What's the difference between EA's player ratings and your own player ratings?

[Sublime12089]

Another suggestion that would never happen is to have either two sets of ratings (hardcore and normal?) or for them to somehow include a "Ratings Spread" slider. I don't know bout how that could be accomplished mathematically, but I assume it would be doable somehow.

[Palo20]

How would a player with 20-40 OVR perform against players that are 80-90 OVR? If I have a 25 OVR DE going against the best LT in the game, won't he be pancaked every play? That's not realistic. Even the worst player will have his moments and be able to compete at times vs the best. That's my concern with the super stretched ratings.

And how do we determine who should be 20 OVR? Backups come on all the time and play at least competently. A bad safety might play good football on 18 out of 20 plays, then get burned on those 2 and that's considered pretty bad safety play. Would a 20 OVR safety even be capable of playing well on those 18 or are they just useless at all times?

If the ratings are stretched too far, the game plays completely differently, and some players are useless. That's not realistic either.

Also, it's already fairly easy to beat Eastern Michigan with Alabama, and you can get realistic scores. If Eastern is even worse, you might have to try hard not to put up 100 points.

[Vaporub83]

Quote: Originally Posted by ActLikeYouCrow

the other problem that is sure to get mentioned are lowering the ratings in ncaa probably impact the draft classes for madden a lot. which means there needs to be the kind of interaction between the two teams so that the ratings on both games are spread out and the draft classes come out accurate.

The one thing that Phil said they did for franchise mode in madden was tweak imported draft classes.

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by Palo20

How would a player with 20-40 OVR perform against players that are 80-90 OVR? If I have a 25 OVR DE going against the best LT in the game, won't he be pancaked every play? That's not realistic. Even the worst player will have his moments and be able to compete at times vs the best. That's my concern with the super stretched ratings.

He wouldn't get pamncake on every play because i don't expect you to lower his Strength rating below 70 or 60

You can take that DE and give him low awareness, low tackling, low play recognition and pursuit

His Block shed and Strength would keep him from being pancked on every play but he wouldn't be a guy who could perform at a high level in the game.

There are like 5 overall ratings that makes up the IMPACT of a DL in this game and to me they aren't used correctly to seperate players good from bad or strength vs weaknesses

[UniversityofArizona]

my 2023 dynasty has 315 players rated 90 or above. think of that in terms of draft stock

my team only had 7 based on recruiting out of only the state of washington

Quote: Originally Posted by Colorado Cooler

What makes matters worse, 2-star recruits rated 66 or higher are easy to land for even the lowliest teams, and thus, an Ark St dynasty player's first recruiting class of freshman makes all those 40, 50 and lower-60 ranked players on the original roster obsolete. In year two, freshman play while many upperclass players who survive the first cut are deadweight, waiting to matriculate out of the system or to be cut on the second go around.

And this right here is my biggest fear with the game. I hope 1-2 star players come in terrible because I do not want these freshman taking over for upperclassman just cause they have better rating

[BSherrod]

@Playmakers

Seeing that you do a lot of roster work, I was wondering if you have any particular posts that go in depth with what attributes matter at what position and the effects of each rating? For instance, what attributes would I assign a game managing QB versus a gunslinger. Something along those lines.

[LucianoJJ]

Quote: Originally Posted by BIGFOOT999

I agree, there is MAYBE 1 player on my team that deserves a 90, and only probably 2 others that deserve upper 80s. I really would like to see the full scale used <20=bad 20-39 =below average 40-59= Average 60-70= above average 71-79= good / All Conference in non BCS 80-89= All Conference (BCS mostly, with exceptions) 90+ = All Americans

I like this scale a lot. The problem is the game must be tuned to reflect the ratings Tiburon handed out. If you edited rosters using this scale, the game might play differently. It might be better to shave off several points off certain columns and see how that works out.