Madden Rating System

[Toupal]

Quote: Originally Posted by crenk

I like it but what determines how much of their potential they achieve? Playing time, working under great coordinators(if madden had them) early success(confidence)?

All great ideas, but I would have to say System, playing time, and success...
I think it could go hand in hand with the confidence system as well.

They can take an Aaron Rodgers approach and sit behind an NFL great and be in a great system.

They can take an Andrew Luck or Cam Newton route and be thrown into it and put up great stats

A Russell Wilson approach, and have a great team/ run game and ease our way into success

Or on the negative side of things...

Get drafted by a bad team with no supporting cast to help you improve

Impatient teams... teams not letting their qb develop. If the QB loses a qb competition or they draft a better qb the next year, it hurts their confidence.

Injury... slows down and even hurts their development

Bad Coaches

[BreakingBad2013]

I don't like the "potential" thought because it limits players. It tells me that this player will never be above said rating. Which if you being an UDFA, his potential would be horrible, then you look at Jason Peters and that would almost eliminate that type of steal.

Another thing, if you allow the potential rating to be scouted or seen before the draft then again, that would take the whole sleeper/bust thing out of the draft which is the problem we have now.

I think that the OP's thought is right, but he's still to conservative with the ratings.

I think 90+ should be all time greats and to-be HoF caliber players. The FBG ratings have the top 50 players ranked 99-78 overall. With drastic ratings like this, you would notice a great difference between Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Geno Smith, and Tim Tebow who could be respectively rated as (overall-assumption) 96, 79, 67, and 43. This would paint a clear picture between HoF, starter, backup, and camp arm.

This would also allow users to FEEL the difference when Tom Brady (98) gets injured and Jimmy G (64) comes in to run your offense.

And this isn't just overall, think if they did this with All ratings and positions. If throw Accuracy goes from 0-100 and a cano arm's accuracy is 27 and 1/5 passes are misses or a lot of them are barely off target, where an 85 accuracy, only 1 of 10 may go off target or he's consistenly putting the ball in correct spots for WRs to make a play on the ball, or directing it away from dbs.

Also this cab can go for speed. What if the slowest player in the league is near 15 speed, and the fastest is a track star at 99. This would give a lot of FEEL differences on in field as there are more 30-90 speed giys running around. In madden 95-99 isn't crazy different. But imagine you have a BLAZER at 88 speed running against a LBer around a speed in the 60s. That matchup would not only be obvious, but would make users adjust their lineup/scheme to deflect that mismatch elsewhere. This isn't a suggestion to make all LBs super slow, but what I'm saying is, you'd FEEL it on the field. Even WRs/DBs can drop into 70s speed like a and in the 80s are very fast, 90s are elite world class speed. And so on. This would effectively end and threshold sliders, and also allow people to FEEL the game.

Instead Madden has a plethora of 80-90 speed guys at all positions, and they just seem to co-exist and there's no GLARING difference until they're 40 yards down field.

I think it should be something that I can FEEL and something that I have to gameplan/counter my opponebt with. Not only speed, but moving ny higher RR WR around to match him up on cloggy DBs, or making sure I scramble less with my QB because I know if he goes down, my PB instantly shrinks because he can't nake the same throws. Or if I want ny lockdown CB to shutdown their best (75 overall) WR who is good, but my DB is much better.

[Toupal]

I think measuring speed, acceleration, strength, and well everything they test at the combine would be an easy way to measure a players ratings.



Speed/ 40 yard dash: 6.5=25 overall (Rich Eisen)
4.24= 99 Overall (Chris Johnson)


Notice the real difference in speed


Acceleration/ 10 yard/ three cone drill: 2.50=25 overall
1.40=99 overall (Chris Johnson/ Justin King)


CJ2k's accelleration is on a different level

Jumping/ Vertical 20=25 overall
46= 99 overall (Gerald Sensabaugh)
It is pretty simple, DB's will not out jump a 6'5 Calvin Johnson with a 43 ich vertical.

Elusiveness/ 20 yard shuttle/ game tape....

I reference you to LeSean McCoy, Michael Vick, and Barry Sanders.

[4thQtrStre5S]

Quote: Originally Posted by Toupal

Along with this, I feel that one feature that Madden has never touched, but something that I love in MLB the Show is the "Potential" rating. The potential rating represents the "overall" that player can possibly achieve. The player can be a bust like a Jamarcus Russell, or be a gem like a Tom Brady. It is nice because it allows you to understand and measure the potential for a boom or bust pick. Are you taking the Ryan Leaf or the Peyton Manning?

I think another thing of importance is the scheme a player is put into..You mention Tom Brady as a Gem, but I could debate that he is also a beneficiary of a great system that is QB friendly...Bledsoe was a good QB in the system, then he goes down and Brady steps up without a stumble; then when Brady was injured, Matt Cassel came in and looked so great he was a high priority free agent that ended up failing as a starter in other systems..

Another example would be Matt Flynn, he explodes in Green Bay and gets a great free agent contract in Seattle, only to be beat out by Wilson and then going to Oakland where he gets beat out, but goes back to GReen Bay and actually saves a couple games while Rodgers was out....

System helps a lot, IMO... I hate Belichick, but I have to admit, he has a very good system and it is very QB friendly because he creates great separation with his receiver routes..Maybe he cheats and creates pick plays, either way, he makes it QB friendly... I bet Brady would fail in Kansas City too..

[4thQtrStre5S]

As Madden plays right now, I feel no need to double team any offensive player - no player is a bigger threat than another...

[Toupal]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

I think another thing of importance is the scheme a player is put into..You mention Tom Brady as a Gem, but I could debate that he is also a beneficiary of a great system that is QB friendly...Bledsoe was a good QB in the system, then he goes down and Brady steps up without a stumble; then when Brady was injured, Matt Cassel came in and looked so great he was a high priority free agent that ended up failing as a starter in other systems.. Another example would be Matt Flynn, he explodes in Green Bay and gets a great free agent contract in Seattle, only to be beat out by Wilson and then going to Oakland where he gets beat out, but goes back to GReen Bay and actually saves a couple games while Rodgers was out.... System helps a lot, IMO... I hate Belichick, but I have to admit, he has a very good system and it is very QB friendly because he creates great separation with his receiver routes..Maybe he cheats and creates pick plays, either way, he makes it QB friendly... I bet Brady would fail in Kansas City too..

I didn't want to hurt anyone's feeling, but yes. I know exactly where you are coming from.

Systems are huge in the NFL. I just wish Madden made coaches have more of an impact, but that is a whole different can of worms I could get into.

[4thQtrStre5S]

We need coaching impact in Madden, as well as position coaches and coordinators...Those influences would be awesome for creating diversity; and when a player is in a system that is not good for them, they would perform less than optimal, but in a system that suits their style, they would excel...

[DeuceDouglas]

Quote: Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013

I don't like the "potential" thought because it limits players. It tells me that this player will never be above said rating. Which if you being an UDFA, his potential would be horrible, then you look at Jason Peters and that would almost eliminate that type of steal. Another thing, if you allow the potential rating to be scouted or seen before the draft then again, that would take the whole sleeper/bust thing out of the draft which is the problem we have now.

I agree and disagree. I agree that it definitely limits players but I feel like the players it would limit the most is the ones that aren't high potential. To use your Peters example, his potential wouldn't have been horrible, it would have been good or great. It's his overall or his ratings that would start low. And the key to that is keeping any kind of potential or DEV rating hidden and making sure that the DEV rating fluctuates between a wide assortment of players.

So again to your example and this is all hypothetical but let's say Jason Peters comes into the draft as a 64 OVR. You go to the free agents and see Jason Peters 64 OVR, that's all you really know. Turns out he has "Great Potential". You sign him and play him in preseason, he makes the team and you notice that he is progressing quite well and he progresses into a great player over time. And then to counterpoint, let's just say somebody like Robert Gallery comes in at a 76 OVR but under the hood, he has "Poor potential". Maybe he maintains that 76 OVR for a season or two but you start to realize that he's not really getting any better and then maybe he starts falling off and getting worse. You've got two different players rated 12 OVR apart that take drastically different career turns because of their potential.

And that's just using what's in the game now, throw in coordinators and position coaches, injuries, and mix in maybe different speeds or curves of development. Maybe you can start to get into some sort of dynamic potential where a players potential can change depending on the scheme they're in.