My list isn't in any particular order.
1.) The fog is real. This is something that's unlikely to be seen, but I'd like the possibility of not having exact ratings as we do currently. I would like to see Scouting reports for all prospective as well as current players. The more experienced the player, usually, the more accurate the report. Scouts with better training also have more precise reports. I'm not happy when I see that WR A is 89 catchers when WR A has 92. This isn't an accurate representation of. I would like to see an accurate scouting report on every player, which helps me make choices. The CPU should study the scouting reports as well and not just know the ratings that are under the hood.
2.) Owners with more impactful names that can be turned between on and off. I don't care about whether they're the actual owners, and also fictional. I would like for them to have distinct personal styles and objectives. Perhaps the Ravens owner is looking for you to be among the one of the top 10 players in the league in terms of rushing per year. Perhaps he sets a target that you sign a contract with your old star, despite having a decline.
3.) A GM's presence. I would like each GM to be unique in style of persona. I would like to see relationships between GM's. I would like to see this as something we can switch between on and off. I would like to see GM's who are determined with regards to Free Agency, others that don't, some who would be willing to bargain higher in deals or re-signings, and others who want their ways or the highway. I'd like to see GM's who consider the different roles or play differently and use certain skills in a different way. Some GM's are obsessed with speed players excessively, while other GM's want players who just sit down and get to work, regardless of regardless of whether they're the best choice or not.
4.) A greater variety of player personalities. It seems that this is being addressed with the motivations and tags in free agency. I am looking for players who have locker room cancer as well as guys who are leaders, who accept pay cuts in order to play for teams that are struggling older veterans who take low-cost contracts to remain in the league, and also mentor young players who are successful and remain in the game as they finish their rookie contracts and so on. I'm looking for players who are furious whenever you pick someone in their place. I want players to demand trades.
5) Plans and goals for the organization. Long-term and short-term. We see this at times within other sporting games, such as NBA 2k, The Show and text-based simulations. Teams will be identified as contenders, rebuilding teams or neutral, etc. and this will influence the decisions they make during the season.
I'll try to keep it simple The game has a basic premise where teams review their rosters every off-season, and then they decide which positions they'd like take on. The system isn't perfect, and may be a little erratic at times, but it's there. I would like for this to be expanded upon. I'd like to see the previously mentioned contender terms like rebuild, neutral and others become multi-year items that alter the current building process within the game.
For instance, a team is hired an entirely new GM and coaches. The plan is for three years that has the team permanently in rebuilding mode. The Head Coach is able to see their seat heating in a lower rate since the team accepts that it will be losing for a couple of years while it is rebuilding.
The game utilizes the established offseason analyses that analyzes the team and create an order of priority for the rebuild over three years. The list is subject to change in the event that any player is better or worse than anticipated, or get injured or other reasons, and so on.
It creates a list of basic objectives. In the first year, it would like to be to make a top 10 list and to sign the services of a QB since there's no QB who is a franchise player on the team roster. This basic logic will review during the off-season, and determines whether the team's performance was poor enough to be placed in the Top 10 of teams or not. If it is, it will make certain that there's a good QB that is likely to be in the lineup in their position. If not, there are no trades made. If both answers were non it is because the game relies on the traits of the GM to attempt to get an upper ten pick.
After the QB is secure, perhaps the next step was to find a player who could be a WR1 within two years. The 2nd draft pick it is then taken and drafted the WR. It's easy to see. All of this doesn't need to be complicated. It's merely logic checks and modifications to existing logic that create the illusion that the CPU constructs teams with the same long and short-term vision as humans do.