Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

The problem with performance-based progression is that it is not realistic at all. Look at Troy Aikman's stats. If we had a performance based system, he would not be progressing very quickly. And we could never have a situation like Tom Brady or Mass Hasselbeck, where they were on the sidelines and improved before they got their oppurtunity to play. So it makes that late round pick that doesn't get playtime worthless. Because he won't improve because he doesn't get fieldtime, but you're not going to put him in if he doesn't improve first.

Also, if that RB gets 2000 yards, is he going to improve in the next season? Probably not. In fact, he'll probably take a step back. That 2000 yd season will likely be the best he'll ever do, so why should his rating go up?

Ratings, and their progression, are supposed to represent out virtual players improvement going into the next season. Do players become better because they have good seasons, or do they have good seasons because they have become better players? It is clearly the 2nd option. Well, a performance based progression system makes them good players, AFTER they've had a good season.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

My solution is to keep the potential system, hide the potential ratings, but don't hard cap the potential ratings, and allow the to change. And so instead of that great season giving you huge progression, what it can do is raise your potential. Because in football, if a guy has a great season, he isn't going to become a better player, but the perception of how good he can be will change. And that perception of how good he can be is called potential.

[PrettyT11]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

I didn't bring up where he was drafted because HE SHOULDN"T EVEN HAVE A POTENTIAL RATING.

So what if he was drafted high?That means he should have a high potential grade? Are you serious? So Ryan Leaf? YOu think he should have gotten a Potential of an A?

Again there you go hand picking examples. Everybody wants to throw Ryan Leaf's name out there without actually looking at what hapened to him. Yes Ryan Leaf did have very high talent and potential. It wasn't a lack of physical skills that kept him from being a good to great QB. It was all his mental skills or lack there of. He all of a sudden couldn't throw the ball 50 yards anymore, he didn't get weaker, or any of that other foolishness. He didn't succeed in the NFL because he didn't know how to use his talents properly and along with the mental issues he had.

There is a reason why players are drafted in the first round and players are drafted in the sixth round. Guess what that is?? That's right it potential. Everybody and thier momma knew Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson had the physical talents and potential to be great stars in the NFL and guess what they have. Reggie Ball didn't have that potential to be an NFL QB and guess what he is not.

So yes where a player is drafted makes a huge difference. Anybody can call out some late round pick who became a star but if you look at all the guys drafted around them they suck. There always a guy or two that exceeds the odds but FAR more times than not that sixth round guy doesn't stay around very long if he stays around at all.

To help you understand the point then I will do you one better. You can make a top 10,15, 20 or whatever list for any position in football or basketball or whatever and I promise you that the vast majority of those guys will be early draft picks.

Just for kicks let's use the WR position as an example. Most if not all people will say the top WR's in the league today are Fitz, Andre Johnson, Moss, Calvin Johnson, Steve Smith, Reggie Wayne, Roddy White, Greg Jennings, T.O, and Boldin. Out of those 10 players SIX of them was drafted in the first round, 2 in the second round, and the other two in the third round. The two that was drafted in the third round came from small schools and where not really known out of college but thier skills still got them drafted in the first day. See the point??

[Mr. Franchise]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

The overall rating should be based more on value. We see it all the time. Michael Turner goes from being a back-up in SD, to the NFL's leading rusher. It's not really about attributes, it's just that people wanna be rewarded for having a breakout season with someone. Like with Matt Cassel. He shouldn't be an 83, but after his breakout season his value shot up and that's why the Patriots were able t trade him for so much. I would just rather there not be a pre=determened potential rating, and instead have potential based on performance.

[smittymac]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

Another thing, on top of not knowing potential, a 60 OVR rated player with A potential shouldn't progress untill you play him.
Because players don't get better by sitting on the bench, they getteing better each down they play, and since practice mode is worthless let them progress with their hidden Potential based on how many game reps they get.

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

The overall rating should be based more on value. We see it all the time. Michael Turner goes from being a back-up in SD, to the NFL's leading rusher. It's not really about attributes, it's just that people wanna be rewarded for having a breakout season with someone. Like with Matt Cassel. He shouldn't be an 83, but after his breakout season his value shot up and that's why the Patriots were able t trade him for so much. I would just rather there not be a pre=determened potential rating, and instead have potential based on performance.

But to have the ovr rating be a value, then it doesn't really impact progression. The ovr rating now is the sum of the parts of the player's other attributes. I would agree that the ovr rating SHOULD be a value, which would include things such as age, recent performance, salary, etc.

However, then we still have to determine what a players attributes would do from season to season. And that should not be based on performance. An example:

Let's say we have a young QB, in real life. In preseason, we see that he has a good arm, with good accuracy. On a scale 1-100, let's say it's a 79. He has a great season. At the end of the year, you think, this guy's accuracy is probably closer to an 84. Now did his accuracy actually get better because of his great season? No. Now let's say he's horrible. He throws a ton of int's. You think, jeez, this guy's awful, his accuracy is probably only a 74. Did his accuracy get worse BECAUSE of his bad season? No.

The fact is, in real life, your changing you assesment of his THA based on your rating, because you don't KNOW what it is. That initial assesment of 79 was your best, educated guess, but you can't KNOW how good it is. So when you're changing that rating based on his performance, you're doing so because you realize that initial assesment of 79 was inaccurate.

In a video game, such as Madden, however, that rating isn't inaccurate. The 79 isn't your best assesment about how good he is, it IS how good he is. It cannot be wrong. Now he can get better or worse, but at that point and time, he IS a 79. So if he has a great season, he doesn't BECOME an 84.

In real life, a player doesn't get better because of a good season. He got better before that season, and had a good season because of that improvement. A good season doesn't make a player faster, stronger, quicker, run better routes, throw harder, or block better. So why should it be that way in Madden?

Let's say we have another QB. He doesn't have a great rookie season. He plays in all 16 games, 26 td's, and 28 int's. 56 comp%, 71 qb rating. In a performance based progression system, he would only improve marginally, if at all. In real life, he improved a ton, learning what works, and what doesn't. In the offseason, he works hard, and is a much better qb than he was at the beginning of the season before. In Madden, he probably improves a little, maybe cuts down his ints a bit, increases his comp % a little. In real life though, it's night and day. He gets all they way to a 90 qb rating, something that wouldn't be possible in a performance progression.

Now let's say we have a rookie RB. His rookie year, he bursts on the scene. Let's say, for argument's sake, he has almost 1200 yards, for 4.1 ypc, and 6 tds. A great rookie season. In a performance based progression, he'll improve a lot. He'll probably get more yards, a higher ypc, and more td's the next year. But in real life, the guy falters. He only gets 800 yds, is down to 3.5 ypc, and only 1 td.

The first guy is Peyton Manning. The performence progression doesn't take into account that he had a bad year because he is a rookie, and that his ceiling (potential) is much higher than what he played like, and how much he improved simply from being on the field, even if he didn't do very well. The second guy is Cadillac Williams. The performance progression didn't take into account that he might've already been as good as he'll ever be, or that he played over his head, and everything bounced his way all year.

In real life, a players performance doesn't make him better. Why should it in a game?

[DonkeyJote]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

Another thing, on top of not knowing potential, a 60 OVR rated player with A potential shouldn't progress untill you play him.
Because players don't get better by sitting on the bench, they getteing better each down they play, and since practice mode is worthless let them progress with their hidden Potential based on how many game reps they get.

Players don't get better sitting on the bench? Ever heard of Tony Romo? Tom Brady? Matt Cassel? Matt Hasselbeck? Brett Favre?

[smittymac]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

Players don't get better sitting on the bench? Ever heard of Tony Romo? Tom Brady? Matt Cassel? Matt Hasselbeck? Brett Favre?

I heard of all of them and like I said before, you get better by playing, not watching. And that goes with everything from sports, to video games, to your job. No matter how many times you see someone do something, you only get good at it by doing it your self. And that's life.

[mavfan21]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

In a sim game you shouldn't be able to turn every player into a superstar. The potential ratings are perfect, and can be edited if you disagree.

No one in the league or any experts would call Thigpen a guy with high potential.

[Richieh]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

I heard of all of them and like I said before, you get better by playing, not watching. And that goes with everything from sports, to video games, to your job. No matter how many times you see someone do something, you only get good at it by doing it your self. And that's life.

You get good by training and practice. Without those, you don't even get the chance to work where a result that matters is at stake.

Do you think those players came into the league as good as they were and their teams just held them back? Do you think those players didn't improve though training camp and weekly practice?

[ZoneKIller]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

Again there you go hand picking examples. Everybody wants to throw Ryan Leaf's name out there without actually looking at what hapened to him. Yes Ryan Leaf did have very high talent and potential. It wasn't a lack of physical skills that kept him from being a good to great QB. It was all his mental skills or lack there of. He all of a sudden couldn't throw the ball 50 yards anymore, he didn't get weaker, or any of that other foolishness. He didn't succeed in the NFL because he didn't know how to use his talents properly and along with the mental issues he had.

There is a reason why players are drafted in the first round and players are drafted in the sixth round. Guess what that is?? That's right it potential. Everybody and thier momma knew Calvin Johnson and Adrian Peterson had the physical talents and potential to be great stars in the NFL and guess what they have. Reggie Ball didn't have that potential to be an NFL QB and guess what he is not.

So yes where a player is drafted makes a huge difference. Anybody can call out some late round pick who became a star but if you look at all the guys drafted around them they suck. There always a guy or two that exceeds the odds but FAR more times than not that sixth round guy doesn't stay around very long if he stays around at all.

To help you understand the point then I will do you one better. You can make a top 10,15, 20 or whatever list for any position in football or basketball or whatever and I promise you that the vast majority of those guys will be early draft picks.

Just for kicks let's use the WR position as an example. Most if not all people will say the top WR's in the league today are Fitz, Andre Johnson, Moss, Calvin Johnson, Steve Smith, Reggie Wayne, Roddy White, Greg Jennings, T.O, and Boldin. Out of those 10 players SIX of them was drafted in the first round, 2 in the second round, and the other two in the third round. The two that was drafted in the third round came from small schools and where not really known out of college but thier skills still got them drafted in the first day. See the point??

Guess that's why Reggie Bush failed too huh? When his teammates ran the ball alot better than he did.But oh everyone knew he was going to be great.The Professionals in New Orleans even thought so with that huge paychek they gave him.

Also Where does the potential grade come from? Combine alone?
I think it also comes from STATS he had in college.So there we go again.STATS is the way to be.If not for the college stats we wouldn't have a Potential grade after all.

[reziztor]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

How can anyone argue that this potential cap crap system is good?

They keep using this animal logic: if your quarterback throws for 3,000 yards and 50tds its just that he was "the product of the system".

So then.. why does EA even upgrade players? Why not keep Brady in the 50's like he was when he was drafted? Maybe hes just the product of the Patriots system!

[ZoneKIller]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

This is getting hilarious. So again you are ignoring the facts, the questions, and trying to hand pick one example of somebody who didn't live up to thier potential. BUT in this case you are wrong. I wouldn't say Bush has failed. Has he become a pro bowler?? No but I wouldn't call him a failure. He had a damn good rookie year and has had some injuries the past two. Last year he was playing very damn good football beofre being hurt. He was leading the league in TD's before getting hurt and he still scored 9 TD's in 10 games.

Now to the second part of your post. No his potential in the eyes of scouts and his draft stock wasn't based on stats. It was based off of what he actually did on the field. If you watched Reggie at all at USC what you say was a game breaking playmaker anywhere on the field and was a threat to score anytime he touched the ball. So no he wasn't drafted based on stats.

Has that translated to the NFL perfectly no. But nobody expected him to be a guy you hand the ball to 20 times a game. They expected him to be a playmaker from the RB,WR, and KR spots. So far he has done that. Not to the same level of success as college in the NFL but he has plenty of time to improve. Hell he is only 24 years old.

Hell if it was just based off STATS like you say then guys like Colt Brennan, Chase Daniels, Graham Harrell, Jason White, Ron Dayne, Danny Wuerffel, and many other guys would have been high draft picks or expected to do something in the NFL. Know why they weren't or they didn't?? Because it was known thier skill sets didn't translate to the NFL and the didn't have the (here comes that word again) potential to be an NFL star or for that matter good NFL player. And guess what they where right.

Maybe you should read every word in my post first.
That's why I asked Combine alone?

I'm not that stupid to thik a potential grade is based off of stats alone.But I KNOW for a fact it's not based off of big plays and the combine alone.Stats have alot to do with it too.

If it was based off combine alone ,you'd have people everywhere trying to get in the NFL.

Big plays alone =Mike Vick,Vince Young,Maurice CLarrett and so on.

Stats have alot to do with where a player gets drafted.

But I still say the potential rating should be moved or made where they can change based upon stats.Tom Brady didn't have a good combine nd he shared time with Drew Henson at Michigan.Who would have thought his Potnential Grade would have been an A.Nobody did.EA didn't.But with good training and a good Coach.He has done alot.

EA's own ONline Progression is based off of stats alone!

Every roster update(you know where they change the ratings?) are changed based on weekly STATS!

Point closed

[smittymac]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

You get good by training and practice. Without those, you don't even get the chance to work where a result that matters is at stake.

Do you think those players came into the league as good as they were and their teams just held them back? Do you think those players didn't improve though training camp and weekly practice?

I guess reading owns you..
I'll quote my self.

Another thing, on top of not knowing potential, a 60 OVR rated player with A potential shouldn't progress untill you play him.
Because players don't get better by sitting on the bench, they getteing better each down they play, and since practice mode is worthless let them progress with their hidden Potential based on how many game reps they get.

So once again, players get better by playing and PRACTICING, but since practice mode in Madden is worthless they should progress if they play, and if they don't play they should only progress 1 or 2 points. So in hindsight, you draft a A rated QB in the 7th round, but since he sat bench for because his OVR is 60, he never blossomed into a star.

[Glorious Arc]

Re: Had Just About Enough of Potential Ratings

How can anyone argue that this potential cap crap system is good?

They keep using this animal logic: if your quarterback throws for 3,000 yards and 50tds its just that he was "the product of the system".

So then.. why does EA even upgrade players? Why not keep Brady in the 50's like he was when he was drafted? Maybe hes just the product of the Patriots system!

Read my post in this thread and you will understand why we agure that it is completely illogical to use a PBP system.