New York Giants - ratings disaster

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by NYJin2011tm

What a surprise! Rivals of Giants think they suck lol.

I think the fact that they went 2-8 when not playing the NFC East shows that they pretty much did suck for the most part.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[NYJin2011tm]

Quote: Originally Posted by canes21

I think the fact that they went 2-8 when not playing the NFC East shows that they pretty much did suck for the most part. Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

It wasn’t just the Giants though lol. Cowboys were best outside division at 4-6. Washington was like 3-8, Eagles were 2-7-1. They all stunk!

[icicle22]

Quote: Originally Posted by NYJin2011tm

It wasn’t just the Giants though lol. Cowboys were best outside division at 4-6. Washington was like 3-8, Eagles were 2-7-1. They all stunk!

Guys, Madden has always had to make players ratings low to reflect a teams poor performance....even when player don't deserve it. I've seen this for years as a Brown fan. The Browns just outright sucked as far as their W-L record was concerned but they had some really good players that were on a bad team. I'm going way back but Eric Metcalf was a fast shifty running back back in the day yet his ratings were so low and when you played as the Browns he felt slow and sluggish. This was done to make it harder to win as the Browns and manipulate an outcome to try to match real life outcomes....regarding wins/losses.

Josh Cribbs never had the rating he deserved to make him feel explosive and dangerous in the Punt Return game. He didn't perform remotely in the game like in real life cause the Browns needed to be losers. I'm sure this applied to other perennial bottom dwellers as well.

I think the Browns are a darn good team now, but I might be inclined to say some players ratings are boosted to manipulate an outcome now, which is make them more likely to win.

The bottom line is in most cases, teams suck because they have poor coaching, poor chemistry or something like that. Most actual players are probably closer in ratings than we might think but its the team/chemistry/coaching that makes the team perform badly and that is hard to replicate in a game.

Just my opinion but it does seem that ratings of individual players are influenced by the prediction of how the team is likely to perform. I dunno. Rant over.

[NYJin2011tm]

Quote: Originally Posted by icicle22

Guys, Madden has always had to make players ratings low to reflect a teams poor performance....even when player don't deserve it. I've seen this for years as a Brown fan. The Browns just outright sucked as far as their W-L record was concerned but they had some really good players that were on a bad team. I'm going way back but Eric Metcalf was a fast shifty running back back in the day yet his ratings were so low and when you played as the Browns he felt slow and sluggish. This was done to make it harder to win as the Browns and manipulate an outcome to try to match real life outcomes....regarding wins/losses. Josh Cribbs never had the rating he deserved to make him feel explosive and dangerous in the Punt Return game. He didn't perform remotely in the game like in real life cause the Browns needed to be losers. I'm sure this applied to other perennial bottom dwellers as well. I think the Browns are a darn good team now, but I might be inclined to say some players ratings are boosted to manipulate an outcome now, which is make them more likely to win. The bottom line is in most cases, teams suck because they have poor coaching, poor chemistry or something like that. Most actual players are probably closer in ratings than we might think but its the team/chemistry/coaching that makes the team perform badly and that is hard to replicate in a game. Just my opinion but it does seem that ratings of individual players are influenced by the prediction of how the team is likely to perform. I dunno. Rant over.

People def worry too much about ratings. It’s all subjective from one to another anyway.

[canes21]

Quote: Originally Posted by NYJin2011tm

It wasn’t just the Giants though lol. Cowboys were best outside division at 4-6. Washington was like 3-8, Eagles were 2-7-1. They all stunk!

And I never said the rest of the division wasn't weak. I was saying people aren't wrong saying the Giants sucked last year and deserve some lower ratings.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Jagsfan24]

I think most fans of their team will argue this player is rated too low in Madden etc...

Madden is weird with their ratings sometimes, they will rate players "I" think are too high and some players will be rated too low in my opinion.

Wait for TFG to come out with his rosters, he may fix them as he goes based off pro football focus i think so maybe you will then the players you wanted higher will be higher

[blitz2kx]

Quote: Originally Posted by TarHeelPhenom

Way too high. The WFT will beat the breaks off of them twice this year!

Just like last year...don't worry I still have the same broom for this year 👍

[IlluminatusUIUC]

Quote: Originally Posted by icicle22

Guys, Madden has always had to make players ratings low to reflect a teams poor performance....even when player don't deserve it.

Dead on. Unless the guy is a superstar in his own right (Calvin Johnson, etc), players are going to rise and fall based on team success. I mean, the classic example is Marshawn Lynch. He took a huge hit when he went to the Raiders and they stunk. He was actually rated *higher* after a year retired and joining the Seahawks mid-season.