FBG Rated rosters for PS3

[Braveman84]

Quote: Originally Posted by JCaponio

Just curious as to what you're basing the ratings on. When I go to the fbgratings website and look at the Dolphins roster, their top nine players are: Wake 76 Grimes 74 Wallace 74 Clabo 73 Starks 73 Tannehill 72 Miller 71 Ellerbe 71 Wheeler 71 But when I load your rosters, the top players are: Clabo 79 Grimes 78 Sturgis 76 Incognito 74 Moore 70 Ellerbe 70 Hartline 68 Pouncey 68 Starks 67 You also have some weird ratings, like Moore ahead of Tannehill, Binns better than Wallace, Shelbe better than Wake, etc. Just wondering if I'm looking at this all right or if there is some reason for the discrepancies.

You have to realize that FBGratings and madden 25 have a different way of stat imputing so yes the stats are not going to be exactly what they are on the site but the stats that we can change we are changing to what they are on the FBG site

[KingV2k3]

Quote: Originally Posted by Blazelore

The overalls don't matter. The depths charts aren't done as of yet. That'll be one of the last things I do. Instead of looking at overalls look at their individual ratings...

FWIW:

If backups have higher OVR's than starters, the USER is going to have to use 32 team control and set "adjust depth chart" for all teams to USER or the CPU AI will put the player with the highest OVR at number one on the depth chart...

Not a big deal, but just want to make sure everyone knows that that will be the case...

I think we'll also have to do the cuts and keeps for each team, because the CPU usually cuts anyone rated under 75...

I also wonder how it will affect player value in FA...

Interesting to see how these will not only affect the on field stuff, but everything else that comprises a multi season CCM...

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by JCaponio

Just curious as to what you're basing the ratings on. When I go to the fbgratings website and look at the Dolphins roster, their top nine players are: Wake 76 Grimes 74 Wallace 74 Clabo 73 Starks 73 Tannehill 72 Miller 71 Ellerbe 71 Wheeler 71 But when I load your rosters, the top players are: Clabo 79 Grimes 78 Sturgis 76 Incognito 74 Moore 70 Ellerbe 70 Hartline 68 Pouncey 68 Starks 67 You also have some weird ratings, like Moore ahead of Tannehill, Binns better than Wallace, Shelbe better than Wake, etc. Just wondering if I'm looking at this all right or if there is some reason for the discrepancies.

The site is currently using the M12 OVR calculations. When I get back from vacation I will update the OVR ratings and attributes to ensure that they match.

[Braveman84]

Quote: Originally Posted by KingV2k3

FWIW: If backups have higher OVR's than starters, the USER is going to have to use 32 team control and set "adjust depth chart" for all teams to USER or the CPU AI will put the player with the highest OVR at number one on the depth chart... Not a big deal, but just want to make sure everyone knows that that will be the case... I think we'll also have to do the cuts and keeps for each team, because the CPU usually cuts anyone rated under 75... I also wonder how it will affect player value in FA... Interesting to see how these will not only affect the on field stuff, but everything else that comprises a multi season CCM...

Yes it will affect all of the things in the game but we are working on the F/A's also so that there stats will be effected also and changed to what the site has. Yes it might be interesting to see what it all will effect for multi seasons but we hope to have that all worked out before the full release of the roster.

[caballero]

Quote: Originally Posted by cp22

Using these rosters, default sliders, and default penalty sliders, I've actually seen def pass interference calls...and for the first time ever I saw an offensive pass interference call.

it's not the sliders or rosters it's the game, I've only played 3 games (with EA's rosters) and saw one of each already. They finally tuned it up.

[caballero]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

I don't think the TE blocking stuff was was viewed as a bad thing. I think the fact that TE's who aren't good run blockers can't hold blocks was good. On default rosters everyone blocks good. That's how I took it anyway

here's the post:

Quote: Originally Posted by wordtobigbird

Playing with the FGB ratings on Xbox and it makes a difference when the TEs are matchup against LB/DEs in the run game. Seen weak TEs get ran right through by LBs on Power O when before any TE would push back a LB or DE.

It could be a huge issue.

The play is called "Power O" for a reason. I fear if a LB/DE blows up the TE you'll never get yards. The average NFL run covers about 4 yards!

For the Power 0 graph:
http://www.secondlevelfootball.com/2...zone-run-game/

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by caballero

here's the post: It could be a huge issue. The play is called "Power O" for a reason. I fear if a LB/DE blows up the TE you'll never get yards. The average NFL run covers about 4 yards! For the Power 0 graph: http://www.secondlevelfootball.com/2...zone-run-game/

I'm using the 360 version of these rosters and I have no issues running the power o or any run play. It plays out pretty realistic

[Braveman84]

Yea I don't see why people say they are having problems with runs unless they are exploiting the computer this ratings with default sliders on you actually have a great game. I haven't had any problems with big runs I actually get shut down from time to time which is nice.