Scoring by decades

[Rich-League Officer]

The range of points per game for a season has been between 40-49 for all 51 seasons.
The low was in 2040 when games averaged 40.63
The high was in 2023 when games averaged 49.09

If we look at the decades, it seems to smooth these numbers out quite a bit.
1998-2009 = 44.78
2010-2019 = 45.39
2020-2029 = 46.04
2030-2039 = 43.99
2040-2048 = 43.73

If I had to predict, I would have assumed that scoring was much higher in the early days but it was not.
And that was when player diversity was greater. Interesting how stable the scoring remains.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

I would say this is largely due to good management on BOTH sides of the ball and good coaching. Yes we may have had more variance in player ratings, but that was on both sides of the ball, so I would think the offense and defense were balanced to the point where scoring was hitting this range. I'm sure if we chose to do so, we could do some tweaking on one side or the other to get those numbers up or down should that be desired.

[Dean-Atlanta]

For comparison, in the PCFL whjere we have more diversity of players skill ratings, the avg in the 2027 season is 55.02 points per game.

I think this might come down a little this season because some teams are playing defense better.

[Mitch-Dolphins]

Interesting trends.

I wonder how much of a factor reducing the league size over the years to ensure a higher perce tage of teams are human owned impacts the scoring in the PNFL vs the PCFL scoring?

Also, so shows that having more ratings variance in players potentially doesn't impact scoring as much as coaching skill.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

We can't understate the impact of the different talent acquisition systems between the two leagues.

[Brian-Broncos]

Shows that having more ratings variance in players potentially doesn't impact scoring as much as coaching skill.

It does not show that; more data needed.

With bigger variance, Chicago, as a fictional example, maybe would have scores closer to 45-0, and with current variance, maybe 28-17 is more typical. Need to look at point differential, not just total points.

Besides, after seeing how mind-boggling lopsided some of the trades are that a handful of teams seem to make time and time again, I now think variance is too big. Teams not involved in these trades get penalized as they drop further and further behind the top-rostered teams. Sucks because skills should be bell-curved, with a handful of elite players and\or a handful of elite skills scattered about as well. I want to have to game plan for and\or against players like that. I want to actually see spin moves and YAC and game-breaking runs.

[Donovon-Steelers]

Sucks because skills should be bell-curved, with a handful of elite players and\or a handful of elite skills scattered about as well. I want to have to game plan for and\or against players like that. I want to actually see spin moves and YAC and game-breaking runs.

Re: elite skills/players > I've said this before & couldn't agree more. Every once in a while is a generational talent should appear - think of like a Barry Sanders (able to be maxxed-out in every potential rating in a few seasons) who is simply very difficult to stop and must be game-planned for. This would be a fun challenge.

Re: YAC / game-breaking runs > the game can give an 84 WR a 5 yard head-start over a 82 CB and the CB catches him every time. And FBPro game-breaking runs from RBs just don't exist compared to the NFL. These problems are partially due to the game design itself, and made worse by PNFL attributes. We'd have to pump up RB SP/AC to allow more busting runs and lower the ST to keep the overall average realistic > but this is tricky & something that would take much tweaking/testing so its 99% unlikely to happen.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

Be careful what you wish for. I personally like the smaller spreads in PNFL, and prefer to have those in the PCFL. Rich has mentioned this before and I think it's playing out in the PCFL. Teams that know how and put the effort into the GM side will rise to the top and stay there. There would be no cases like Shuggy breaking through and making the playoffs or a Dan. They would find a way to horde the top talent and leave the rest of us with scraps. I prefer the PNFL to stay where it's PPP vs PPP instead of PPP + Roster vs PPP + Roster. I love the parity and think that if we went very far with the spread in the PNFL we'd lose that parity.

[Donovon-Steelers]

I guess there's a point to be made if Justin somehow acquired a Sanders' type RB, we'd all be fkd pretty hard

[Mitch-Dolphins]

Be careful what you wish for. I personally like the smaller spreads in PNFL, and prefer to have those in the PCFL. Rich has mentioned this before and I think it's playing out in the PCFL. Teams that know how and put the effort into the GM side will rise to the top and stay there. There would be no cases like Shuggy breaking through and making the playoffs or a Dan. They would find a way to horde the top talent and leave the rest of us with scraps. I prefer the PNFL to stay where it's PPP vs PPP instead of PPP + Roster vs PPP + Roster. I love the parity and think that if we went very far with the spread in the PNFL we'd lose that parity.

Your point is valid. I just hate that we've basically taken away the GM aspect of the PNFL in an attempt to compensate for coaches making bad decisions.