My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

[ghostlight85]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

@asterisk: You're right. I agree with you. It logically makes sense that only young players progress (though veterans should still progress small amounts in technique-oriented ratings like AWR and Route-running over time).

But there needs to be some sort of ratings adjustments when players perform outside the norm. For online play, there's roster updates, but no such system for veterans in franchise mode. It doesn't happen often in real-life, but occasionally it DOES happen that a player dramatically improves. Aubrayo Franklin was a virtual unknown, and then all of a sudden became a high-level NT with the 49ers a year or two ago.

And in the case of Madden, players performing outside the norm is very frequent because users can play the players better than what is expected.

The word "progression" is probably the wrong term to use for this situation. "Adjustment" would be a better one, and there's nothing in the game that truly accounts for it.

I want the gameplay to reflect the player's ratings, not the player's ratings to reflect the gameplay.

[ghostlight85]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

I just quoted the wrong post from iamwubble, my bad man. I was reading an earlier post.

I get what you are saying with guys like Aubrayo Franklin and Arian Foster, but I think that isn't a progression issue. It's an issue with it being virtually impossible to 100% accurately project what a player will do in the NFL before he's really played in the NFL.

This is why in between years it's totally normal for a player's rating to change a lot. But the game doesn't have an estimated overall. It has an exact overall, and players should be playing to that level. Progression should come BEFORE an increase in production.

This is why I've been lobbying so hard for a separate rating for what a player is VALUED around the league and hiding the overall rating. It sort of becomes the solution for this in my opinion. You can have high rated players that are buried on a roster because you don't see their overall ratings, and they came into the league with a low perceived value. This way in draft classes they can put players like Arian Foster who go undrafted and if they play, they will show themselves to be better than their value. The VALUE should change drastically based on production. But the skill of the player should already be good for him to be playing at a high level. Otherwise the gameplay isn't reflecting the ratings.

[asterisk]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

But there needs to be some sort of ratings adjustments when players perform outside the norm. For online play, there's roster updates, but no such system for veterans in franchise mode. It doesn't happen often in real-life, but occasionally it DOES happen that a player dramatically improves. Aubrayo Franklin was a virtual unknown, and then all of a sudden became a high-level NT with the 49ers a year or two ago.

And in the case of Madden, players performing outside the norm is very frequent because users can play the players better than what is expected.

The word "progression" is probably the wrong term to use for this situation. "Adjustment" would be a better one, and there's nothing in the game that truly accounts for it.

I'm not opposed to some performance-based ratings adjustments in certain situations, but I don't see why it's necessary or logical in cases you're describing.

The Alex Smith situation is just like the Cedric Benson one: if Alex Smith did that in real life, we'd assume his old ratings were incorrect and update them so he could perform like that in Madden. But if he's doing it in your Franchise, he's already doing it in Madden, thus there's no adjustment needed. It would indeed be a nice feeling if you were able to see Alex Smith listed among the best rated quarterbacks when you go to Player Management, but there's no justification for it.

The roster updates for online play doesn't factor into this, or I don't see how they do at least.

As for players just dramatically improving like Aubrayo Franklin... that's not a case for the ratings adjusting because of abnormal performance, it's a case for an unexpected ratings boost. If your NT is going to dramatically improve in his rating, why would it happen *after* he set a career high for sacks in a season? If a player is going to unexpectedly dramatically improve, the only way it makes sense is for this improvement to show up in his ratings *first* and then in his stats.

I like the idea of temporary rating improvements for performance, which we now have with the hot streaks and cold streaks. A player finds his groove and starts playing better as a result, or gets stuck in a rut and really starts playing terrible. It makes a lot of sense, unlike a permanent change whether you call it "progression" or "adjustment".

[asterisk]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

]I get what you are saying with guys like Aubrayo Franklin and Arian Foster, but I think that isn't a progression issue. It's an issue with it being virtually impossible to 100% accurately project what a player will do in the NFL before he's really played in the NFL.

This is why in between years it's totally normal for a player's rating to change a lot. But the game doesn't have an estimated overall. It has an exact overall, and players should be playing to that level. Progression should come BEFORE an increase in production.

Nice, this is a much more concise version of what I was saying.

This is why I've been lobbying so hard for a separate rating for what a player is VALUED around the league and hiding the overall rating. It sort of becomes the solution for this in my opinion. You can have high rated players that are buried on a roster because you don't see their overall ratings, and they came into the league with a low perceived value. This way in draft classes they can put players like Arian Foster who go undrafted and if they play, they will show themselves to be better than their value. The VALUE should change drastically based on production. But the skill of the player should already be good for him to be playing at a high level. Otherwise the gameplay isn't reflecting the ratings.

Interesting, I've never considered that. It would work well in an unlicensed franchise-only game, but it's too restrictive for Madden and all its large casual market.

[aussieBKR]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

just finished my eagles season 1, had major issues with the progression......asomugha -8, samuel -5, vick -4, nate allan +8....thats just a few of them, but there were major influx, n deflux. some of my lesser known players didnt even get on the field and went up 8 points?? this definetly needs to b fixed......fingers crossed for the patch, cause this ruins a major part of the franchise, for me anyway.......

[Richieh]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

just finished my eagles season 1, had major issues with the progression......asomugha -8, samuel -5, vick -4, nate allan +8....thats just a few of them, but there were major influx, n deflux. some of my lesser known players didnt even get on the field and went up 8 points?? this definetly needs to b fixed......fingers crossed for the patch, cause this ruins a major part of the franchise, for me anyway.......

Why do you think that was wrong?

[aussieBKR]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

Why do you think that was wrong?

guess i shouldve of explained myself better........allen had a sub par season, n i didnt start him until week 9, he had no stand out stats, n im guessen the engine is designed to make young players advance, but that cant always b the case, that would mean there will b no draft busts, n all ur young players will be 90 in no time.....asomugha n samuel were part of the best pass d in the league, even though they didnt have that many int, but asomugha neva does...i would say age is probably the thing here, but jenkins whos older then them both went up 1....i dnt expect perfection at all, but -8, n +8 seems bit to much for over 10 players on my roster...

[Richieh]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

guess i shouldve of explained myself better........allen had a sub par season, n i didnt start him until week 9, he had no stand out stats, n im guessen the engine is designed to make young players advance, but that cant always b the case, that would mean there will b no draft busts, n all ur young players will be 90 in no time.....asomugha n samuel were part of the best pass d in the league, even though they didnt have that many int, but asomugha neva does...i would say age is probably the thing here, but jenkins whos older then them both went up 1....i dnt expect perfection at all, but -8, n +8 seems bit to much for over 10 players on my roster...

I'd have thought it fair enough.
Not all young players advance, only those with potential. There are plenty of Steve Slaton a-likes who start highly rated but then never improve, just as there are Miles Austins who start lowly rated but have high potential and progress even with little to no playing time.

[ABR173rd]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

To give you an idea:

1.) We don't touch players who are in years 1-3 because they already progress.
2.) Players that are 30 or older do not progress, unless they outperform their career average.
3.) Individual positions are edited if they statistically place in the top 5, top 10, etc. at the end of the regular season
4.) All players in groups (offensive line, passing defense, rushing defense) progress if the team places in the top 5, top 10, etc.
5.) Specific skill ratings such as TAC or AWR progress, but not physical ratings like SPD or ACC
6.) Players with an OVR of 83 and below get a bonus if they outperform their career average. (So if Alex Smith suddenly becomes an elite QB, he'll get an additional bonus)

This sort of thing is why we were given the ability to edit our players at the end of the season. The Issue now is they lose their player roles... when edited......

[mavfan21]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

Yes, he went DOWN a point. Now explain to me how that is supposed to make sense? Dont worry i'll wait.....

Dalton Hilliard, Priest Holmes, Ladanian Tomlinson, Ronnie Brown, Brian Westbrook, Julius Jones, and many more backs had great seasons and then fell off big time, usually due to age (which is Benson's case).

Benson and all RBs entering their 30s start showing drop-offs in Madden. This is realistic. This happens. See the examples above.

Progression and potential work great this year. There is no "issue".

The great thing is, if you think there is, you can edit any player at any time.

[mavfan21]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

I'd have thought it fair enough.
Not all young players advance, only those with potential. There are plenty of Steve Slaton a-likes who start highly rated but then never improve, just as there are Miles Austins who start lowly rated but have high potential and progress even with little to no playing time.

Great point. Madden emulates this perfectly. Slaton and Austin are great examples.

[bucky60]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

Yeah I feel you. I honestly think that progression should be based on stats. I really do. It should also include the scheme they have going on now about age of the player and what players at his position overall ave and stats are. If he is the most productive out of his age group then he should obviously be rated higher. I think the potential should still be there, but say a player does not live up to that potential by year 3 or 4 they should start decreasing their attributes drastically. I think that would be the best progression system for my liking. You should be able to turn a potential F in a Pro Bowler and their attributes reflect that. They should be classified as a gem even if their grade was an F. That way in a Draft you could draft anyone, but it is up to how you use your 54 overall speedy HB. If you use him a lot and start to produce good numbers he should progress accordingly.

Completely disagree.

[bucky60]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

@asterisk: You're right. I agree with you. It logically makes sense that only young players progress (though veterans should still progress small amounts in technique-oriented ratings like AWR and Route-running over time).

But there needs to be some sort of ratings adjustments when players perform outside the norm. For online play, there's roster updates, but no such system for veterans in franchise mode. It doesn't happen often in real-life, but occasionally it DOES happen that a player dramatically improves.

Stats should not drive progression.

Many factors should drive progression, progression should drive ratings, ratings should drive stats. A player doesn't progress because he prduces, a player produces because he progresses.

What you are describing will not realistically be portrayed in a stats based progression system. All a stats based progression system does is allow us to pick and choose any players we want to become HOF'ers, just by stick skilling them to be. What you are looking for is something that MLB2K does in there ratings. They have ages where a players begins there peak and ends there peak. This way you can have a player peak early or peak late in there career. You can have a player still be at there peak at a late age or end there peak at an early age. This would implement what you are looking for, the late bloomers. Not a stats based progression system. A stats based progression system will end up only progressing those that are playing. Which kills position battles, or having that veteran backup. Starters improve and the bench gets crappy in a stats based progression system. Stats based progression is just so highly unrealistic.

[bucky60]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

This is why I've been lobbying so hard for a separate rating for what a player is VALUED around the league and hiding the overall rating. It sort of becomes the solution for this in my opinion. You can have high rated players that are buried on a roster because you don't see their overall ratings, and they came into the league with a low perceived value. This way in draft classes they can put players like Arian Foster who go undrafted and if they play, they will show themselves to be better than their value. The VALUE should change drastically based on production. But the skill of the player should already be good for him to be playing at a high level. Otherwise the gameplay isn't reflecting the ratings.

You and I have been through this, and I wouldn't scarp displaying overall and individual ratings altogether. I would have the actual ratings for overall, individual, and potential be hidden, and just show perceived ratings for all, accuracy of the perceived ratings based on how good your GM, Coaching Staff and Scouts are at evaluating talent.

[bucky60]

Re: My take on the Player Progression "Issue"

Dalton Hilliard, Priest Holmes, Ladanian Tomlinson, Ronnie Brown, Brian Westbrook, Julius Jones, and many more backs had great seasons and then fell off big time, usually due to age (which is Benson's case).

Benson and all RBs entering their 30s start showing drop-offs in Madden. This is realistic. This happens. See the examples above.

Progression and potential work great this year. There is no "issue".

The great thing is, if you think there is, you can edit any player at any time.

I wouldn't say it works great. I would greatly enhance it to make it more realistic. Include Coaching Staffs, scheduled off season workouts, training camp practice and weekly practice. We would create a schedule of what things to work on, and sim them. All this along with the potential ratings would have an impact on prgression, STATS WOULD NOT have an impact on progression.

Players produce because they progress. They don't progress because they produced.