Jump to content



Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

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


  • Please log in to reply
11970 replies to this topic

#6061 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:52 PM

well the bengals got slaughter by the titans 28-0 couldnt get anything going agianst his defense his CBs shut mostly everything down. i expected it to be tough to pass but it was alot worse than expected. running game wasnt to bad but after a certain point u just have to pass when ur down to try and get back in it. my RT was letting people in all day which is weird becuz his numbers are great guess he just didnt want to show up today. o well i guess 1-1 start is to bad. not looking forward to 49ers game in week 3 his defense is more stacked than the titans and his offense is well going to be hard to defend. hoping my trade im trying to get helps my team get to the next level since i missed out on revis

GG n8 u might be ready for the next level

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6062 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:56 PM

i do have a question involving lineman.
wut does impact blocking really do for them compared to run and pass

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6063 n8rockerasu

n8rockerasu

    Shhh...I'm Invisible

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:06 PM

Titans - 28
Bengals - 0

I guess the Titans just needed that Music City crowd to get them amped up for the regular season. After a somewhat sluggish performance in Week 1, the Tennessee defense stepped up big time, limiting Cincinatti to 18 yards of total offense, with -12 passing yards. Honestly, this is the type of game that my offseason was crafted for. The Bengals featured some big time receivers, and I've got 4 very capable CBs. DVO tried to keep me off balance by running some draw plays, but it just wasn't his style.

The most surprising thing was that my DBs really weren't even tested that much because apparently the Bengals RT must have grown up in Nashville or something and was totally jobbing to Derrick Morgan all game long. I never rushed more than 4, and somehow Morgan finished the game with 6 sacks. It seemed like every time Andrew Luck turned around, he was right there frothing at the mouth ready to pounce. I definitely wasn't expecting that. Kamerion Wimbley also picked up a sack, giving the Tennessee defense 7 sacks for the second week in a row.

Chris Johnson had a pretty solid game, though I definitely don't expect him to put up the numbers he did last year since people are mostly ready for it this season. It's definitely forcing me to vary my offense more. GG, DVO. It's hard to do much when I can rush 3 and get pressure like that. Derrick Morgan was a man possessed in this one.

Titans
Jake Locker - 6-11, 151 yds, 2 TDs, 1 INT
Chris Johnson - 19 att, 140 yds, 1 TD, 1 rec, 53 yds, 1 TD
Danny Woodhead - 1 att, 14 yds, 1 TD
Nate Washington - 2 rec, 22 yds, 1 TD
Jared Cook - 1 rec, 53 yds
Derrick Morgan - 6 tackles, 6 TFL, 6 sacks

Bengals
Andrew Luck - 6-11, 85 yds, 0 TDs, 1 INT
David Wilson - 5 att, 20 yds
BenJarvus Green-Ellis - 3 att, 10 yds
AJ Green - 2 rec, 28 yds
Rishard Matthews - 1 rec, 24 yds
Andre Smith (the RT) - 6 sacks allowed, lol...damn
Rey Maualuga - 4 tackles, 1 sack
Taylor Mays - 3 tackles, 1 INT

#6064 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:12 PM

ya i dont know what happened to my line that game it was awful its like madden wanted me to be under pressure the whole game. theres only one big stand out on ur D line that i really notice as a huge threat and he wasnt the one with all the sacks either. really confused about it is over now so on to the next one. i just want to make the playoffs thats my main goal for the season. and they have a whole season to get better. making lineman good really isnt as tough as other positions like QB and CBs.

BRING ME SOME GOOD NEWS LATER SINCE YOU ALREADY BROUGHT ME BAD NEWS N8 ;)

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6065 n8rockerasu

n8rockerasu

    Shhh...I'm Invisible

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:13 PM

LMAO...not trying to pour salt in the wounds here. But I just looked at the tweets after the game, and Trey Wingo's made me crack up.

"Trey Wingo @WingozEA

Derrick Morgan picked up 6 --
the opposition shouldn't expect
an apology letter for it."

Those guys can really be wiseasses sometimes, lol.

#6066 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:25 PM

All right, got a topic of discussion here that I want to get community feedback on. Since we've got a decent number of CPU teams right now, the idea of trading with the CPU is becoming an issue for the first time. In general, I think trading with the CPU could be ok. But I also feel like those trades need to be critiqued MUCH MORE harshly because the CPU isn't capable of speaking for itself or even expressing if it has any interest in the deal to begin with.

What further becomes a problem is when the trade hinges on draft picks. We saw this in the NHL 13 league where people would grab top players from vacant teams by offering a package that mainly consisted of draft picks (sometimes 3-4 seasons away). It became pretty obvious what people were trying to do, and it makes for a very uncomfortable position not only in the trade committee, but in the league in general.

So, I feel like we need to re-evaluate if allowing trading with CPU teams is a good idea...and how we would want to approach these deals if we do decide to allow it. The reason I'm bringing it up is because there's a proposal on the table right now (not naming teams or players involved), and I want to make sure we're all on the same page before we venture down that road. So, feel free to sound off on this subject. I feel like this goes without saying, but the more thought out your case is, the more weight it will carry.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6067 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:34 PM

well its states in the rules that it is aloud so it should be aloud. no rule was broken what so ever. i dont think it would be fair to change a rule becuz somone finally did just seems unfair to that person. since he didnt break a rule and now that he did something by following the rule people are trying to change it during the trade process. it just makes me feel uncomfortable that rules can just change in the blink of a second becuz now all of sudden we dont like the rule. in which that trade should be grandfathered in since it was before the rule change if the rule does change

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6068 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:34 PM

All right, got a topic of discussion here that I want to get community feedback on. Since we've got a decent number of CPU teams right now, the idea of trading with the CPU is becoming an issue for the first time. In general, I think trading with the CPU could be ok. But I also feel like those trades need to be critiqued MUCH MORE harshly because the CPU isn't capable of speaking for itself or even expressing if it has any interest in the deal to begin with.

What further becomes a problem is when the trade hinges on draft picks. We saw this in the NHL 13 league where people would grab top players from vacant teams by offering a package that mainly consisted of draft picks (sometimes 3-4 seasons away). It became pretty obvious what people were trying to do, and it makes for a very uncomfortable position not only in the trade committee, but in the league in general.

So, I feel like we need to re-evaluate if allowing trading with CPU teams is a good idea...and how we would want to approach these deals if we do decide to allow it. The reason I'm bringing it up is because there's a proposal on the table right now (not naming teams or players involved), and I want to make sure we're all on the same page before we venture down that road. So, feel free to sound off on this subject. I feel like this goes without saying, but the more thought out your case is, the more weight it will carry.


Well for one I am pretty sure you can only trade picks in the upcoming 2 years. Also, the CPU seems to usually want a lot for players so getting them through is probably harder then getting them approved by the committee. So taking that all into account I am fine with CPU trades, I will now go start looking over there rosters lol.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6069 Dark Rider

Dark Rider

    Looks Dashing

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:34 PM

All right, got a topic of discussion here that I want to get community feedback on. Since we've got a decent number of CPU teams right now, the idea of trading with the CPU is becoming an issue for the first time. In general, I think trading with the CPU could be ok. But I also feel like those trades need to be critiqued MUCH MORE harshly because the CPU isn't capable of speaking for itself or even expressing if it has any interest in the deal to begin with.

What further becomes a problem is when the trade hinges on draft picks. We saw this in the NHL 13 league where people would grab top players from vacant teams by offering a package that mainly consisted of draft picks (sometimes 3-4 seasons away). It became pretty obvious what people were trying to do, and it makes for a very uncomfortable position not only in the trade committee, but in the league in general.

So, I feel like we need to re-evaluate if allowing trading with CPU teams is a good idea...and how we would want to approach these deals if we do decide to allow it. The reason I'm bringing it up is because there's a proposal on the table right now (not naming teams or players involved), and I want to make sure we're all on the same page before we venture down that road. So, feel free to sound off on this subject. I feel like this goes without saying, but the more thought out your case is, the more weight it will carry.


So you mean my Tom Brady for Willis MaGahee trade won't pass? :lol:

#6070 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:39 PM

well if the committee does allow computer trades i would say we get a squatter to apply the trade. if it was deemed fair by the committee. also when dealing with computer trades i think if at first the trade doesnt succeed others shouldnt be able to just jump on it right after either the person should get one extra chance before others get to try on it.
im also worried that the committee might vote no becuz they want the player and if they keep voting no so they can try and get the person instead. that is a worry of mine that i find with the committee since when trying to trade for revis i got denied then someone from the committee ended up getting him im not saying thats exactly what happened at all but im worried it could happen. im not saying we have a faulty committee who thinks of themselves but who is to say they wont do it if they really want that player badly. but like i said im not saying they do it or will do it just stating i feel like it could happen and we would never know

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6071 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:42 PM

also i have no problem saying that the first person to go for a computer trade was me so its out there
and i didnt only offer picks i offered a 87 overall player and 2nd and 3rd rounder for a certain player

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6072 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:43 PM

well if the committee does allow computer trades i would say we get a squatter to apply the trade. if it was deemed fair by the committee. also when dealing with computer trades i think if at first the trade doesnt succeed others shouldnt be able to just jump on it right after either the person should get one extra chance before others get to try on it.
im also worried that the committee mind vote no becuz they want the player and if they keep voting no so they can try and get the person instead. that is a worry of mine that i find with the committee since when trying to trade for revis i got denied then someone from the committee ended up getting him im not saying thats exactly what happened at all but im worried it could happen


I don't think the committee needs to be involved, I think if the computer accepts it then it should be fine. I also don't like the idea of a squatter putting trades through. It is going to be a lot of work on the committee if they have to go over CPU trades, if the CPU keeps denying it over and over.

also i have no problem saying that the first person to go for a computer trade was me so its out there
and i didnt only offer picks i offered a 87 overall player and 2nd and 3rd rounder for a certain player


I figured it was you, and I am sure others did as well lol
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6073 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:48 PM

blade are u suggesting computer trades shouldnt be up for vote to just put them thru and let the computer say yes or no then after wards post it if the trade does go thru? if so i think thats a fair system as well but i would still like the first right to go after my trade atleast since i am the reason this did come up in the first place

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6074 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:48 PM

well its states in the rules that it is aloud so it should be aloud. no rule was broken what so ever. i dont think it would be fair to change a rule becuz somone finally did just seems unfair to that person. since he didnt break a rule and now that he did something by following the rule people are trying to change it during the trade process. it just makes me feel uncomfortable that rules can just change in the blink of a second becuz now all of sudden we dont like the rule. in which that trade should be grandfathered in since it was before the rule change if the rule does change


I asked people to make good cases. There is never going to be a situation where we allow the integrity of the league to be compromised. This is not to say that a current trade proposal is doing that, and acting defensive about anything under review is never going to help someone's cause.

If it is deemed fair, it will pass. The only reason it is being brought up is because multiple members of the committee have expressed apprehension in allowing these types of deals. There is no harm in reassessing the issue to make sure that it's what is best for the league moving forward (look at the Carolina Panthers if you want an example of a gutted team that nobody will ever want). Anyone who would want something that would be a detriment to the league would be acting under a completely selfish mindset.

As Blade mentioned though, if the CPU itself doesn't accept the trade, we would never force it through...whether we think it's fair or not. The CPU rejecting would basically mean that they're not interested.

As for whether it "follows the rules", that part of the rules was never hashed out because we've never had open teams like this. If you think this issue only deserves a quick and hasty decision though, then that would be a rejection. Discussing the issue and putting some thought into it is much more likely to lead to a solution that everyone is happy with.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6075 KasterDB

KasterDB

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:50 PM

well if the committee does allow computer trades i would say we get a squatter to apply the trade. if it was deemed fair by the committee. also when dealing with computer trades i think if at first the trade doesnt succeed others shouldnt be able to just jump on it right after either the person should get one extra chance before others get to try on it.
im also worried that the committee might vote no becuz they want the player and if they keep voting no so they can try and get the person instead. that is a worry of mine that i find with the committee since when trying to trade for revis i got denied then someone from the committee ended up getting him im not saying thats exactly what happened at all but im worried it could happen. im not saying we have a faulty committee who thinks of themselves but who is to say they wont do it if they really want that player badly. but like i said im not saying they do it or will do it just stating i feel like it could happen and we would never know


I'm sure I speak for everyone on the committee when I say that at no point does personal desire for a player influence their view on the fairness of a trade. The Revis deal wasn't shot down because we all wanted Revis. However, we all knew Revis was available. The Jets put it out there that he was shopping him. If it hadn't been the Bears, it would've been someone else. Revis is a great corner, and it made sense for plenty of teams to make an offer. It just happened to be that a consensus fair offer was presented to us by someone on the committee.

Check out my podcast, Kind of a Talk Show, on iTunes and like it at facebook.com/koats
166876.png


#6076 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:52 PM

blade are u suggesting computer trades shouldnt be up for vote to just put them thru and let the computer say yes or no then after wards post it if the trade does go thru? if so i think thats a fair system as well but i would still like the first right to go after my trade atleast since i am the reason this did come up in the first place


Yeah...your idea of how the trade should be put through would not happen. It's unreasonable and it starts to look incredibly shady. You're suggesting that the trade be forced through even if the CPU doesn't want to do it? What does that do to the CPU team and the hope that we might ever find someone who wants to take them? If they're not interested, they're not interested.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6077 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:54 PM

well if the committee does allow computer trades i would say we get a squatter to apply the trade. if it was deemed fair by the committee. also when dealing with computer trades i think if at first the trade doesnt succeed others shouldnt be able to just jump on it right after either the person should get one extra chance before others get to try on it.
im also worried that the committee might vote no becuz they want the player and if they keep voting no so they can try and get the person instead. that is a worry of mine that i find with the committee since when trying to trade for revis i got denied then someone from the committee ended up getting him im not saying thats exactly what happened at all but im worried it could happen. im not saying we have a faulty committee who thinks of themselves but who is to say they wont do it if they really want that player badly. but like i said im not saying they do it or will do it just stating i feel like it could happen and we would never know


Also, I'd watch what you say along these lines. This is an incredibly inflammatory post and starts treading dangerous waters. Making baseless accusations isn't going to help your case.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6078 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:55 PM

Yeah...your idea of how the trade should be put through would not happen. It's unreasonable and it starts to look incredibly shady. You're suggesting that the trade be forced through even if the CPU doesn't want to do it? What does that do to the CPU team and the hope that we might ever find someone who wants to take them? If they're not interested, they're not interested.


I think he is trying to explain what I was saying?

I was suggesting submitting a trade to the CPU if the CPU accepts then the deal goes through, not needing the committee to go over it. I was not in favor of someone taking control of the CPU team to force a trade through.
Posted ImagePosted Image

#6079 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:55 PM

i never said i needed an answer right now and i never said the committee was fixed and i said i do at times worry about that it could be. im fine with waiting to find out wuts goes to happen the only reason i did the the computer trade was becuz when i stumbled upon it the rules that said we are allowing cup trades this year so i figured i would give it ago. even though its hard to trade with the computer and more than likely could pass the committee but not the computer. but in that situation im not sure wut would happen would the committee allow then to add more to the trade to see if the computer would allow it. stuff like that theres many questions about this type of subject.

im not at all trying to stir problems here at all just trying to help hash the issue out and i do have questions of my own.

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6080 Ultimate Matt X

Ultimate Matt X

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:57 PM

What kind of shape are the Browns in? I see they are open.

#6081 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:58 PM

they got tom brady but no haden

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6082 Dark Rider

Dark Rider

    Looks Dashing

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:58 PM

What kind of shape are the Browns in? I see they are open.


Pretty good. They have Tom Brady, and went to the playoffs last year.

Edit: They may or may not have Trent Richardson soon depending on a trade.

#6083 KasterDB

KasterDB

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 10:59 PM

What kind of shape are the Browns in? I see they are open.


UMX? Oh happy day! :D

Check out my podcast, Kind of a Talk Show, on iTunes and like it at facebook.com/koats
166876.png


#6084 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:12 PM

now that my week 2 game is up im allowed to trade players that i signed thru FA and trades now correct since week 3 is when we can start but my game 2 is up so i cna make proposals

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6085 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:15 PM

now that my week 2 game is up im allowed to trade players that i signed thru FA and trades now correct since week 3 is when we can start but my game 2 is up so i cna make proposals


Correct. Anyone that was traded/signed before the first preseason game was played anyway.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6086 CAGLeagueSports

CAGLeagueSports

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:22 PM

I was suggesting submitting a trade to the CPU if the CPU accepts then the deal goes through, not needing the committee to go over it. I was not in favor of someone taking control of the CPU team to force a trade through.


Just want to say this is not a good idea. What it's going to lead to is people offering 2 72 rated players and 2 draft picks to Carolina for Jon Beason. I'm not making shit up. I saw this type of stuff happen less than a month ago.

All trades will be reviewed by the committee. Even if we decide to allow trading with the CPU, the trade would be reviewed first...and then if the CPU rejects it, people can take that to mean they're not interested. I realize that this is going to lead to people tweaking offers over and over again to try to get the CPU to take the deal. But honestly, this might be where we need to enact a real "3 proposals and then give up" rule.
Do you have what it takes to compete?

#6087 Lexxon

Lexxon

    In the face!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:25 PM

scrub0bk, the Eagles owner, has a full CAG inbox. Trying to schedule my game with him, will try an XBL message.

#6088 DVO21

DVO21

    Non-Pro League

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:27 PM

i like the 3 tries and ur out rule but i think it should be added that if it involves a computer that person should be allowed his 3 strikes first before others try and hop on

Madden 25

Official League Team: Bengals

Season 1: 0-0

 

Fans League Team: Possibly Chiefs

Season 1: 0-0


#6089 GamerDude316

GamerDude316

    CAGiversary!

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:29 PM

I think CPU trades could be allowed but with some kind of limitation on the rating of guys involved, like it has to be within 3 OVR (a silly attribute but the only one a CPU team will care about) of the guy you're trying to trade for.

Also, limit it so that only draft picks from the upcoming season can be offered. No way it makes sense to trade picks from the 2014 season.

#6090 Blade3D

Blade3D

    Grandmaster Swag

  • CAGiversary!

Posted 03 January 2013 - 11:30 PM

Just want to say this is not a good idea. What it's going to lead to is people offering 2 72 rated players and 2 draft picks to Carolina for Jon Beason. I'm not making shit up. I saw this type of stuff happen less than a month ago.

All trades will be reviewed by the committee. Even if we decide to allow trading with the CPU, the trade would be reviewed first...and then if the CPU rejects it, people can take that to mean they're not interested. I realize that this is going to lead to people tweaking offers over and over again to try to get the CPU to take the deal. But honestly, this might be where we need to enact a real "3 proposals and then give up" rule.


The CPU would accept that? I know in the franchises I have done it was pretty stingy. Well you can't do that cause it includes 2 players and 2 picks, and max is 3.
Posted ImagePosted Image