Madden 27 Franchise Simulation and Management Feedback

Hello Madden/EA Franchise Team,

I wanted to provide some constructive feedback regarding Franchise Mode in Madden NFL 27. I really enjoy the mode and want to spend a lot of time building long-term franchises, but after simulating multiple seasons, I have noticed several issues that significantly affect the realism and longevity of Franchise.

I understand that an NFL simulation will never perfectly replicate real life, and I am not expecting every roster move or player outcome to be realistic. However, many of these issues happen so consistently that they can make a franchise feel unrealistic after only a few seasons.

CPU teams signing/drafting far too many players at the same position

CPU roster management seems to have very little positional awareness.

I have seen teams accumulate 10+ players at a single position, including positions such as long snapper. This appears to happen because multiple teams repeatedly target the same positions without properly considering their existing roster.

This creates unrealistic rosters while leaving other positions severely neglected.

The salary cap becomes completely unrealistic after only a few seasons

After approximately two seasons of simulation, I regularly see a huge percentage of teams significantly over the salary cap and millions of dollars into negative cap space.

This becomes especially problematic because it appears to snowball. Once teams get into bad cap situations, their roster management becomes even less realistic.

The NFL obviously has teams dealing with difficult cap situations, but having the majority of the league severely over the cap after only a couple of seasons makes long-term Franchise simulations difficult to take seriously.

Player progression is far too aggressive

Player progression becomes one of the biggest problems after approximately 3–5 seasons.

In many of my simulations, the majority of the top 300 players are 85+ OVR, with an enormous number of players reaching Star, Superstar, and X-Factor development traits.

Player development should allow players to become stars, but when so many players reach elite overall ratings and development traits, it removes the meaning from having truly elite players.

The NFL has a relatively small number of players who are genuinely among the best at their position. Franchise should reflect that scarcity.

Players are retiring far too early

I have repeatedly seen players retire after only one or a few seasons.

For example, Travis Etienne has retired after just one season multiple times in my simulations.

Obviously, unexpected retirements can happen in real life, but when the same players repeatedly retire extremely early, it feels like a problem with the retirement logic rather than natural randomness.

There is no true GM/Owner role in Franchise

This is more of a feature request, but I was surprised that Franchise does not appear to offer a true General Manager/Owner experience with full control over the organization.

With real-life coordinators now being represented in the game, I think this could make Franchise significantly deeper.

For example, I would love to be able to act strictly as the team’s GM/Owner, hire and fire head coaches, hire offensive and defensive coordinators, promote coordinators to head coach, hire coaches from other teams, and make organizational decisions without actually playing as the head coach.

A real-life example would be something like hiring an opposing team’s offensive coordinator to become your head coach, similar to how teams make coaching hires in the NFL. (Ben Johnson to Chicago, Kevin O’Connell to Minnesota, Liam Cohen to Jacksonville, etc.)

I honestly expected some version of this to already exist in Franchise, especially now that real-life coordinators are represented.

A dedicated GM/Owner mode could also give players a reason to spend hundreds of simulated seasons building organizations rather than simply controlling games.

CPU trades, free agency, and contract extensions need significantly better logic

This is probably the biggest issue I have encountered.

Trades

I understand that big-name players get traded in the NFL. I actually like having significant trades happen in Franchise.

The problem is the frequency and lack of context surrounding many CPU trades.

For example, I have repeatedly seen Tetairoa McMillan get traded within the first two seasons, among many other young/high-value players. When the same players are constantly being moved in different franchises, it makes the league feel algorithmically generated rather than organically managed.

There is also a particularly strange issue where a CPU team places a player on the trade block, the player gets traded, his new team gives him an extension, he remains on the trade block, and then he gets traded again shortly afterward.

This makes it appear that the CPU’s trade block does not properly update after roster changes.

I would strongly recommend looking at whether CPU teams understand the consequences of trades, including dead-cap penalties, player value, contract status, positional needs, and whether they have already solved the roster problem that caused them to make the trade.

Free Agency

Free agency has similar positional-awareness problems.

Teams will frequently sign an excessive number of players at the same position while allowing important players at other positions to leave.

More concerningly, I regularly see established cornerstone players such as Sam LaPorta and Jonathan Taylor reach free agency in simulation after just a few seasons.

I understand that even great players can become free agents in real life, but when the same caliber of players consistently reach free agency across virtually every franchise, something appears wrong with the CPU’s contract-management logic.

It would be great if teams could better identify their core players and prioritize extending them before allowing them to reach free agency.

Contract Extensions

The number of extremely long contracts also feels unrealistic.

I regularly see 7+ year contracts being handed out, even when they don’t make much sense for the player’s age or situation.

Even more strangely, I have seen older players receive contracts of five years or more and then retire the following offseason.

It would be helpful if contract logic considered the player’s expected career length and retirement likelihood before generating extremely long contracts.

Overall

I really enjoy Franchise Mode, and I think the foundation is there for it to be an incredible long-term NFL simulation.

My biggest concern is that these issues become much more noticeable when simulating multiple seasons. A franchise can feel relatively normal in Year 1, but by Years 3–5, rosters, contracts, player ratings, retirements, and the salary cap can become so unrealistic that it becomes difficult to continue the save.

I would really appreciate it if the EA team could investigate the underlying CPU roster-management, contract-management, progression, retirement, and salary-cap logic, rather than treating these as isolated issues.

I also think adding a true GM/Owner role would be an incredible addition to Franchise and would make the mode much more appealing for players who enjoy the management/simulation side of football.

Thank you for continuing to work on Franchise Mode and for taking the time to read the feedback. I hope some of these issues can be investigated and addressed in future updates.

I would also be happy to provide additional examples, screenshots, or franchise files if they would help reproduce any of these issues.