...with players 90+ counting more than players with lower ratings. This is what we used before.

Trades will be limited according to the following trade cap:
5 trades per season, 3 core players traded away max
90+ Player = 2 core players
80-89 Player = 1 core player
1st round pick = 1 core player

This basically meant that if someone wanted to trade a superstar, it would limit them to one other mid-level trade and 3 low-level trades for the rest of the season. Or, they could make 3 mid-level trades and 2 low-level trades. I think it provided decent flexibility without letting people go bonkers. Obviously, we would still have the restriction on "re-trades" as well.

Born and raised in Chicago, I'm 100% a Bears fan and would love to play with them. I don't know the system for picking teams is on here and I know there are other Bears fans in the leage... so I guess my 2nd choice would be the Texans since now I live in Houston.
Hmm...I'm not thinking of too many Bears fans. I know we had one last year...well, I think he was more of a Jay Culter fan than a Bears fan. But he's long gone, lol. Let me ask you this, do you think you'd enjoy the league and/or care more if you were using your favorite team?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The system we had in Madden 12 was very similar to this. It didn't require that owners designate someone as a franchise player, but there was a limit on how many "core players" could be traded...with players 90+ counting more than players with lower ratings. This is what we used before.

Trades will be limited according to the following trade cap:
5 trades per season, 3 core players traded away max
90+ Player = 2 core players
80-89 Player = 1 core player
1st round pick = 1 core player

This basically meant that if someone wanted to trade a superstar, it would limit them to one other mid-level trade and 3 low-level trades for the rest of the season. Or, they could make 3 mid-level trades and 2 low-level trades. I think it provided decent flexibility without letting people go bonkers. Obviously, we would still have the restriction on "re-trades" as well.
Well my thinking was that it would force people to actually put some thought in their team, by making them figure out who their franchise player was. It might keep guys like Arian Foster and Cam Newton from being on three teams in three seasons or something like that.

Also, I think there should be no in-season cuts. If you can't make a trade during the season work without cutting a player, you can't make it. That would probably save some headaches for the trade committee.

 
Well my thinking was that it would force people to actually put some thought in their team, by making them figure out who their franchise player was. It might keep guys like Arian Foster and Cam Newton from being on three teams in three seasons or something like that.

Also, I think there should be no in-season cuts. If you can't make a trade during the season work without cutting a player, you can't make it. That would probably save some headaches for the trade committee.
Well, I just want to make sure we don't push things too far. The goal of the restrictions is to make things more realistic because things were happening that wouldn't happen in real life. If I designate someone as my franchise player (and I'm assuming you intend this designation to last for the duration of the league), it kind of turns that player into the proverbial albatross...where it might be difficult to even move him if I NEEDED to. Not even just wanting to, but unloading a big contract to allow me to fill two smaller needs or something like that. I mean, you mention only being able to trade franchise players for other franchise players or two first round picks. Both of those scenarios would be allowed under the old trade cap

A) Franchise Player - 90+ OVR (2 core players) FOR Franchise Player - 90 OVR+ (2 core players)

B) Franchise Player - 90+ OVR (2 core players) FOR 2014 1st Rd Pick (1 core player) and 2015 1st Rd Pick (1 core player)

But it would additionally allow a trade like this

C) Franchise Player - 90+ OVR (2 core players) FOR 2014 1st Rd Pick (1 core player) and Mid-Level Player - 80-89 OVR (1 core player)

Just re-examining everything again on the surface, I don't see anything hugely wrong with something like this. Not to mention, it would still need approval from the trade committee and the players still wouldn't be eligible to be "re-traded" for the set amount of time (which we could even look at increasing if we wanted).

Maybe I'm just not thinking about it the same way you are, but what other advantages are you thinking of in designating a specific player as a "franchise player"?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
See, that's almost what's kind of sad though. Having to think about not wanting to use your favorite team because they might not be "Madden good". Almost seems like selling out a little bit, haha. If we were all just concerned with winning at Madden, we'd all be fighting over the 49ers.

The system we had in Madden 12 was very similar to this. It didn't require that owners designate someone as a franchise player, but there was a limit on how many "core players" could be traded...with players 90+ counting more than players with lower ratings. This is what we used before.

Trades will be limited according to the following trade cap:
5 trades per season, 3 core players traded away max
90+ Player = 2 core players
80-89 Player = 1 core player
1st round pick = 1 core player

This basically meant that if someone wanted to trade a superstar, it would limit them to one other mid-level trade and 3 low-level trades for the rest of the season. Or, they could make 3 mid-level trades and 2 low-level trades. I think it provided decent flexibility without letting people go bonkers. Obviously, we would still have the restriction on "re-trades" as well.

Hmm...I'm not thinking of too many Bears fans. I know we had one last year...well, I think he was more of a Jay Culter fan than a Bears fan. But he's long gone, lol. Let me ask you this, do you think you'd enjoy the league and/or care more if you were using your favorite team?
Oh yea, most definitely haha. I think any sports game is way more fun when you're actually a fan of who you're using. i used the Bears in other leagues I was in last year and always use them in my offline franchise mode. I chose the Jets last year simply bc there weren't many teams left when I joined up.

 
Haha, I'll gladly give up the Bears. I was so sick of that team by the end of last year.

I do think the trading guidelines need worked on this year, though. I'm not sure what all the answers are, but a cap is definitely a good place to start. If DVO ends up not playing in the league, the trade committee will have a tenth of the work we had last year, lol.
Sweet! it's going to be so weird not having Urlacher on defense this year. also, LOL at the DVO comment.

 
I think locking a team into one franchise player for the entirety of the league doesn't make sense. I'd say you can chance it each offseason you like. Gives you the flexibility to change it to a hotshot rookie you found, or a new FA signing. If it doesn't work for you that's fine, I was just spit-balling an idea.

I do think that players should be prohibited from being re-traded in same season they are acquired, ie if you get a guy week 1, he's yours until the offseason. You get a guy in the offseason, he's yours until the regular season, etc.

 
I do think that players should be prohibited from being re-traded in same season they are acquired, ie if you get a guy week 1, he's yours until the offseason. You get a guy in the offseason, he's yours until the regular season, etc.
That would definitely be a big change. Just a couple things to think about, we had the timeframe at 6 weeks and the trading deadline ended up being before Week 8 due ot the way the game handled trades. So, that pretty much meant anybody traded in the regular season was stuck on their team all season. So, it's really just a question of if we want players acquired during the pre-season to be eligible to be traded again that season. Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but I'm hoping the trade cap and the 6 week limit would be enough to encourage restraint among owners. It would seem silly to waste one of your limited trades acquiring a guy just to turn around and unload him. With some limits in place, maybe it won't be so bad?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
hey i might be the only eagles fan in here... especially after that "performance" last season. i'm looking forward to playing them again this year if possible, especially with the new system, cause i love me some mccoy

 
Just as a running tally, for my own curiosity at this point (obviously, this doesn't mean anything yet), this is what I've got if we wanted to keep things fan oriented.

n8rockerasu - Titans

Dark Rider - Panthers

jza1218 - Giants

dr0ppinl0adz - Bears

scrub0bk - Eagles

Matt Young - Packers (I know we had other Packers fans last season...but neither of them lasted very long)

pitfallharry219 - doesn't have a favorite team, but follows Colts and Bengals

I've also talked to DarkTower80, who is a longtime Colts fan. So, if we did decide to go this route, we'd have to clear up that situation with pitfallharry (though him taking the Bengals would be the easiest solution). I also had another "crazy" idea of leaving teams empty unless there specifically was a fan to take them on. This may seem limiting...but between the flakes and the douchebags that tend to frequent Madden leagues, I'm not really sure how much I care, lol. Not something I would go through if the community was strongly against it though. Just an idea to maybe regain our focus on the "gentlemanly" aspect of the leauge if you knew everyone in it had a personal attachment to their team.

 
Yeah, he can have the Colts if he's a fan. I've never had much attachment to the team. I was more of a Peyton fan than a Colts fan. That said, I wouldn't mind taking Manning and the Broncos, but it doesn't really matter too much.

 
I like where you guys are headed this year. Last season was a lot more fun for me because I was able to play with the Chiefs. Good luck with the league again this season.

 
I like where you guys are headed this year. Last season was a lot more fun for me because I was able to play with the Chiefs. Good luck with the league again this season.
Thanks. I told a couple others, I feel like a mad scientist when it comes to making Madden both more fun and fair, lol. And when I was thinking about it, something just made me feel better about having people play as fans rather than playing as mercenaries. I'm sure there will still be problems, but I think it's a decent start in terms of getting everyone in the same mindset.

 
I consider myself an above average Madden player, and while I would love to take on the Broncos again like I did in Madden 12, I can't imagine it would be that fair with how good that team is going to be in Madden 25. I too have been getting a Madden itch again and I feel confident now that I'll be ready for Madden 25. I may just aim for a middle of the road team that I like more than the Vikings. But if we're just talking about fan owned teams, I'd absolutely be on board. I definitely felt weird playing against Dark Rider's Broncos last year and when I had them in Madden 12 I definitely enjoyed building up the team more than I did with the Vikings

 
I also had another "crazy" idea of leaving teams empty unless there specifically was a fan to take them on. This may seem limiting...but between the flakes and the douchebags that tend to frequent Madden leagues, I'm not really sure how much I care, lol. Not something I would go through if the community was strongly against it though. Just an idea to maybe regain our focus on the "gentlemanly" aspect of the leauge if you knew everyone in it had a personal attachment to their team.
I mean, the one issue I have with this is that sometimes there are people that join in the middle of the league that are cool people and there are people who are fans of specific teams who are total tools. I remember in the other league last year OG whitewidow was not always good about playing his games even though he owned the Pariots and was a big Pats fan (if I'm misremembering, someone please correct me). The whole idea of limiting teams to fans of the team seems just as hit or miss as not doing so.

 
I mean, the one issue I have with this is that sometimes there are people that join in the middle of the league that are cool people and there are people who are fans of specific teams who are total tools. I remember in the other league last year OG whitewidow was not always good about playing his games even though he owned the Pariots and was a big Pats fan (if I'm misremembering, someone please correct me). The whole idea of limiting teams to fans of the team seems just as hit or miss as not doing so.
Also, can't you see people just saying the "49ers are my favorite team" no matter what? This is a forum and 99% of the "Maddeners" could just say their favorite team is conveniently the highest rated or full of "Madden" talent.
 
I consider myself an above average Madden player, and while I would love to take on the Broncos again like I did in Madden 12, I can't imagine it would be that fair with how good that team is going to be in Madden 25. I too have been getting a Madden itch again and I feel confident now that I'll be ready for Madden 25. I may just aim for a middle of the road team that I like more than the Vikings. But if we're just talking about fan owned teams, I'd absolutely be on board. I definitely felt weird playing against Dark Rider's Broncos last year and when I had them in Madden 12 I definitely enjoyed building up the team more than I did with the Vikings
I mean, the one issue I have with this is that sometimes there are people that join in the middle of the league that are cool people and there are people who are fans of specific teams who are total tools. I remember in the other league last year OG whitewidow was not always good about playing his games even though he owned the Pariots and was a big Pats fan (if I'm misremembering, someone please correct me). The whole idea of limiting teams to fans of the team seems just as hit or miss as not doing so.
I don't disagree with this...but there's a couple things that have to be considered: 1. We have to pick teams somehow. And 2. Somebody has to have the "good teams". Unless we had a concrete way of measuring skill level (like compiling everyone's win-loss record like I wanted to do last year, but never was able to put together), we're always going to run into this problem. Even if we did have a way of measuring skill level, that wouldn't tell us anything for new players. For instance, last year, Hemingway, as a new player, joined this league from the get-go and took the Patriots... Blade3D, as a returning player, took the 49ers. As far as I know, neither of them are fans of those teams...but they both had a hell of a lot of success.

The other option, of course, in an attempt to keep rosters "balanced", would be to just do fantasy rosters. I have a couple problems with this though. 1. I don't know that this would be the ultimate solution that people would hope for. As GamerDude mentioned before, it could cause people to just draft a "Madden team" built around speed or whatever, while others try to create a more realistic roster...and thus, you end up with what could be a worse balance than the default rosters had. 2. It could take away from the enjoyment of people who do want to play as their favorite team with their favorite players.

So, when taking all that into consideration, the thought I'm left with is trying to make the people who put the most effort into this league happy. And that's why I like the "favorite team" system. Like I said, for me personally, I would be picking my favorite team no matter what selection criteria we use. But then I start to wonder, "Am I handicapping myself because I'm not willing to just pick the best team in the game so I can have a better chance of winning?" Yeah, probably. Then I think "Are there other people in the league who do the same thing?" Again, probably yes. Then I think "Why should loyal members who have put years of effort into this league be punished because other players who just want the best team can join, win, blow up their team, and leave?" So, why not do more to discourage that type of behavior?

And I'll say again, yes, I would consider you one of the better players here...and I know the Broncos are going to be a good team. But it doesn't mean that if you didn't take them, another Hemingway or somebody wouldn't come along and take them anyway. And I would rather lose to somebody that I knew actually cared about the team they're controlling. Because you probably wouldn't run them like a jerkoff and blow up the roster either (I'm only assuming ;) lol).

Also, can't you see people just saying the "49ers are my favorite team" no matter what? This is a forum and 99% of the "Maddeners" could just say their favorite team is conveniently the highest rated or full of "Madden" talent.
I thought about this. For one, most of the people here have been here for awhile, and there most likely is a record of their favorite team somewhere...whether it's in a post in an old thread, a signature picture, etc. This would mainly only be a concern for new players. For new players, we'd have a couple options. We could actually require some kind of proof that they're actually a fan of the team they say they are (picture of team gear, Facebook link, etc). If people think that's asking too much, the other option would just be assuming they're not lying...but marking down that that's "their team" moving forward. It's not a perfect system...but again, there's no guarantees no matter how we do it. And I'd rather be sure that the people who have invested the most time in this league are happy and taken care of.

 
I don't know. At the end of the day, we're just picking teams for a video game. It shouldn't be so complicated, but there are plenty of shitheads who make it that way by taking any cheap advantage possible.

Do we have a rough idea of how many owners from last year are returning?

 
I don't know. At the end of the day, we're just picking teams for a video game. It shouldn't be so complicated, but there are plenty of shitheads who make it that way by taking any cheap advantage possible.

Do we have a rough idea of how many owners from last year are returning?
I agree. I think that's why the important thing is just making sure the league is what WE want it to be, and that the people who put the most time into it are taken care of. No idea how many people want to come back...but I'll be making a new thread soon. Stay tuned!

 
bread's done
Back
Top