Aug. 16th roster from EA

[jalbin]

I totally disagree about Vick. It's not realistic to keep him on the roster. Everyone that I've heard said that Vick is going to be out at the VERY LEAST, three years. On ESPN's front page (as of this post) they had a story where all of Vick's teammates were saying that he's an ex-teammate. Time to come to grips with this simple fact... Michael Vick won't be playing in the NFL for many years to come, and he's got zero chance of being on the Falcons.

Personally I dropped his ratings to zero and released him. Maybe he comes back in 3 years, but for the purposes of a game, if you leave him in he'll just be signed to one of the other teams either during the season, or in the off season.

[dochalladay32]

Yea, if you dropped his ratings to 0 then he won't be signed.

But it is also unrealistic to cut him because the Falcons still have him on the payroll and they can't release him just yet. Now I imagine they will by next year, but he may still be listed on the payroll for this season, at least that was how it was explained yesterday when it was announced on ESPN. If you cut him, then you have that free money to go spend in free agency which is cheap. Now you may not be into that much realism, but that is how Vick is treated right now: as a paid player who is currently suspended; not a free agent with the inability to sign.

[erich20012001]

YES THANK YOU MAN!

[jalbin]

Quote: Originally Posted by dochalladay32

Yea, if you dropped his ratings to 0 then he won't be signed. But it is also unrealistic to cut him because the Falcons still have him on the payroll and they can't release him just yet. Now I imagine they will by next year, but he may still be listed on the payroll for this season, at least that was how it was explained yesterday when it was announced on ESPN. If you cut him, then you have that free money to go spend in free agency which is cheap. Now you may not be into that much realism, but that is how Vick is treated right now: as a paid player who is currently suspended; not a free agent with the inability to sign.

The only problem with that, is that in Madden he would take up a roster spot which he doesn't right now in real life. Yeah they'll pay him, but they won't have to count him as a member of the 53 man roster. You have to do that in Madden. So what's more realistic... Having a guy on the team who won't be welcomed back and won't be able to play till 2010 at the earliest... thus keeping someone off the 53 man roster that would actually be able to play, but now can't because you don't have enough roster space. Or is it better to just drop him to 0 and release him? Considering Madden doesn't have accurate rosters to begin with, I'd say cutting him is the best, because lets face it... you keep him on and get the roster to 53 men, (or is it 55) then you can't sign, say another quarterback to replace Vick, and you can't sign another one to replace Shockley. Now that's not realistic.

But lets face it, nothing we come up with is going to be completely realistic, but I say cutting him off, while giving salary cap space, will give you the full roster.

EDIT: Sorry if this reads like a 2 year old wrote it... I haven't had much sleep in the past three days.

[EvilSonGoku]

anyone else having problems with this roster file. won't load for me.

[koebner]

Quote: Originally Posted by EvilSonGoku

anyone else having problems with this roster file. won't load for me.

It came up as a damaged save for me...I downloaded the one from codejunkies and it worked fine.
What's strange is that the datelinfo.xbx file wasn't with the file here,but it was present in the codejunkies version.I deleted it,as usual,and the file loaded fine.