Madden 2010 News Post

Madden NFL 10 Blog: Player Ratings - A New Philosophy, A New Era

06:53 PM - February 9, 2009 by Ian_Cummings

Hey guys, we thought it would be a perfect time to share something that I am personally very excited about for Madden NFL 10. We took each and every rating in the game (over 50+ player ratings) and scaled them up/down in a way that is now using much more of the scale. I like to describe it around the office like this…”We basically stretched out the ratings.” We want to use more of the numbers so we get a bigger, more noticeable affect in the game.

Let me give you guys an example….in Madden NFL 09 all of the WR’s Route Running ratings ranged from 62-99. In the current Madden NFL 10 build, WR’s now check in from 35-99. To counter this on the defensive side, all CB’s in Madden NFL 09 had a Man Coverage rating which ranged from 64-99. Now in Madden NFL 10, CB’s Man Coverage range is currently 40-99.

Every position and every rating has been re-scaled to expand the range of numbers we are dealing with. The Overall Rating for your average NFL player has dropped. Your Joe Average linebacker who was 80 OVR is now dropped down to 70. The players who were before right on the cusp of 90 in a rating category are now down around 85-88…Meaning, there are fewer superstar players out there. Before, where you could maybe get by throwing to your slot WR who had 93 SPD, with 74 ROUTES, and 77 Catching…now in Madden NFL 10, that guy is going to have like 91 SPD, 60-65 ROUTES and anywhere from 65-70 Catching. Let me tell you, these rating drops make a big difference when that slot rookie WR with 90+ speed now drops every 3rd pass or so, or just simply cannot get open.
The superstars have not been affected however, this is intentional. Peyton is still 99 OVR, Patrick Willis a 99, Larry Fitz is 99, etc. The elite players at rating categories have not been affected either (JaMarcus Russell still has a 98 Throw Power and Chris Johnson still rated 99 Speed). [Side note: One of my personal goals is to have the actual NFL players in Madden NFL 10 look like their real-life counterparts and play to their strengths and weaknesses like never before in a football video game.]

Speaking of the Speed, which is always a hot topic, we made some major changes with the infamous SPD rating as well. To give you a great example, I will again go back to WR and CB. In Madden NFL 09, the WR SPD range was 85-100…CB was 87-99.

In Madden NFL 10, WR SPD range is currently 70-100…CB is currently 75-99. So as you may or may not tell, the SPD range has been pushed down, in our opinions, to better reflect the “sim-gameplay” style that Ian and Phil have been telling you about all winter long. This SPD change has been updated for each position, so it makes a huge game play affect.

Ian and I had a game the other day where Earnest Graham broke one up the middle for a 55 yard touchdown run… and he could not be caught!…E-Grahams’ Madden NFL 10 current SPD rating….80 SPD. That should give you a good sense of what is possible with the new ratings. It’s not all about having the 90+ SPD anymore. On this particular run, Ian’s CB’s got hung up against some blockers and all I had to do was beat one safety and Graham was gone! He had Brandon Jacobs and his 85 SPD breaking some long runs as well. On the flip side of bigger/slower backs, Chris Johnson is absolutely lethal right now. You can actually get him outside with sweeps now and he is a beast to stop. But again, we are constantly tuning the gameplay, we have an entire team dedicated to that and they are some of the best people we have in the building.

So there you have it, player ratings are in for a major overhaul this year and I am really excited already with the impact they are having on the early builds of the game. And rest assured, we are well aware of the outside impacts this will have….Rookies will now come into the league based on the new ranges, NCAA Import guys are being tuned as well…Progression has been accounted for as well to better reflect breakout stars and burned-out former stars. Meaning, we want to have bigger jumps in OVR this year, both positive and negative. That’s all for now, probably gave away too much already!

Would love to hear any feedback about this big new change in the way we do player ratings. I’d be happy to answer any questions regarding the new rating ranges….please no individual ratings questions, not answering those! Stay tuned for more Madden player rating related blogs in the future!

- Donny Moore – Madden NFL 10 Designer

Game: Madden NFL 10Reader Score: 7.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Wii / Xbox 360Votes for game: 76 - View All

Madden NFL 10 Videos

Member Comments

# 161 RGiles36 @ 02/10/09 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexBrady


	I love this feature but let me say that there are no true 99 worthy players in the NFL currently. Certainly, there are about 6 or 7 elite players but they all have shortcomings. For example: Tom Brady: struggles mightily with pressure in his face Demarcus Ware: still bites on play fakes more than he should, struggles to recognize routes in man coverage, tends to drag the ball carrier to the ground rather than driving him into the ground. As you can see, the "perfect player" simply does not exist. Do away with the 99 ratings!

I disagree here. While I CERTAINLY don't want to see a slew of 99-rated players, picking apart some of the elite player's weaknesses and trying to use that as justification for not being rated at the top of the scale is wrong.

For example:

Tom Brady, until proven otherwise, is the best QB in the NFL in my opinion. Some people want to point to that SuperBowl loss and say that pressure makes him struggle. I don't know of any QB's who can consistently pass the ball with pressure and hands in their face. With that said, if he was rated a 99, I wouldn't bicker one bit.

I'd argue the same for a couple players on your list. I don't think a 99 rating suggests that a player is PERFECT all across the board.

# 162 AlexBrady @ 02/10/09 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rgiles36


	I disagree here. While I CERTAINLY don't want to see a slew of 99-rated players, picking apart some of the elite player's weaknesses and trying to use that as justification for not being rated at the top of the scale is wrong. For example: Tom Brady, until proven otherwise, is the best QB in the NFL in my opinion. Some people want to point to that SuperBowl loss and say that pressure makes him struggle. I don't know of any QB's who can consistently pass the ball with pressure and hands in their face. With that said, if he was rated a 99, I wouldn't bicker one bit. I'd argue the same for a couple players on your list. I don't think a 99 rating suggests that a player is PERFECT all across the board.

Did I say that Tom Brady is not the best qb in the NFL? I believe he is the best, but he does have shortcomings. ( believe it or not)

Those shortcomings include:

-Floating passes high when his back foot is not set ( you saw this more in the 2006 season)

-Does not throw well on the run and must set up to fire deep balls

-Struggles with his intermediate accuracy and does not throw well if he is forced left

-Arm strength is not elite, he is still among the top arms and his overall abilities are in the top 3

-Used to have the bad habit of throwing late over the middle (more common in the 2006 season)

-Has a slight hitch in his delivery

-Will fail to see a zone corner which will result in errant passes

-Not a threat to run

That being said, he is the best player in football. Lets see how he rebounds from injury though.

# 163 rhombic21 @ 02/10/09 01:56 PM

I think you need to separate out OVR ratings from a discussion about whether or not players have weaknesses. The OVR rating, to me, is just a way to quickly look at a player and tell, generally speaking, how good he is relative to other players. It doesn't actually govern any on-field action. Now, in terms of the on-field action, then the ratings would reflect weaknesses.

The on the field ratings, rather than reflecting relative ability compared to other players, actually govern performance. So, for instance, a 99 SPD rating tells the game how fast a player should move. Thus, that rating directly tells the game how to handle game action.

OVR ratings, in contrast, don't actually affect gameplay (or shouldn't). As a result, whether or not a player is given a 99 OVR rating or a 95 OVR rating is really inconsequential, so long as the actual ratings that govern his on-field abilities are accurate.

# 164 seriousluboy83 @ 02/10/09 02:10 PM

say good-bye to the cheesers and hello to real players.....no more deshawn jackson slot routes all day.....real strategy now

# 165 briax87 @ 02/10/09 03:03 PM

I love the idea of expanding and stretching the ratings out. Hopefully it should stop players being excellent in-game based almost purely on speed.

# 166 LBzrule @ 02/10/09 03:08 PM

I just want to know one thing right now. Is it EASY for Johnson or any other back to get outside on the Ravens and Steelers defenses? If it is, that needs to be fixed. How has the stretch of ratings had an impact on defenders?

# 167 glitchditcher @ 02/10/09 03:10 PM

Linebacker Coverage

One thing that drastically needs some changing is the coverage ratings of Linebackers. You have some linebackers with 70+ Man Coverage and 85+ Zone Coverage. That is absolutely ridiculous. Did you know that in Madden 09, if you put Brian Urlacher at CB his overall rating is an 86 ? Eighty effing Six. Brian Urlacher. That's higher than most #2 CBs in the game. It's absurd, man. I know guys like Brian Urlacher, Gary Brackett, and Kirk Morrison are some of the best coverage Linebackers in the game, there is no doubt about that, but you simply cannot have Linebackers with higher coverage ratings than some corners.

The fact of the matter is, no LB in the game today is better at coverage than any CB in the game today. I don't care if you're talking about Jason David.. he still should have higher coverage ratings than any Linebacker. In Madden 09 you have most Linebackers running 30 yards downfield with WRs and HBs. Jumping 10 feet off the ground to blindly super swat a pass. That is asinine. There is no way in hell that would happen in real life. That's why coaches uses motion and try to get HBs one on one with a LB in real life. It's caleld match-ups. Because no LB is able to have good coverage more than 10-15 yards downfield. It just doesn't happen.

The highest MAN COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 60. The highest ZONE COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 75. No if, ands, or buts about it.

# 168 LBzrule @ 02/10/09 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	Linebacker Coverage One thing that drastically needs some changing is the coverage ratings of Linebackers. You have some linebackers with 70+ Man Coverage and 85+ Zone Coverage. That is absolutely ridiculous. Did you know that in Madden 09, if you put Brian Urlacher at CB his overall rating is an 86 ? Eighty effing Six. Brian Urlacher. That's higher than most #2 CBs in the game. It's absurd, man. I know guys like Brian Urlacher, Gary Brackett, and Kirk Morrison are some of the best coverage Linebackers in the game, there is no doubt about that, but you simply cannot have Linebackers with higher coverage ratings than some corners. The fact of the matter is, no LB in the game today is better at coverage than any CB in the game today. I don't care if you're talking about Jason David.. he still should have higher coverage ratings than any Linebacker. In Madden 09 you have most Linebackers running 30 yards downfield with WRs and HBs. Jumping 10 feet off the ground to blindly super swat a pass. That is asinine. There is no way in hell that would happen in real life. That's why coaches uses motion and try to get HBs one on one with a LB in real life. It's caleld match-ups. Because no LB is able to have good coverage more than 10-15 yards downfield. It just doesn't happen. The highest MAN COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 60. The highest ZONE COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 75. No if, ands, or buts about it.

I agree, but I'm not sure that's how it works in this game. If they lower it too far then we'll have the NCAA problem, where backers can't even keep up with backs flaring to the flats and that isn't right either.

# 169 Mo_Magic @ 02/10/09 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexBrady


	Did I say that Tom Brady is not the best qb in the NFL? I believe he is the best, but he does have shortcomings. ( believe it or not) Those shortcomings include: -Floating passes high when his back foot is not set ( you saw this more in the 2006 season) -Does not throw well on the run and must set up to fire deep balls -Struggles with his intermediate accuracy and does not throw well if he is forced left -Arm strength is not elite, he is still among the top arms and his overall abilities are in the top 3 -Used to have the bad habit of throwing late over the middle (more common in the 2006 season) -Has a slight hitch in his delivery -Will fail to see a zone corner which will result in errant passes -Not a threat to run That being said, he is the best player in football. Lets see how he rebounds from injury though.

You do realize you just described about 95% of all QB's to have EVER played?

Is there a QB who's ever had frequent success off of his back foot or thrown as well as the best QB's in the league on the run rather than off?

The thing is, all this stuff you said that Brady doesn't do well, he still does better than 90% of the league.

# 170 TheWatcher @ 02/10/09 03:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rgiles


	Some people want to point to that SuperBowl loss and say that pressure makes him struggle. I don't know of any QB's who can consistently pass the ball with pressure and hands in their face. With that said, if he was rated a 99, I wouldn't bicker one bit.

I thought Brady handled things pretty well considering that he had no time to throw for most of the game and his receivers were getting blanketed (which was largely a result of the questionable offensive playcalling that happened almost all game... what the heck was McDaniel doing?) His stats were pretty good too, and he did lead the Pats on that late TD drive that would've won the game had the Pats D not completely melted down on the Giants GW drive. Had the D held, we'd still be talking about how clutch Brady's last TD drive was.

I still can't believe a defense stacked with impact players, Pro Bowlers, All-Pro's and future hall of famers could blow it at the end like that, especially since the Pats usually end the game and win in those situations. But the NFL is so unpredictable today, and I guess that's why it's popularity is ever increasing. I mean, the Cardinals made the Super Bowl... and not only made it but with a 9-7 record... and almost won it! It doesn't get any more unpredictable than that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexBrady


	Did I say that Tom Brady is not the best qb in the NFL? I believe he is the best, but he does have shortcomings. ( believe it or not) Those shortcomings include: -Floating passes high when his back foot is not set ( you saw this more in the 2006 season) -Does not throw well on the run and must set up to fire deep balls -Struggles with his intermediate accuracy and does not throw well if he is forced left -Arm strength is not elite, he is still among the top arms and his overall abilities are in the top 3 -Used to have the bad habit of throwing late over the middle (more common in the 2006 season) -Has a slight hitch in his delivery -Will fail to see a zone corner which will result in errant passes -Not a threat to run That being said, he is the best player in football. Lets see how he rebounds from injury though.

Yeah, but I could pick apart all of Joe Montana's weaknesses too. He wasn't terribly athletic. Wasn't good from outside the pocket. Had questionable arm strength for most of his career. Yet, most consider him the GOAT (myself included). The thing is, all great players have weaknesses. Jim Brown wasn't a good pass blocker (mostly because he was just disinterested in doing it as he said himself), but he's still considered by many to be the greatest runningback of all time (not my personal opinion necessarily, but many people believe it and they have a strong case).

# 171 roxnsox @ 02/10/09 03:38 PM

This is excellent!

On a side note. I see you are using SQL Query Analyzer. Have you ever used Toad for SQL Server? It allows you to do so much more than SQA. For example, It keeps 5 result sets in memory (or more if you choose), so you can go back and forth between selections to compare. You can filter result sets if you are looking for a specific player, and add sums or averages at the bottom. It has a much more robust search and replace than SQA, too.
It 's a great tool.
FYI, I do not work for Quest Software the company that makes it, but I am a beta tester for new versions.

Here's a link to the free version if you'd like to give it a try:
http://www.toadsoft.com/toadsqlserver/toad_sqlserver.htm

Please delete this post if it is against the TOS for Operation Sports.

# 172 BezO @ 02/10/09 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	Linebacker Coverage One thing that drastically needs some changing is the coverage ratings of Linebackers. You have some linebackers with 70+ Man Coverage and 85+ Zone Coverage. That is absolutely ridiculous. Did you know that in Madden 09, if you put Brian Urlacher at CB his overall rating is an 86 ? Eighty effing Six. Brian Urlacher. That's higher than most #2 CBs in the game. It's absurd, man. I know guys like Brian Urlacher, Gary Brackett, and Kirk Morrison are some of the best coverage Linebackers in the game, there is no doubt about that, but you simply cannot have Linebackers with higher coverage ratings than some corners. The fact of the matter is, no LB in the game today is better at coverage than any CB in the game today. I don't care if you're talking about Jason David.. he still should have higher coverage ratings than any Linebacker. In Madden 09 you have most Linebackers running 30 yards downfield with WRs and HBs. Jumping 10 feet off the ground to blindly super swat a pass. That is asinine. There is no way in hell that would happen in real life. That's why coaches uses motion and try to get HBs one on one with a LB in real life. It's caleld match-ups. Because no LB is able to have good coverage more than 10-15 yards downfield. It just doesn't happen. The highest MAN COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 60. The highest ZONE COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 75. No if, ands, or buts about it.

IMO, this is why the game desparately needs realistic footwork. Footwork is why Urlacher shouldn't cover as well as any CB. He shouldn't get in & out of breaks nearly as quickly as a CB and shouldn't be able to cover any WRs because of that. At the same time, he'd be able to cover most RBs due to their lower route running ratings.

# 173 K_GUN @ 02/10/09 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexBrady


	Did I say that Tom Brady is not the best qb in the NFL? I believe he is the best, but he does have shortcomings. ( believe it or not) Those shortcomings include: -Floating passes high when his back foot is not set ( you saw this more in the 2006 season) -Does not throw well on the run and must set up to fire deep balls -Struggles with his intermediate accuracy and does not throw well if he is forced left -Arm strength is not elite, he is still among the top arms and his overall abilities are in the top 3 -Used to have the bad habit of throwing late over the middle (more common in the 2006 season) -Has a slight hitch in his delivery -Will fail to see a zone corner which will result in errant passes -Not a threat to run That being said, he is the best player in football. Lets see how he rebounds from injury though.

ha hah

are you a scout?

or just a gamer like the rest of us?

# 174 K_GUN @ 02/10/09 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave374


	You guys really should consider releasing one more Madden 09 roster with these re-worked roster ratings. It would be a great way to have thousands of people testing them.

i'm actually re-editing the last set now.....to try it myself

going to use my bills against the steelers and eagles...just 3 teams...and play, play, play

one can't truly get a feel with just a couple games here/there

long ways til August, might as well have some fun

# 175 kcarr @ 02/10/09 04:29 PM

first, as far as whether there should be 99 ovr players. It depends on what you consider 99. If you take it to mean perfect in their position then no, noone is there. If you take it to mean a top notch player compared to others in the league today, there should be a few. If you take it to mean at the top level of any who ever have or will in the foreseeable future play then it could be questionable but there would probably be a few.

Second, another concern from me. While they are out there lowering players ratings I hope they don't just lower every average player's ratings across the board. you shouldnt just take a players and because he was an 80 overall lower everything drastically to where he is a 40 overall. What I hope they do is actually look closer at the ratings so if a guy is an 80 ovr with 98 speed, 80 catch, and 78 route running for instance you probably wouldn't lower speed or maybe just lower it one or 2 but then you would lower route running to like 35 and catch to like 37 maybe. That way you get some real variety to your 40 overall players. Also, that way players who are rated 40 overall can still help their teams in the way they do in real life and can still succeed in those ways.

A good example of this would be someone likie devery henderson. Among the top of the league in drops, misses some easy passes with pretty bad regularity, doesn't run good routes, but he can catch the deep ball decently well and he is dangerous with the ball. He had crazy yards per catch this year and a really high percent of his passes went for 20 or more yards and for 40 or more yards as compared to the rest of the league. I figured those numbers up once and posted them somewhere but I cant remember what they were exactly. Just because he becomes like a 40 overall I dont want to see him become completely worthless. He should still be able to do what he does in real life

# 176 OverUnder @ 02/10/09 04:36 PM

to better reflect the “sim-gameplay” style that Ian and Phil have been telling you about all winter long.

SIM Gameplay...thats what it's all about...great move

ONLINE LEAGUES with stat tracking and an online web component...PRETTY PLEASE WITH A CHERRY ON TOP

# 177 kehlis @ 02/10/09 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcarr


	first, as far as whether there should be 99 ovr players. It depends on what you consider 99. If you take it to mean perfect in their position then no, noone is there. If you take it to mean a top notch player compared to others in the league today, there should be a few. If you take it to mean at the top level of any who ever have or will in the foreseeable future play then it could be questionable but there would probably be a few.

Couldn't have said it better myself. Remember the ratings are arbitrary and should be looked upon as being relative to other peers.

I can't remember the range that they extended too, but IMO there should players at both ends of the spectrum.

# 178 glitchditcher @ 02/10/09 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BezO


	IMO, this is why the game desparately needs realistic footwork. Footwork is why Urlacher shouldn't cover as well as any CB. He shouldn't get in & out of breaks nearly as quickly as a CB and shouldn't be able to cover any WRs because of that. At the same time, he'd be able to cover most RBs due to their lower route running ratings.

That's actually an excellent idea. A footwork rating for defenders. They have it for Offensive Lineman, why not defenders ? It's actually MORE important to have it for defenders.

# 179 Vikes1 @ 02/10/09 06:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LBzrule


	I just want to know one thing right now. Is it EASY for Johnson or any other back to get outside on the Ravens and Steelers defenses? If it is, that needs to be fixed. How has the stretch of ratings had an impact on defenders?

Good question LB.

One of the things I really like about the current Madden is...in my experience, it's tough for me to run to the outside. As in the real NFL you have to learn to be patient and run between the tackles. Of course I'm not saying running to the outside should be nearly impossible...but remain difficult.

As far as how this will impact the defenders?....I just hope both sides of the ball get a fair shake.

# 180 Glorious Arc @ 02/10/09 06:26 PM

How in the world can Tom Brady have a stronger arm then Jemarcus Russel?(sp) Jemarcus can sit on his butt and throw the ball 40 yards, on his knees he can throw it 60, and standing he can throw the ball at least 80 yards. Tom has some zip on the ball no doubt but honestly do you think he can chuck a ball that far or that deep? No he cant maybe Vick could but thats a whole different story. In the Tom and Manning debate almost everyone agreed that Manning had a stronger arm. And time after time after time Tom has 99 arm strength!?! He is a great QB but he does not have that ability.

DONT bring the progression system from head coach into madden. How many stand-out rookie running backs did we have this season? Head coach killed the ability for players to grow that deserved to grow. If I draft a 70 overall RB and start him and he gets 1000 yards with 8 TDs(which is a well above average) i expect him to grow during the season to something in the 80's with whatever skills i used when running with him/catching/blocking.

Not all players grow because they had a great season though. There should be some type of system that allows us to train our players to grow a little bit like a training camp or coaches develping players by coaching them and giving them new workouts.

The Physical skills speed, strength, agility, jumping, acceleration, throw power should only grow a limited amount. Players that enter the NFL that run a 4.6 40 dont run a 4.2 40 at the end because they ran for 2000 yards. The most it should be able to increase is maybe by 3-4 points unless they drop alot of weight but that should effect their strength.

strength should increase a bit more because it is easier to get stronger then faster. arm strength should stay about the same; maybe increase a few points if thats all as a coach you focus on.

Scouts look into players with physical ablities because for the most part you either have them or you dont

« Previous 1 2…6 7 8910 11 12…16 17 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 10 Blog: Player Ratings - A New Philosophy, A New Era