I view my solitaire leagues this way. All I am is the Commissioner. I supplied the talent, the dice call the plays, it's up to the players to execute. I only feel bad if I make some sort of error in record keeping, reffing, etc., that negatively affects one team vs. the other.
It plays into how I base the linemen with their TTCs. I have a certain tweak technique I use on every base. Once that's done, I put the base on the board to make it sure it runs.
That's it.
I don't care how strong it is. In just finishing basing up 18 teams for my 2 leagues, I never tested the strength of a single base. That's what the games are for.
The point being: Some will be strong, some will be average, some will be weak. I'm OK with that. My main concern is making sure I treat the teams in my leagues that I don't like in real life (Broncos, Florida, Oklahoma, etc.) the same way I treat the teams I like in real life (Steelers, Virginia, Texas, etc.). I give every team the same treatment, it's up to them on gameday to figure out what happens. I **think** it's an anomaly that the first EPFA game between Pittsburgh and New England ended up so close and with the teams struggling so much offensively, especially in the running game. I seriously doubt every game will be like that, but if they are all 1-point nailbiters after 140 plays, then so be it.
I'll have an offseason system in place that will allow teams to improve via free agency and the draft, so I'm hoping that as I go through season after season, each team will at some point get to be a contender.
Such is sports, though. Not every team gets invited to the big dance each year.
Ed
