Imagine this scenario happening:
It is the 2018 NFL draft and we are in the 5th or so round. The Jets are on the board and the GM of the Jets says to his staff "oh no. I don't know what we are going to do. All of the guys that we scouted have been drafted and we still have four more picks to make."
I highly doubt if this scenario has ever happened, yet in Madden, it is a constant thing. In EA, you're scouting options are pretty much either scout some of the attributes on most of the players; or scout most of the attributes on some of the players. No matter how bad the team, I feel very confident in saying that all teams fully scout the same amount of players. Even the guy drafted with 234th pick in the 7th round was researched the same way the 4th overall pick was researched.
First... can we agree with that statement?
What separates the good teams from the bad teams is the accuracy of those evaluations. I'm sure Cleveland spent the same amount of hours evaluating Carson Wentz as the Eagles did but they simply got different outcomes. It is time for this to be emulated in Madden.
My solution: let's do away with this "scouting points" thing. I totally understand what EA was trying to do, but it doesn't make sense. Instead, EA need to implement my method, before I raise investors and make my own game. All teams get the overall ratings of all players, but these ratings are in a +/- range. So Jordan Smith is a QB with an 80 ratings. The range of the ratings are based on how 'good' the personnel department is. If the personnel department is rated as an "A" or whatever, it is a small range; if the personnel department is rated as an "F" or whatever, it is a large range. So for the bad team, Jordan Smith is an 80 with a range of +/- 15. So in actuality, he could be a 95 or he could be a 65... a HUGE difference. For the personnel rated an "a" the +/- could be as small as 3... so he's either an 83 or a 77.
If EA absolutely insists on using scouting points so be it... maybe these points can be use for stuff like being good at evaluating offensive players but suck at defensive player (so your +/- for offense is a 3; for defense it is 15) or maybe the team is good at finding late round gems (+/-10 in rounds 1-3 and +/- in four and after). Or maybe they are good at specific positions. Whatever.... the possibilities are endless.
And the good thing is that this is kind of what happens in real life. When Andy Reid was with the Eagles, he just could not draft LBs but he was good at O and D lines. It happens.
Oh yeah... how do we determine who gets to have a "good" or "bad" personnel department? Well, the better your team performs, the more resources you have.
Of course this system can be tweaked but the point is, this whole thing of "you can only spend so many points on a player" is archaic. That does not happen in real life.
It is the 2018 NFL draft and we are in the 5th or so round. The Jets are on the board and the GM of the Jets says to his staff "oh no. I don't know what we are going to do. All of the guys that we scouted have been drafted and we still have four more picks to make."
I highly doubt if this scenario has ever happened, yet in Madden, it is a constant thing. In EA, you're scouting options are pretty much either scout some of the attributes on most of the players; or scout most of the attributes on some of the players. No matter how bad the team, I feel very confident in saying that all teams fully scout the same amount of players. Even the guy drafted with 234th pick in the 7th round was researched the same way the 4th overall pick was researched.
First... can we agree with that statement?
What separates the good teams from the bad teams is the accuracy of those evaluations. I'm sure Cleveland spent the same amount of hours evaluating Carson Wentz as the Eagles did but they simply got different outcomes. It is time for this to be emulated in Madden.
My solution: let's do away with this "scouting points" thing. I totally understand what EA was trying to do, but it doesn't make sense. Instead, EA need to implement my method, before I raise investors and make my own game. All teams get the overall ratings of all players, but these ratings are in a +/- range. So Jordan Smith is a QB with an 80 ratings. The range of the ratings are based on how 'good' the personnel department is. If the personnel department is rated as an "A" or whatever, it is a small range; if the personnel department is rated as an "F" or whatever, it is a large range. So for the bad team, Jordan Smith is an 80 with a range of +/- 15. So in actuality, he could be a 95 or he could be a 65... a HUGE difference. For the personnel rated an "a" the +/- could be as small as 3... so he's either an 83 or a 77.
If EA absolutely insists on using scouting points so be it... maybe these points can be use for stuff like being good at evaluating offensive players but suck at defensive player (so your +/- for offense is a 3; for defense it is 15) or maybe the team is good at finding late round gems (+/-10 in rounds 1-3 and +/- in four and after). Or maybe they are good at specific positions. Whatever.... the possibilities are endless.
And the good thing is that this is kind of what happens in real life. When Andy Reid was with the Eagles, he just could not draft LBs but he was good at O and D lines. It happens.
Oh yeah... how do we determine who gets to have a "good" or "bad" personnel department? Well, the better your team performs, the more resources you have.
Of course this system can be tweaked but the point is, this whole thing of "you can only spend so many points on a player" is archaic. That does not happen in real life.
Comment