View Single Post
Old 01-07-2011, 03:48 PM   #207
eye_opener
Rookie
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Jan 2011
Re: Player Progression In Franchise Mode.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icarus2k9
Here's some simple (and stupid) scenarios for anyone arguing that stats should drive progression...

* A 45 OVR running back is fed the ball continually. He's running behind a terrible O line, and is only pulling out 3ypc, but the sheer amount of carries gives him 1,200 yards. Does he deserve a boost?
* A WR is the fourth string receiver behind three all star WRs. He's spent months practicing in the off season, and the coaches agree he's a future star, snagging highlight reel catches all through training camp. In Madden, because of his 4th WR role, he gets 17 catches for 250 yards. He was rated a 84 by EA to start the season - does this mean he should have his numbers slashed?
* A more extreme example - a WR is targeted three times in one game. The first time, the CB slips and gives him an easy 60 yard td. The second time, a mix up in zone coverage gives him another 20 yards. On the third, he's matched against the defence's slowest player, and the throw gives him the easiest of catches on a quick go pattern, resulting in 20 more yards. He had a 100 yard game, yet didn't once prove his abilities. If this somehow continued to happen throughout a season, (and in a game like Madden 11, easily could), does he deserve a boost?
You are quite correct about the simplicity of the scenarious. In fact, you are over-simplifying the situation.

* A 45 OVR running back is fed the ball continually. He's running behind a terrible O line, and is only pulling out 3ypc, but the sheer amount of carries gives him 1,200 yards. Does he deserve a boost?[/quote]

The 45 OVR w 1200 yrds and 3.0ypc does not deserve a great increase, but the player in question would have had to have learned a bit through the course of that run. However, the most telling stat is 3ypc (which by the way is less than ideal, but it's not terrible. It's just mediocre). If the YPC was higher and the O-Line was less than steller then the player definitely deserves a stat boost (though not up to the 90's). However, I disagree with one year wonders getting to the top of the ratings anyway. Even if they pan out one great year does not indicate a great player. Miles Austin was sensational last year, but this year, while very good, he has not matched the flashes of ability he showed last year. The same applies for Deshawn Jackson. I fear Arian Foster will be the next in a long line of players whose one league leading year will dictate a superb ratings increase and next year he will perform well but not spectacular. 1st break through players are rarely game planned for, and even when they are teams don't have enough game tape to adequately plan so they will catch opponents off guard. Also players within their division will learn their tendencies and play better as they face the same opponent twice a year. Again your idea of realism is short-sighted.

* A WR is the fourth string receiver behind three all star WRs. He's spent months practicing in the off season, and the coaches agree he's a future star, snagging highlight reel catches all through training camp. In Madden, because of his 4th WR role, he gets 17 catches for 250 yards. He was rated a 84 by EA to start the season - does this mean he should have his numbers slashed?

Again an over-simplification you use to skewer the reality of the league to suit your rationalizations for the current system. As the 4th receiver his role is not expected to make a lot of catches or yards. In fact if he made more than 3 touchdowns he would have done very well at his spot on the roster the next year might be the 3rd WR on the chart (if he performs well in training camp, which is absent, and pre-season). Again I realize the math nessecary for the algorithm is not simple, but it's not that complex either. Realize the thousands of calculations run just for a single play and the couple hundred for player progression is miniscule in comparison.

* A more extreme example - a WR is targeted three times in one game. The first time, the CB slips and gives him an easy 60 yard td. The second time, a mix up in zone coverage gives him another 20 yards. On the third, he's matched against the defence's slowest player, and the throw gives him the easiest of catches on a quick go pattern, resulting in 20 more yards. He had a 100 yard game, yet didn't once prove his abilities. If this somehow continued to happen throughout a season, (and in a game like Madden 11, easily could), does he deserve a boost?

Once this player is "RE-Evaluated" IRL he would be given a great rating. However, what caused the zone mix up? Could the player's route running have confused the defenders. Did the defender slip because of a move the receiver put on him or was it raining and the receiver was agile enough to keep his footing through a cut and the defender was not. The slower player is a defensive mismatch, but guess what? That happens all the time in real game scenarios and is often what head coaches and offensive coordinators try to achieve so they can exploit this. Why is this seen as a "cheap" way of playing. This is the purpose of game planning and audibles on the field in PROFESSIONAL FOOTBALL GAMES. Not video games, REAL GAMES. If a CB gets injured in a game the quarter back comes after his replacement until he can prove he can defend his man/zone and if the team adjusts to provide more protection then the team will use the openings to attack other areas of the field. That is the nature of the game.

Do any of you people actually know anything about football? Have you ever watched a game with an underatnding of the strategy or just cheer and curse at "good plays" and "bad plays"? I just don't unsderstand how this is news. You would probably call me a cheap player for creating mismatches on offense and defense and then exploiting them. But then again, you'd probably say the same thing about professional coaches and athletes if you knew what was actually happening.
eye_opener is offline  
Reply With Quote