Madden NFL 15: Top Rookies

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Physically, yes. It happens. Dri Archer is easily the fastest player in the NFL right now, and the data proves it. However, when it comes to technical skill like PMV, MCV, CTH, etc, there should NEVER be a player rated that high as a rookie in ANY of those categories. Their OVR ratings should never be that high as well, and once again, I have data that illustrates that. Rookies should be RAW. They should have the physical skills the data indicates, regardless of their youth and vitality, but also should show their age (and lack of experience) when it comes to employing technical skills that have to be learned and mastered before being successful.

This is basically what I meant in a 100x better wording. I agree with you 100%.

[Mckinley Cash]

These are rookies??

In all seriousness, I don't like seeing rookies above 75 until they've proven themselves.

[Steve_OS]

Updated the OP w/ the release date schedule for more ratings. Top 5 QB's tomorrow.

[The JareBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by Steve_OS

Updated the OP w/ the release date schedule for more ratings. Top 5 QB's tomorrow.

Something tells me that whoever fifth on the list is tomorrow is going to cause a big debate. I am sure most everyone can agree that Manning, Rodgers, Brady, and Brees are the top four (in any order you want to put them) but that fifth spot is pretty up for grabs IMO.

As for the rookies, it looks like Mack is going to be a Von Miller type within no time in CFM mode.

I am glad I don't play in a lot of ranked matches where default rosters are mandatory, these ratings really aren't close at all

[michiganfan8620]

I don't know this for sure, but I'm guessing that the reason the ratings are so high on here for rookies is most likely so that they progress correctly over time in CFM modes. Yes, it isn't a perfect system, but it does make sense. If they lower the technical skills to where you want them since they are unproven, then they might not develop correctly in CFM compared to other players. I'm not defending EA's ratings, as many of you are right, Clowney has too high of PMV, Robinson may have a bit too high of RBK, and there are more, but saying so-and-so has too high of an OVR is too quick to judge. You can't say that until you have seen what other players at the position are rated. Some of these guys are overrated, but some are also underrated, EA realizes that and just tries to take a moderate approach in terms of OVR. Look at Sheldon Richardson, taken number 26 last year. Had he been rated even 85 in the first ratings, most people would be freaking out, talking about inflation of rookies. However, he played as one of the better 3-4 ends in the league, justifying a rating that high. He was rated mid-high 70's I believe in the initial ratings. A few of these rookies even make the pro bowl some years, thus, I don't believe it is right to say EA over-rates rookies every year, even though some of them are under-rated based on the way they perform.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

PFF is for analyzing tendencies, not traits. They do not look for the same information that is used to rate player attributes in Madden. All they look at is the end result of each play. They even admit this in their FAQ section. Since the 1997 draft, there has not been ONE rookie that entered the league as tops in any category that is technical aside from a QBs THP and Ks KPW. I cannot publish the primary source material as I am bound by a few NDAs, but I can interpolate and publish them indirectly at the FBG Ratings website. You will have to go there to see how the data mimics Madden, albeit, not as realistically as I would like (see the FBG thread and issues regarding the true-mean methodology vs. the equal-interval method for rating players).

I appreciate what you do but I do have a few concerns.

1. You say you have data to back up your claims but when asked for it you cannot release it for legal reasons. I understand that you are required to abide by the NDA but it still comes off odd. Donny Moore says the same thing.

2. Regarding the portion about any rookie being tops in any category I must ask, according to who? Your source? Well that is problematic for me. It is almost circular. Rating technical attributes (no matter what your methodology is) is subjective.

3. You also slightly shifted the goal posts a bit on this. You went from "there should NEVER be a player rated that high as a rookie in ANY of those categories." to "not been ONE rookie that entered the league as tops in any category." Has Madden ever rated a rookie as tops in a technical category?

4. This is more of a personal quirk, but I just dislike use of the word never. Just because it has not happened does not mean it will not.

5. Regarding PFF and its relationship with Madden, it is a tricky thing. I know you have spoken about the difference between traits and production before and I get what you are saying. But I think the primary goal when rating players in a videogame should be to come as close as possible to replicating real life results. So, and others may disagree, I think matching production should take precedence over traits.

6. Most importantly, I am not a fan of Donny Moore. Don't take this as me defending him or anything. Madden's rating philosophy is pretty bad in my view.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

Madden ratings are completely ridiculous at this point, I don't just mean the numbers but the whole perceived circus around them. The more I think about how nonsensical it is to be displaying numerics that are just a part of the programming for in game player performance, the more I scratch my head at this entire affair. It's not like this nonsense is unique to Madden but this is a Madden forum and EA along with the Madden community seem to blow this the most out of proportion. When it comes to releasing Madden ratings, it should be about profiling real data and scouting on players, pretty much like they do during the real NFL draft. That event has plenty of fanfare and excitement, without all the arcadey/video game numerics on parade. Have the teams that drafted them release they're internal raw data on player tangibles and how they evaluate they're skill and potential. Player X, "My speed should be 97 at least", Player Y "A 82 Catch, man I should be at least a 89", etc, is the stupidest sounding ish coming from professional athletes about a game that's supposed be simulating their profession. You video game kids get the **** off this old man's sim lawn! /rant Spoiler Attachment 79498

This comes from left field, but your post reminded me of an old commercial for NFL Gameday. Can't remember who the player was, but it showed him playing a game and he got tackled from behind. The player remarked "man that don't show my breakaway speed!" The developer remarked "our numbers show your speed has dropped over the years." Then the athlete mumbled something about numbers. Really funny.

If I find the video on youtube I will post it.

[DeuceDouglas]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

This comes from left field, but your post reminded me of an old commercial for NFL Gameday. Can't remember who the player was, but it showed him playing a game and he got tackled from behind. The player remarked "man that don't show my breakaway speed!" The developer remarked "our numbers show your speed has dropped over the years." Then the athlete mumbled something about numbers. Really funny. If I find the video on youtube I will post it.

Yeah, I remember that. It was Robert Brooks from the Packers. I feel like it was a Madden commercial but I can't confirm that.