Player rating changes

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by cparrish

I've always been confused how you can just say a player is a 93 overall? Do you just higher and lower ratings till John Doe is a 93 overall as opposed to rating a player to his specific abilities and rolling with whatever the overall rating ends up being?

I can't answer for everyone but I personally try to capture the player tendency ratings 1st

I'm not going to give a power back added speed and acceleration just to boost up his overall rating and rank him in the game based on his overall rating.

It's kinda like a Pocket QB because of his speed and acceleration ratings possibly being low it might appear as if he's been underrated compaired to a mobile QB's overall rating.

But in this game if you give a Pocket QB great awareness plus accuarcy it doesn't matter if his overall rating in the low-mid 80's he'll still play very effective because you focused on his prime ratings 1st.

I see these types of player rankings every year in these threads and people just give a overall but i very rarely see anyone post tendencies that justify that overall.

For example a speed back they will very rarely be a 90+ overall uless you jack up his Break Tackle, Trucking and Stiff Arm rating.

If you had those ratings all in the 40's you'll see even with speed, acceleration, and agility in the 90's it will be very hard for that RB to end up a 90+ overall.

On Default Rosters i might be in the minorty but i would have no more than 4-5 players at RB with 90+ overall and that is being generous because i can have no problems with a roster file released even without a 90+ RB.

There is nothing wrong with having the highest rated player at RB only be 88 overall because like i said his actual tendency ratings should determine his ability on the field not his overall rating.

[GruffyMcGuiness]

Quote: Originally Posted by tarheel_24

16. Bryn Renner- 91

Homer much?

[TDavis45]

Personally I agree with many people here... the 90+ ratings should be rare... As in only a few players in the whole nation per position.... Sounds like this year many players attributes will need to be adjusted. (GREAT!!!!!)

[Purplepower_NC]

Quote: Originally Posted by Playmakers

I can't answer for everyone but I personally try to capture the player tendency ratings 1st I'm not going to give a power back added speed and acceleration just to boost up his overall rating and rank him in the game based on his overall rating. It's kinda like a Pocket QB because of his speed and acceleration ratings possibly being low it might appear as if he's been underrated compaired to a mobile QB's overall rating. But in this game if you give a Pocket QB great awareness plus accuarcy it doesn't matter if his overall rating in the low-mid 80's he'll still play very effective because you focused on his prime ratings 1st. I see these types of player rankings every year in these threads and people just give a overall but i very rarely see anyone post tendencies that justify that overall. For example a speed back they will very rarely be a 90+ overall uless you jack up his Break Tackle, Trucking and Stiff Arm rating. If you had those ratings all in the 40's you'll see even with speed, acceleration, and agility in the 90's it will be very hard for that RB to end up a 90+ overall. On Default Rosters i might be in the minorty but i would have no more than 4-5 players at RB with 90+ overall and that is being generous because i can have no problems with a roster file released even without a 90+ RB. There is nothing wrong with having the highest rated player at RB only be 88 overall because like i said his actual tendency ratings should determine his ability on the field not his overall rating.

Playmaker, I have to agree with this. Last year with your suggestions I had a very good set. However, this year I am planning on going a bit deeper and drop the ratings.

But lets say I do have a couple of RB's in the 90's, more in the 80's....wouldn't the rest just get lumped together, because you can't go lower than 40 on the scale.

I have thought of having all the back-ups from the smaller schools go in the 40 range, starters in the 50's unless they are above the rest such as Tulane's Darkwa. Then the majors -- back ups in the 60/70 and avg in the 70/80. This way the AA's would get the rare 90's such as Wis's Bell, SC's Lattimore, etc.

Anyone's ideals?

[BSherrod]

Quote: Originally Posted by Purplepower_NC

Playmaker, I have to agree with this. Last year with your suggestions I had a very good set. However, this year I am planning on going a bit deeper and drop the ratings. But lets say I do have a couple of RB's in the 90's, more in the 80's....wouldn't the rest just get lumped together, because you can't go lower than 40 on the scale. I have thought of having all the back-ups from the smaller schools go in the 40 range, starters in the 50's unless they are above the rest such as Tulane's Darkwa. Then the majors -- back ups in the 60/70 and avg in the 70/80. This way the AA's would get the rare 90's such as Wis's Bell, SC's Lattimore, etc. Anyone's ideals?

I think you should use that system as a general rule of thumb unless you know for sure the back up doesn't touch the field for one reason or another (fumbles, lack of vision, etc). I'm down to help out with a 360 set this year. I liked how Gotmadskillzson played, but the lack of depth chart and accessories threw me off a little top much.

[ndirish6776]

Notre Dame's rosters are a bit overrated, but much more accurate than usual.

QB: #11 (Rees) should be an 83 as opposed to an 87. He is also too fast and should have speed/acc/agl in the mid 60s. #12 (Hendrix) should be an 82 as opposed to an 86 and should have speed in the mid 80s with acc/agl in the low 80s. #5 (Golson) should also be an 82 as opposed to an 86 and should have speed in the mid 80s with agl/acc in the upper 80s. Kiel is good as a 78, but should probably have a tiny bit better speed/acc/agl.

RB: #20 (Wood) should be a 90/91, not a 93. He also should have speed/acc in the low 90s and agl in the mid 90s. He is too fast in the game. #6 (Riddick) should be more of an 85/86, not an 88, but he should have agl/acc in the mid 90s. His speed should be a low 90. #41 and #4 (Carlisle and Atkinson) should both be a 83/84. Carlisle has better acc/agl (93ish) but speed of around a 90. Atkinson should have speed of 95 (he is a track star), but acc/agl in the low 90s.

WR: #81 (Goodman) is overrated. 88 is way too high, and he should be about an 82. WR is the weakness on the offense apart from QB. #7 (Jones) should also be an 82. #9 (Toma) should be an 81, as should #3 (frosh Neal). Neal should have blazing speed/acc/agl. One mistake here with the WRs is that #16 (Daniels) should also be an 80 or 81, and should have great jumping and agl/acc. Essentially, Neal and Daniels are the young, flashy playmakers and Goodman/Jones/Toma are all just solid, slower guys.

TE: Eifert is a stud, but he should be a 94/95, not a 97. His speed looks good, so I'm guessing his blocking is overrated. Koyack and Niklas should both be 83-85, with Koyack the receiving threat and Niklas the blocking one.

OL: Best o-line ratings that EA has ever done for ND. They all look spot on. The backups could maybe be boosted by 1-3 points, but thats about it. This is the strength of the offense, and EA did a great job here.

DE: Tuitt is good as an 87, but Lewis-Moore is low as an 86. He should be more of an 88. They also have two frosh (Day/Jones) who are rated too low, and should be 77-78.

DT: Nix is solid as an 88, but he is more of a 90. Teams didn't run the ball too well against ND last year, and Nix was the main reason why. Springmann is rated well behind him. Kona Schwenke should be about an 84 as he is the #2 DT in their 3-4, and he is very underrated in the game

MLB: Te'o is probably a tiny bit overrated as a 98, but I'm not complaining. Fox's overall is good, but he's probably a bit too fast in his rating. Behind them should be Jarrett Grace who has emerged as Te'o's stud backup, and he should be around an 81-83. He is nowhere near that. Also, Calabrese came close to splitting time with Fox last year next to Te'o in the 3-4, and he should be around an 83.

OLB: Shembo is good as an 86, and Ishaq Williams (his backup who was even with him after the spring) should be an 85. On the other side, Danny Spond is solid as an 85, but his backup, Ben Councell, is way underrated and should be about an 82.

CB: Bennett Jackson seems overrated as an 87 at CB as he barely played last year, but it was his first year playing there, and the DBs coach has already said he's the most talented corner he's ever coached. He could prove to be better than an 87, so I think his rating is fair. Lo Wood and Josh Atkinson are both even as the #2 CB, and they should both be around an 80. Jalen Brown was the 4th corner in the spring, and he should be in the mid 70s.

FS: Slaughter is a stud, and may be a bit underrated as an 88. I'm ok with him there, but he could be rated as high as a 91.

SS: Motta is listed as the #2 FS for some reason, and he should be the starter and around an 85. His backup, Collinsworth, should be an 82-83.

P: Turk is overrated as a 90, and should be an 85.

K: 86 seems fair for Tausch.


These ratings are miles ahead of EAs usual ones. Last year they were missing Harrison Smith (1st round pick) along with Gary Gray who was a starting CB. They also had Nix rated in the mid-60s although he was a 4-star RS FR who had emerged as the #1 DT after the spring. They were also missing a starting O-lineman, and all the backups ratings were way off. I don't know nearly enough about other teams apart from their starters to comment on too much, but these ratings really do seem way better this year as opposed to in previous years.

[goblue1523]

Devon Butler (MLB #9) from Northern Illinois. He should be in the high 70's or low 80's. He is rated 69 in the game

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by goblue1523

Devon Butler (MLB #9) from Northern Illinois. He should be in the high 70's or low 80's. He is rated 69 in the game

I think that is a generic player that is rated 69 not Devon Butler.

In fact in the future I would not be surprised if EA start just assigning uniform #'s that don't even match the current college players becuase of all the lawsuits being thrown around.

This is why i wish they would just get rid of the overall ratings use a system like NCAA Basketball used (Blue Ribbon) to rank/rate teams.

Aslong as there is a editing option do we really need a system with a overall rating being the most important thing people care about it seems with ratings.

Edit:
They could acutally learn something from College Hoops 2K8 look at their scale for player overall ratings....I love how spread out it is and 90+ guys are very rare.