Madden 2010 News Post

Madden NFL 10 Blog: Franchise Mode Improvements

06:28 PM - April 6, 2009 by buddyhobbs321813

EA has just posted another Madden NFL 10 blog. This one covers franchise mode improvements.

Quote:


	"This week I wanted to give you an update on what we�re addressing in franchise mode this year. We�re probably going to have a few blogs about franchise mode from now until August, so I�m just going to touch on a couple of things we�ve been working on since I joined the team. One thing we learned on NFL Head Coach �09 was that in order to have a great franchise mode, you need a solid base. You wouldn�t put a 2nd or 3rd addition on your house if the foundation is crumbling, right? Since our �foundation� is the logic behind every decision made in franchise mode, we knew we really wanted to address that foundation before anything else major was applied. I know some folks may be expecting the entire NFL Head Coach �09 game to be dropped into Madden this year, but that�s not going to happen. We have a lot of work to do and it�s going to take us some time to start with the core of franchise mode and take it where we all want it to be. I�ll break down some of the problems we�ve encountered so far and talk about how we�re addressing them below."

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

# 121 seveb @ 04/06/09 11:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bump101


	Look at it this way, when madden 10 is release, Kurt Warner probably is going to have a 90 overall rating or higher. Yet, if we were going off of the new madden 10 logic, if Warner have the kind of season he had in real life, in the first year of franchise in 10, his rating would either decrease "at warp speed", or he probably would retire, just because he's over 30. It just doesn't make sense. I mean if a player get old, I can see him decreasing in certain physical ratings such as spd, acc, agl, etc. But to say a player is going to fall off at warp speed because he turns 30 is crazy.

I don't disagree. I think the 30 mark was just for RB's, and it really does make sense there. No one can make a list of really good over-30 rbs. Qb's and OL and stuff, sure, I'm with you, but I don't think that EA was talking about anything other than RB's when they specifically mentioned age 30.

I think guys who rely on pure physical skills (Speed, agility, etc) should be hurt more than, say, a Teddy Bruschi type. I'll go on record and say Urlacher either won't be in the league or will be just another guy (maybe playing weak-side) within a few years.

I just don't want a lot of guys maintaining well into their mid-thirties because then you end up unbalancing the game as good young guys come in. For every guy people think of that held up well for longer than usual, about a bajillion guys didn't.

Edit: Kcarr just said some of what I was trying to say, but said it better.

# 122 Ian_Cummings @ 04/06/09 11:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGaither84


	You can see in his chart the Stock of ERTS in the last 5 years adn what has come of EA since the Exclusive licensing deal. Keep in mind that Madden isn't the only thing EA makes, but it is one of it's largest and highest selling products. In the second chart we will also notice the stock of EA prior to the exclusive licensing deal and afterwards in this 10 year chart.

Sorry PGaither....I am kinda confused with this one...what point are you trying to make here? Can you explain a little more?

# 123 sportzbro @ 04/06/09 11:31 PM

how did stocks make it into this thread

# 124 MrDhWhat @ 04/06/09 11:36 PM

Really great!

# 125 thejake @ 04/06/09 11:38 PM

For the guys arguing against player ratings decreasing as they get older....

Do yall think that if you have a good season with a guy their ratings should stay the same or get better? So if you keep having good years they can play forever? Age is the number one factor that determines regression and the example in the blog about the running backs is right on and I'm excited to read that they are finally doing something like this.

# 126 Bump101 @ 04/06/09 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thejake


	For the guys arguing against player ratings decreasing as they get older.... Do yall think that if you have a good season with a guy their ratings should stay the same or get better? So if you keep having good years they can play forever? Age is the number one factor that determines regression and the example in the blog about the running backs is right on and I'm excited to read that they are finally doing something like this.

It's not really the decrease when they are 30. It's the warp speed, as in up to 10 points off of overall rating that was explain in the blog.

If a player has a good season and decrease by a point or two cool. But to decrease by 10 points, that's insane. Every player is different. Age, stats, contract, team success, team talent, potential rating, number of hits/collision and overall wear and tear should be the deciding factor in whether a players rating increase/decrease or retire. Not age.

Don't get me wrong, for most players when they reach the age cap (that have obvious been add to the progression system) they should fall off. But for the players that is still putting up big numbers and winning mvp awards and making pro bowls, their rating shouldn't go drop "at warp speed" and they shouldn't retire either. Just my opinion.

# 127 Blkcanes @ 04/07/09 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kcarr


	Ok, first off I wanted to point out the fact that he said running backs at that age. They probably therefore realize other positions don't take the same high impact beating that running backs take. As far as LT goes, I see him probably still being borderline elite, low 90s, his first season. Even if he regresses really harshly (10 points overall) that still makes him low 80s which with the spread out ratings should still be good enough to be effective in a lot of situations. Especially in the case of LT and guys like westbrook their catching ability, their vision, and their leadership and awareness abilities should really allow them to maintain a role on the team for a couple more years. Sure, when he drops down to an 82, hopefully with lower endurance/stamina/injury type ratings, you will want to start looking to use him less. Maybe lowering his carries more and more, getting a replacement ready, and trying to protect him from taking the beating of trying to run 20 or 25 times a game. This forces you to play more to their strengths once they start to decline if they want to still make the proper impact, somewhat like how bettis was used primarly in short yardage situations at the end of his career.

See the thing about that is, in Madden when a player has a lower overall rating than the second stringer the second stringer becomes the starter which means LT would be cut out of the picture completely. I wonder What happens when a Team drafts a QB 2th overall but his rating is still lower than the Vet QB? does he have to wait until the Vet contract is over or is he going to start sometime in the year?

This is a major problem to me hope they have seen this. When a player is drafted in the top 15 they think of him as a starter sometime in the near future. Not sit on the bench for two or three years waiting for something to happen to the starter ahead of him.

# 128 xxjgbxx @ 04/07/09 12:11 AM

may be best madden to date and may take me away from the show franchise if it is

# 129 Vikes1 @ 04/07/09 12:13 AM

The blog was a good read, and I liked most everything I read. Thanks Josh.

The only thing I'm a little unsure of is the "Potential rating".

As a few others have said...I'm not real thrilled about knowing pretty much exactly the "limit" of a players rating. I just don't like the sound of that. The one thing about it I did like is, that this rating is hidden with the cpu teams. That would add a layer of mystery in trading for players, and possibly FA. Not knowing if their potential has been reached. That part I like.

# 130 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian_Cummings_EA


	Sorry PGaither....I am kinda confused with this one...what point are you trying to make here? Can you explain a little more?

Happy to. While i understand that there are many factors involved in EA's market Value, when you look at the 10 year history you se an obvious spike from 45 to 65 dollars a share in january 2005. What could possibly have happened to cause this?
Posted Dec 13, 2004 2:53 pm PT - EA and NFL ink exclusive licensing agreement.

Please don't misunderstand me. I am not blaming EA for "stealing" exclusive right or anything. this is just a simple fact and you can see the signifficant increase in their market shares. As you continue to watch the eb and flow of the market you will also notice that EA's value goes up come august when Madden comes out. Also you may notice that along with the market as a whole EA is also affected by Madden sales.

NO ONE could escape the financial melt down we have recently sufferd through, however one must also think that along with a market colapse that the interest in consumers buying products in an economic down turn will decrease as well. Making bad games doesn't help sales in tough times.

Electronic Arts does not live and die off of Madden. The Sims, Sim City, games like battlefield 1942 and others are great EA products. "Challenge everything." EA Sports is just a devision of the company. However no one will deny that Millions and millions of copies sold each year do no effect the companies market value.

One of the things I was hoping to point out, and this all ties back into Guillotine 1's original post on the topic of the stock value, was that the work Ian and co. are doing is having an effect on the shares. Consumer confidence, at least here at OS is reaching an all-time high and I can only imagine what shareholders are thinking when they see the community reacting positively to the Insideblog. The shareholders are not going to read OS threads, but the people in charge of researching consumer confidence must note how we all feel towards EA and your efforts. I would predict, along with other market trends that with the continued support from your consumer base that EA will be ableto weather this storm better than most.

I actually am thinking of buying shares in ERTS, and have been thinking about it for a few months. If for no other reason, come August the stocks will HAVE to be worth more than 19.69 a share just because of the sales of madden alone. That should more than pay for my initial investment.

Jst look at each low summer compared to the high fall values after the release of madden. From 42.0 in may of 06 to 55.84 in september of 06[+13.84],from 47.32 in June of 07 to 61.12 in october of 07[+13.8], and from 44.43 in june of 08 to 48.81 in August prior to the crisis [+4.38]. I honestly belive that, barring another huge economic melt down, EA is a safe bet to place you money into. More so now that we are in a rut. most econmic experts, real experts, teach you to buy low and sell high. history teaches you that often the best time to invest is when the market plumits. Ground floor investing in stable companies often leads to future wealth. But this is a personal choice, something I am honestly concidering making myself. I didn't loose me butt in the stock market because I knew to get out back when Bush was TALKING about the 1st bailout.

There are certian trends you can see, and one trend I see is that ERTS should have a decent raise from now untill August.

# 131 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:19 AM

That's all I have to say about that.

# 132 Cnada @ 04/07/09 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vikes1


	The blog was a good read, and I liked most everything I read. Thanks Josh. The only thing I'm a little unsure of is the "Potential rating". As a few others have said...I'm not real thrilled about knowing pretty much exactly the "limit" of a players rating. I just don't like the sound of that. The one thing about it I did like is, that this rating is hidden with the cpu teams. That would add a layer of mystery in trading for players, and possibly FA. Not knowing if their potential has been reached. That part I like.

Yeah i was just taking a 2nd look at the blog and notice that too.
Does that mean most undrafted rookies cannot exceed an overall Rating? that is if his potential is say 85, i use him all season has a cromartie rookie year, i cant get him above 85?

# 133 Megatron2k7 @ 04/07/09 12:23 AM

I think players should progress physically until the age of 25 regardless of playing time or workouts unless they suffer a severe injury. (some more than others based on potential, body types, etc.)

Age 25 - 30.... maintain physical attributes as long as they are not severly injured. Some attributes like strength can be upgraded through training. Speed pretty much locked in at this point.

Age 30 +.... Some players slowly start to regress in physical attributes. Stamina, and Injury really need to start regressing here. Severe Injuries take a much larger toll on attributes. RB's being the hardest hit here. LB's probably next in line. Gaining even the simplest of physical attributes like strength should be very difficult.

The progression of non physical attributes should be determined by success. If a 32 yr old RB still has a decent year stat wise, then he should still see an incease in Awr or in skills like catching, or any other skill he was good at during the year.

The main thing I don't want to see is a player in his 30's who has been a solid player for years, suddenly start to lose Awareness points. That seems silly to me, if anything, it should be the opposite. I know for a fact I've seen older players regress in some older versions of Madden, and I was always so confused by seeing Awr drop for them. Players don't get dumber with age, they just get older, and lose their physical edge.

# 134 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:34 AM

I really don't like the idea of a "cap" on how players progress. If they do ell, they should be ratted higher. It's simple really. If I draft rookie QB Joe Blow in the 4th round and his "potential" is 85 and I through a serise of events I end up making him the next Tom Brady, he should be THE NEXT TOM BRADY. Not get caped at 85. This potential "cap" idea [i don't know if it is accurate] as we understand it is GARBAGE. Potential should help you rate what kind of player he "Could be" on draft day. Manning and Leaf had a lot of potential, but look who lived up to it?

When Jamal Lewis ran for over 2000 yards what happened in Madden? he was a BEAST as he should be. i was jsut talkignto my friend and he was sayign it would be wrog if I could just take a shmuck reciver and do crazy things with him that he shoud become a 99 in a few years. I responded "Why? If you saw that reciver go ape $hit, wouldn't you EXPECT his madden ratting in the next update/game to be high?" Your ratting should be in part a reflecion on you performance. Manny Lawson of the 49ers is 6'6" 235 lbs and has 90 speed. he is a beast. however he is hurt a lot and it only an 85 OLB. If he could overcome injury and play at the level willis has played, would he too deserveto be a high 90's player?

I know I sound like a bad record, but production and physical attributes should factor into how well a player's ovr is ratted and how he progresses. I agree that things like speed, agilit, acceleration, and jump shouldn't really go up. tackle, play recogniton, man/zone coverage, rout runningand others however should be altered by thier performance as that is the POINT of rattings, to RATE how well a player is doing out there.

# 135 tron8 @ 04/07/09 12:36 AM

the toughness rating and injury history should directly relate to when a player retires. Tougher players play longer but they can also get one too many concussions.

# 136 CreatineKasey @ 04/07/09 12:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PGaither84


	I really don't like the idea of a "cap" on how players progress. If they do ell, they should be ratted higher. It's simple really. If I draft rookie QB Joe Blow in the 4th round and his "potential" is 85 and I through a serise of events I end up making him the next Tom Brady, he should be THE NEXT TOM BRADY. Not get caped at 85. This potential "cap" idea [i don't know if it is accurate] as we understand it is GARBAGE. Potential should help you rate what kind of player he "Could be" on draft day. Manning and Leaf had a lot of potential, but look who lived up to it? When Jamal Lewis ran for over 2000 yards what happened in Madden? he was a BEAST as he should be. i was jsut talkignto my friend and he was sayign it would be wrog if I could just take a shmuck reciver and do crazy things with him that he shoud become a 99 in a few years. I responded "Why? If you saw that reciver go ape $hit, wouldn't you EXPECT his madden ratting in the next update/game to be high?" Your ratting should be in part a reflecion on you performance. Manny Lawson of the 49ers is 6'6" 235 lbs and has 90 speed. he is a beast. however he is hurt a lot and it only an 85 OLB. If he could overcome injury and play at the level willis has played, would he too deserveto be a high 90's player? I know I sound like a bad record, but production and physical attributes should factor into how well a player's ovr is ratted and how he progresses. I agree that things like speed, agilit, acceleration, and jump shouldn't really go up. tackle, play recogniton, man/zone coverage, rout runningand others however should be altered by thier performance as that is the POINT of rattings, to RATE how well a player is doing out there.

I don't know about this. Sometimes players perform better than their abilities. Couldn't that be the case? Maybe that WR with low ratings just played better than you'd expect with his skill set.

Maybe some intangibles could be more high-ended with repeated success, but really I think it's totally fine that abilities are capped on players. I think physical abilities should be more set and capped along with the intangibles being more wide open. Think Jerry Rice - not the fastest guy, not the most agile... but geez his intangibles blew everyone away.

Doing attributes would be a tough balance between their talent level and their performance. I know where you are coming from with your argument.

# 137 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave374


	The average consumer doesn't even know OS exists or that Ian has been interacting with community. Ian/Phil/Franchise Guy's interactions with the community will have ZERO impact on EA's share price. If I had to guess, OS members are about 0.1% of the entire Madden community. Am I glad they're listening to us? Absolutely. Do I think it will result in a better game? Yes. But to think the average Madden consumer gives a crap what we think is wishful thinking at best.

I respect that. Just kep in mind that the average person who reads the blogs oesn't go to OS either. I had no idea about OS untill ian poste a link in one of the blogs. The blogs reach more people than i think you give them credit for and I think that they are well promoted on EA's site to involve the consumer.

While clearly editied to make my point, this is on the main page of www.easports.com

You don't have to be an OS member to be a visitor of easports online.

# 138 Jump @ 04/07/09 12:46 AM

Spot on Megatron.

I'll use LT as an example.

You start your chargers franchise and LT has a good year. Say 1300 rsh yds 500 receiving yds and 13 total TD's.

I would hope that the progression takes away a few points from some physical attributes,(SPD,AGL,ACC etc.) BUT he would gain technique or awareness attributes(BCV,CAR,CTH etc.).

If he started at 92 OVRL his OVRL rating might stay the same, maybe even go up a small amount(1 or 2 points). If he had an average or bad season, he likely would have dropped due to not gaining the technique or awareness attributes.

And I think we can all agree that a 92 or 93 rated back can play a big part in an offense even if he did lose a step.

Thats what I'm hoping for.

# 139 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CreatineKasey


	I don't know about this. Sometimes players perform better than their abilities. Couldn't that be the case? Maybe that WR with low ratings just played better than you'd expect with his skill set. Maybe some intangibles could be more high-ended with repeated success, but really I think it's totally fine that abilities are capped on players. I think physical abilities should be more set and capped along with the intangibles being more wide open. Think Jerry Rice - not the fastest guy, not the most agile... but geez his intangibles blew everyone away. Doing attributes would be a tough balance between their talent level and their performance. I know where you are coming from with your argument.

I agree with your primise here. I agree that players shouldhave thier physical abilitie caped. however, though hard work and dedication players shoudl have the opertunity to be greats like Jerry Rice if they perform up to that level. i am not talking about single game performances, but over all. If I rush for 2000 yards, I shouldn't be caped at having an 85 ovr back. J. Lewis ran for over 2000 yards an in the next madden his speed went up from 88 to like 91, but his other skills went through the roof just like they should have. the same is ture in Madden. if your guy goes nuts, he should have his rattings do the same over he corse of time. conversely, if he starts to decline and shows thathe is more of a fluke [like Dante Hall?] then he should drop accordingly as well.

# 140 PGaither84 @ 04/07/09 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jump


	Spot on Megatron. I'll use LT as an example. You start your chargers franchise and LT has a good year. Say 1300 rsh yds 500 receiving yds and 13 total TD's. I would hope that the progression takes away a few points from some physical attributes,(SPD,AGL,ACC etc.) BUT he would gain technique or awareness attributes(BCV,CAR,CTH etc.). If he started at 92 OVRL his OVRL rating might stay the same, maybe even go up a small amount(1 or 2 points). If he had an average or bad season, he likely would have dropped due to not gaining the technique or awareness attributes. And I think we can all agree that a 92 or 93 rated back can play a big part in an offense even if he did lose a step. Thats what I'm hoping for.

I agree with you. honestly I fear the Madden 02 progression system. that had to be amoung the worst I have ever delt with. Junior Seau retired in 05 as a 58ovr. That is so sad and stupid.

Players would have FANTASTIC seasons and drop just because they were old. I think the best way ot age players is to drop their physical stats over the age of 30, but allow room to grow as well. in 02 all heir stats would drop except awareness. Seau had 99awr but everything else was in the $hitter.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 678 9 10 11 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 10 Blog: Franchise Mode Improvements