Shopmaster YT video regarding scouting

[underdog13]

Quote: Originally Posted by briz1046

I'm not sure why you would think that , I'd imagine from previous experience ( the ps2 games required you hire coaching staffs etc) it would take a few minutes per season played or could be done by the CPU for you if you set it that way as can most CFM tasks

Well I'd be definitely down with Oc/DC and what not. But if the scouting system is similar to The show. I would want to pass. I guess I never really think about a scouting department when I think about an NFL front office so I wouldn't value the addition. Not to say others wouldn't like it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[TMJOHNS18]

Quote: Originally Posted by briz1046

I don't like idea of totally hidden ratings, that's not even remotely realistic IMO , even just casual eye balling of games gives you some idea of players abilities though there is no reason to not include this as an option tbh I'd prefer a blurring of ratings within a certain range or a star or alphabetical grading, which is clarified as certain playing time or practice criteria are met , until after a time the whole picture is visible , I believe deuce douglas outlines such a system in his franchise re-build I believe the AI could be programmed to see whatever is visible to the user and react accordingly with it's teams , ie treat the grades as the "true" picture not the hidden OVR until those criteria are reached

Player ratings themselves aren't even remotely realistic. Look at Mike Glennon and Brock Osweiler FA contracts. Tom Savage starting over Deshaun Watson last year. Any draft bust ever. All of these mistakes are made due to incorrect evaluations. If teams could 'see' their ratings then these mistakes would never happen (Savage wouldn't be on a team, and definitely not starting ahead of Watson).



And all casual eyeballing can give you is a rough estimate of their physical ratings, anything else is speculation. If a QB throws the ball deep once in a game how do you rate his deep throwing ability? Arm strength and accuracy can possibly be measured, but this is all dependent on weather conditions, the WR's route (or lack there of), timing, pocket pressure, luck/fluke play and more.


I do agree that player ratings should be show in a range or estimated, and possible tightened up over time, but never fully realized.



Think of Cam Newtons first game against the Cardinals. In the preseason he looked abysmal at times. Didn't have any touch, couldn't even complete simple dump-offs at times, kept rifling it by his WRs. He's getting criticism from media already that says he's not pro-ready, Carolina shouldn't start him. Then proceeds to go out and break the rookie single-game passing record Week 1.



If this were to be used in Madden, in the preseason his ratings/grades are fluctuating up and down do to his poor play. This would possibly create doubt that he should be starting or was even the right pick. Although he may be a 78ovr QB, all you know his that his accuracy range is wide (C- to B) and your vet sitting there at B- accuracy is looking mighty tempting.


---


What I think rookie and veteran scouting needs in the game is:


1) A league wide base view/rating of a player, information that every team/scout knows. This is the 'eye' test, general opinion, collective thought about the player. This is why Ryan Leaf is a draft bust, or any player is a bust. Not because San Diego had poor scouts. Because EVERYONE thought he was one-the-best or even the best QBs in the draft. He had the measurables, but perhaps the scouts (collectively) missed something, or it wasn't until he spent time in the league that he truly showed where is skills landed.


2) More Experience = Tightened Ratings. A player's ratings shouldn't be 'locked in' until the have extensive playing time in the league. As a rookie the range should be high, the more they play the more accurate/tighter the range comes. Poor play, good play, also effect this range. This can be reflected in one-year wonders or poor scheme fits. A player my truly be a B rating, but a big year gives him a B to A- range, where a poor scheme fit may give an A- player the same range. This can created added value to a player who plays well in his contract year, as well as never show the potential of a great player who's stuck on the bench his first four years in the league.




Changes like this can recreate the Glennon and Osweiler contracts when teams are bidding on potential/hope instead of locked in ratings. It can cause a team to start Savage over Watson because of the kinda known vs kinda unknown. It can create doubt in starting your #1 overall QB because of his poor preseason performance.

[BleedGreen710]

I prefer minimal scouting info. I don't want to be sure when I draft a guy that hes going to be a stud, especially in the later rounds. with the current scouting system you can figure this out way too easily. I remember in Madden 2004 if you max scouted a guy all you got was his combine, workout, and literally just a few sentences about the player. you had to trust your gut most of the time. then in Madden 2008 they had similar scouting however you could run drills with the prospects to unlock some scouting info as well as even play the college football all star game. all the players had questions marks as ratings on the depth chart. it was amazing. you could use your eyes to scout the players. bringing back the question mark ratings would be a good start at getting back to Madden's old scouting system, but there is such a long way to go. the fact they didn't get it into this years game tells me it wasn't much of a priority unfortunately.

[khaliib]

Quote: Originally Posted by briz1046

I don't like idea of totally hidden ratings, that's not even remotely realistic IMO , even just casual eye balling of games gives you some idea of players abilities though there is no reason to not include this as an option tbh I'd prefer a blurring of ratings within a certain range or a star or alphabetical grading, which is clarified as certain playing time or practice criteria are met , until after a time the whole picture is visible , I believe deuce douglas outlines such a system in his franchise re-build I believe the AI could be programmed to see whatever is visible to the user and react accordingly with it's teams , ie treat the grades as the "true" picture not the hidden OVR until those criteria are reached

That’s why I mentioned Front End.

Right now Pre-Season serves no meaningful purpose in the game.
- NFL teams use this time to see what a player can actually do (in spite of their physical Combine numbers etc) within their system during live reps.

This would at least link the Pre-Season to a purpose.

Introducing a whole new Ecosystem is another ball of wax and something to be done down the line.

Shop mentioned how there are no ratings during EA Play and if we really think about it, much of the player utilization is centered around simply playing and seeing what you can do with the players you’re fielding at that time.

Of course optional, but it’s something that could be introduced sooner rather than later into CFM for those that would like the mystery/challenge of what a player is capable of doing.

Honestly to me, having a need to see exactly what a player is capable of on the Front End, is no different than any other “exploit” that some gamers use to get ahead during gameplay.
- See the best players, to Pick the best players, to Play with the best players, for the ease of a win.

We can’t claim to want a True Simulation experience, but then step back when a Simulation aspect is put forward

Not seeing the ratings on the Front End also would produce a more natural User defined difficulty instead of the artificial difficulty that AM applies against the user.

[GoJags904]

Quote: Originally Posted by TMJOHNS18

Player ratings themselves aren't even remotely realistic. Look at Mike Glennon and Brock Osweiler FA contracts. Tom Savage starting over Deshaun Watson last year. Any draft bust ever. All of these mistakes are made due to incorrect evaluations. If teams could 'see' their ratings then these mistakes would never happen (Savage wouldn't be on a team, and definitely not starting ahead of Watson). And all casual eyeballing can give you is a rough estimate of their physical ratings, anything else is speculation. If a QB throws the ball deep once in a game how do you rate his deep throwing ability? Arm strength and accuracy can possibly be measured, but this is all dependent on weather conditions, the WR's route (or lack there of), timing, pocket pressure, luck/fluke play and more. I do agree that player ratings should be show in a range or estimated, and possible tightened up over time, but never fully realized. Think of Cam Newtons first game against the Cardinals. In the preseason he looked abysmal at times. Didn't have any touch, couldn't even complete simple dump-offs at times, kept rifling it by his WRs. He's getting criticism from media already that says he's not pro-ready, Carolina shouldn't start him. Then proceeds to go out and break the rookie single-game passing record Week 1. If this were to be used in Madden, in the preseason his ratings/grades are fluctuating up and down do to his poor play. This would possibly create doubt that he should be starting or was even the right pick. Although he may be a 78ovr QB, all you know his that his accuracy range is wide (C- to B) and your vet sitting there at B- accuracy is looking mighty tempting. --- What I think rookie and veteran scouting needs in the game is: 1) A league wide base view/rating of a player, information that every team/scout knows. This is the 'eye' test, general opinion, collective thought about the player. This is why Ryan Leaf is a draft bust, or any player is a bust. Not because San Diego had poor scouts. Because EVERYONE thought he was one-the-best or even the best QBs in the draft. He had the measurables, but perhaps the scouts (collectively) missed something, or it wasn't until he spent time in the league that he truly showed where is skills landed. 2) More Experience = Tightened Ratings. A player's ratings shouldn't be 'locked in' until the have extensive playing time in the league. As a rookie the range should be high, the more they play the more accurate/tighter the range comes. Poor play, good play, also effect this range. This can be reflected in one-year wonders or poor scheme fits. A player my truly be a B rating, but a big year gives him a B to A- range, where a poor scheme fit may give an A- player the same range. This can created added value to a player who plays well in his contract year, as well as never show the potential of a great player who's stuck on the bench his first four years in the league. Changes like this can recreate the Glennon and Osweiler contracts when teams are bidding on potential/hope instead of locked in ratings. It can cause a team to start Savage over Watson because of the kinda known vs kinda unknown. It can create doubt in starting your #1 overall QB because of his poor preseason performance.

I'd sign a 5 year purchase agreement for madden if they added this and built on it. I want the challenge of drafting someone and learning 1-4 yrs down the line he was a bust. I never play preseason and it would give new life to franchise for me. Building a team in Madden is too easy, and kills immersion around 4 to 5 years into the league.

I want to feel the pain of not winning a SB before the decline or retirement of one of my stars. If I dont have good players,that should affect my entire season outlook so to speak. They could have teams winning the SB only to have 1yr wonders decline and cost the team the playoffs year 2. Ijs

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[briz1046]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

That’s why I mentioned Front End. Right now Pre-Season serves no meaningful purpose in the game. - NFL teams use this time to see what a player can actually do (in spite of their physical Combine numbers etc) within their system during live reps. This would at least link the Pre-Season to a purpose. Introducing a whole new Ecosystem is another ball of wax and something to be done down the line. Shop mentioned how there are no ratings during EA Play and if we really think about it, much of the player utilization is centered around simply playing and seeing what you can do with the players you’re fielding at that time. Of course optional, but it’s something that could be introduced sooner rather than later into CFM for those that would like the mystery/challenge of what a player is capable of doing. Honestly to me, having a need to see exactly what a player is capable of on the Front End, is no different than any other “exploit” that some gamers use to get ahead during gameplay. - See the best players, to Pick the best players, to Play with the best players, for the ease of a win. We can’t claim to want a True Simulation experience, but then step back when a Simulation aspect is put forward Not seeing the ratings on the Front End also would produce a more natural User defined difficulty instead of the artificial difficulty that AM applies against the user.

Absolutely nothing against hiding the ratings totally , as an option , I'd prefer blurred though personally as I've no desire to turn myself into a madden version of PFF , whereby I'd be sifting through countless replays ( assuming the are available anyway) to assess the performance of my OL on a play by play basis before setting depth charts etc ...
I see where you're going with user controlled players where you 'can get a feel' by using them but I don't think that carries over to the entire team without too much " tape study" for my liking , certainly would support it as an option though

[briz1046]

Quote: Originally Posted by BleedGreen710

I prefer minimal scouting info. I don't want to be sure when I draft a guy that hes going to be a stud, especially in the later rounds. with the current scouting system you can figure this out way too easily. I remember in Madden 2004 if you max scouted a guy all you got was his combine, workout, and literally just a few sentences about the player. you had to trust your gut most of the time. then in Madden 2008 they had similar scouting however you could run drills with the prospects to unlock some scouting info as well as even play the college football all star game. all the players had questions marks as ratings on the depth chart. it was amazing. you could use your eyes to scout the players. bringing back the question mark ratings would be a good start at getting back to Madden's old scouting system, but there is such a long way to go. the fact they didn't get it into this years game tells me it wasn't much of a priority unfortunately.

I understand what you're saying about having little information being a greater challenge , personally though I'd prefer to go the route of having a lot of information , but that information being of an unreliable and possibly inaccurate nature , I think that's more realistic and more interesting too, whilst still providing the challenge you seek

[briz1046]

Quote: Originally Posted by TMJOHNS18

Player ratings themselves aren't even remotely realistic 1) A league wide base view/rating of a player, information that every team/scout knows. This is the 'eye' test, general opinion, collective thought about the player. This is why Ryan Leaf is a draft bust, or any player is a bust. Not because San Diego had poor scouts. Because EVERYONE thought he was one-the-best or even the best QBs in the draft. He had the measurables, but perhaps the scouts (collectively) missed something, or it wasn't until he spent time in the league that he truly showed where is skills landed.

I'd agree with the vast majority of your post , true player ratings aren't realistic , but they are an essential part of how the game functions so we have to deal with them , in whatever manner we see fit , or EA allow us , even now though if you so chose you could play the game without more than a passing glance at them , though they are being constantly shown on numerous screens so it's not easy

To your point about draft busts like Leaf though I'd like to add something , whilst there is a large degree of group thinking in the scouting world that's not the entire story , not everyone thought Heyward-Bey was a 1st rd talent , or Germaine Ifedi, or the Edmunds guy Pittsburgh selected this year and it's not always about "fit", teams just differ in how they rate people sometimes
Whilst the archetype/ player type/scheme fit system does allow Madden to express teams valueing players differently , it doesn't reflect teams just having different opinions on a prospect from a talent perspective which is something I'd like to see in Madden, and having varying scouts offering differening grades would help that regardless of any ratings blurring or hiding