Reducing accuracy ratings for all QB’s in Madden 21

[tommycoa]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

Actually, he was 22/25 for 275 yards and 2 TD. That's 11 YPA, so they certainly weren't dumpoffs. And he most certainly was NOT Peyton Manning. Now, he was playing a Chiefs defense that was objectively terrible in all phases in Week 1 of 2019. The pass defense talent was essentially the same as the defense that played well down the stretch and helped win a Super Bowl, but those guys were still adjusting to Spagnuolo's scheme, and were...not good at football yet. In Madden terms, let's say their ratings were solid, but their morale was terrible. But that's my point...there are so many variables in real-life football that we should expect to see a lot of weird, outlier results in a game that accurately models the NFL. If they're all shoved into a predetermined range, realism is decreased, not enhanced. I do hear you on the "going back and forth" bit...I see completion after completion from an average (at best) QB and sometimes get frustrated myself. Like I said, expectations are a real thing, and if they impact somebody's immersion and perception of "real", I'm not going to argue that effect. It's just sometimes useful to take a step back and think about what kind of "real" we want to see.

More times than not, when you see numbers like you mentioned, they don’t throw more than 25 passes, the run game is going, and they are killing it with play action.

[tg88forHOF]

Quote: Originally Posted by tommycoa

More times than not, when you see numbers like you mentioned, they don’t throw more than 25 passes, the run game is going, and they are killing it with play action.

Absolutely...that's exactly how Ryan Tannehill finished 2019 with a completion percentage above 70%.

Or, as mentioned, they're facing a bad defense, or their OC has an attack of the brilliants and calls a phenomenal game, or one of a dozen reasons or caveats that caused such unusual results.

Is it fair to say we don't see a lot of those details being discussed when we talk about Robo QB and Madden stats generally (especially when we're talking about sim stats)? And is it also reasonable to expect a sim engine to allow for those kinds of caveats?

(I just sock-puppeted you to a degree...I know you haven't argued against those kinds of things. I'm relating the whole Minshew example back to the larger discussion about "realistic" sim stats and deterministic results.)

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

I guess, let me ask you this: if you were playing Madden...let's say you were simming a full game in broadcast mode...and you saw a rookie backup QB come off the bench and complete 88% of his passes, would you consider that result realistic? Edit: It's perfectly cool if your answer is "no"...that is an outlier result, and if that kills the feeling of accuracy from the sim for you, I totally get that answer. But the point is, that's a real thing that really happened...just last year, and from a QB who (probably) isn't the second coming of Drew Brees or Tom Brady. If the game had forced that completion percentage into a more normal range, it would be actually factually making the game less realistic.

I actually love seeing that kind of stuff so the answer would be a resounding yes.

I would like it better if those varied results happened more the other way though as well. Everyone I face has either a decent, good, or exceptional day. Almost never does a QB have a bad day. I'd argue that QBs having an off day is way more prevalent than having an exceptional day. Especially a backup.

So I think seeing my post as just one example is easy to do but I meant it as only one of example of what I'm seeing across the board.

[tg88forHOF]

Quote: Originally Posted by CujoMatty

I actually love seeing that kind of stuff so the answer would be a resounding yes. I would like it better if those varied results happened more the other way though as well. Everyone I face has either a decent, good, or exceptional day. Almost never does a QB have a bad day. I'd argue that QBs having an off day is way more prevalent than having an exceptional day. Especially a backup. So I think seeing my post as just one example is easy to do but I meant it as only one of example of what I'm seeing across the board.

That sounds like being a KC fan in 2018 and early 2019...every QB that faced us seemed to have a career day. Maybe your DC is Bob Sutton and you didn't notice?

In all seriousness, I guess I was just mostly trying to point out that outliers happen a lot more often in the real league than people realize...and that a lot of what we still think of as outliers aren't really outliers anymore. When several QBs throw 75-80% completions per week in the NFL these days, maybe we could widen our ranges and not look at a 75% day as such an unusual example.

Part of the problem is, this game is still drowning in 70s and 80s thinking. Turn on nearly any NFL broadcast, and you'll hear announcers say things like "they have to establish the run to win" or "...for play action to work". "The weather is bad so both teams will be forced to run." "If Back X gets 20 carries/100 yards they'll win". All things that were conventional wisdom 40 years ago but that haven't really been true for years.

Inevitably, all of that will impact what we think of as normal results, even if we know better rationally.

Anyway, I do know the feeling of "...but why do I see it so much when I'm playing?" If EA ever gives you a real DC to fire, maybe fire him.

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

That sounds like being a KC fan in 2018 and early 2019...every QB that faced us seemed to have a career day. Maybe your DC is Bob Sutton and you didn't notice? In all seriousness, I guess I was just mostly trying to point out that outliers happen a lot more often in the real league than people realize...and that a lot of what we still think of as outliers aren't really outliers anymore. When several QBs throw 75-80% completions per week in the NFL these days, maybe we could widen our ranges and not look at a 75% day as such an unusual example. Part of the problem is, this game is still drowning in 70s and 80s thinking. Turn on nearly any NFL broadcast, and you'll hear announcers say things like "they have to establish the run to win" or "...for play action to work". "The weather is bad so both teams will be forced to run." "If Back X gets 20 carries/100 yards they'll win". All things that were conventional wisdom 40 years ago but that haven't really been true for years. Inevitably, all of that will impact what we think of as normal results, even of we know better rationally. Anyway, I do know the feeling of "...but why do I see it so much when I'm playing?" If EA ever gives you a real DC to fire, maybe fire him.

LOL

100% agree on this: "Inevitably, all of that will impact what we think of as normal results, even of we know better rationally."

I play as the Colts and what really sucks is I spent all my CAP on assembling the best defense in modern history and they suck!!!!!!! lol They can't stop a thing and my offense is too crappy to play catch up.

It's like the exact opposite of the Peyton Manning years lol

[Jagsfan24]

Quote: Originally Posted by CujoMatty

LOL 100% agree on this: "Inevitably, all of that will impact what we think of as normal results, even of we know better rationally." I play as the Colts and what really sucks is I spent all my CAP on assembling the best defense in modern history and they suck!!!!!!! lol They can't stop a thing and my offense is too crappy to play catch up. It's like the exact opposite of the Peyton Manning years lol

See I started a Cardinals franchise, signed logan ryan so I have Peterson and ryan at 88 rating and then Byron at 81, with a superstar safety of baker and simmons. After 4 games all the cpu qbs I faced have had at least 80% or higher completion rate.


You can say (well it can happen to you) or to gameplan better or call better plays etc.. but at some point its not YOU lol. Or least I don't believe so

[tg88forHOF]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jagsfan24

See I started a Cardinals franchise, signed logan ryan so I have Peterson and ryan at 88 rating and then Byron at 81, with a superstar safety of baker and simmons. After 4 games all the cpu qbs I faced have had at least 80% or higher completion rate. You can say (well it can happen to you) or to gameplan better or call better plays etc.. but at some point its not YOU lol. Or least I don't believe so

Just for the sake of argument, those opposing QBs would have been:

Jimmy Garoppolo, who had 2 75% passing games and 2 80% passing games in the 2019 regular season. SF is also one of those teams tommycoa was talking about up above, with a great running and PA game, and where Jimmy G's best days are low-volume 18/22 kind of gigs.

Teddy Bridgewater, who had 3 75% games in only 5 starts in 2019.

Matthew Stafford, who didn't have any 75% passing games in 2019, but who did have 4 70% passing games in only 9 starts, and who historically has pretty good completion numbers

And then Washington, which...yeah.

So it's unusual, but it really isn't that unusual. Did you sim all those games from the franchise menu? Super sim? Play them? What were the opposing QBs YPA like...was it all dink and dunk, high percentage underneath stuff?

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by tg88forHOF

Just for the sake of argument, those opposing QBs would have been: Jimmy Garoppolo, who had 2 75% passing games and 2 80% passing games in the 2019 regular season. SF is also one of those teams tommycoa was talking about up above, with a great running and PA game, and where Jimmy G's best days are low-volume 18/22 kind of gigs. Teddy Bridgewater, who had 3 75% games in only 5 starts in 2019. Matthew Stafford, who didn't have any 75% passing games in 2019, but who did have 4 70% passing games in only 9 starts, and who historically has pretty good completion numbers And then Washington, which...yeah. So it's unusual, but it really isn't that unusual. Did you sim all those games from the franchise menu? Super sim? Play them? What were the opposing QBs YPA like...was it all dink and dunk, high percentage underneath stuff?

I see what you are saying but I just dont think it's fair to look at it that way. It's not the fact they are happening its the likelihood that they would all happen to the same team, in a row, with good defenders.

I'm not at all trying to call you out on it but I'm genuinely curious who the teams were those numbers were against? I'm way too lazy to look for myself lol.