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

[peteykirch]

Quote: Originally Posted by gator3guy

Kordell went to school near me and ran 4.3 coming out of high school...take it for what its worth

Yeah as a Freshman coming into College, I'd agree with you, but after going through two major surgeries on your knee it's hard to keep that speed.

[gator3guy]

Quote: Originally Posted by peteykirch

Yeah as a Freshman coming into College, I'd agree with you, but after going through two major surgeries on your knee it's hard to keep that speed.

Yeah that's why I said I dont blame EA for missing that.

I hope EA actually reads this thread. The opinions in here are very valid. I hate to bring up last-gen, but out of boredom last night I popped in NCAA 2002, 2003, and 2004 and took a look over all the ratings. OMG I couldn't believe my eyes. Not only did ratings match up to real-life counterparts, but there was a reasonable amount of players rated above 90 and 95+ was reserved for the elite. As I was scrolling through QB's (overall NCAA) it didn't take long before I was scrolling into the 70's overall. That in my opinion is how it should be. I strongly suggest EA go through past games and look over player ratings. It may seem like an insignificant item, but the ratings control what goes on on the field more than anything. If the ratings are reasonable your going to have a positive outcome on the field. I don't think it's a coincidence last-gen was so good and present-gen is so ehhhh.

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by gator3guy

Yeah that's why I said I dont blame EA for missing that. I hope EA actually reads this thread. The opinions in here are very valid. I hate to bring up last-gen, but out of boredom last night I popped in NCAA 2002, 2003, and 2004 and took a look over all the ratings. OMG I couldn't believe my eyes. Not only did ratings match up to real-life counterparts, but there was a reasonable amount of players rated above 90 and 95+ was reserved for the elite. As I was scrolling through QB's (overall NCAA) it didn't take long before I was scrolling into the 70's overall. That in my opinion is how it should be. I strongly suggest EA go through past games and look over player ratings. It may seem like an insignificant item, but the ratings control what goes on on the field more than anything. If the ratings are reasonable your going to have a positive outcome on the field. I don't think it's a coincidence last-gen was so good and present-gen is so ehhhh.

I definetly agree the ratings a few years back on PS2 were really good and balanced.

I always refer the NCAA 05-06 or Madden 05-06 ratings before creating any Classic teams/Players.

Those ratings really help to keep the overall ratings down for me especially when creating the younger players on players at the bottom of the depth chart.

I always end up with with a ton of guys in the 60's or 70's and by the time they are Jr's or Sr's they are barely reaching 80+ overall

[Palo20]

Playmakers, how have your stretched ratings done with sim stats? I know with Madden, there were some issues, especially with backup RBs having horrible numbers.