David Harris

[KamikazeBlaize]

Quote: Originally Posted by AnthonyPhillips

WHEN IS IT GOING TO STOP!? I have seen topics for Revis, Sanchez and now Harris complaining about their ratings. Ok fine Sanchez needs a boost but if this continues it will be Leonhard needs a boost, Sheppard needs a boost, Douglas and Ellis needs a boost then we cant forget about the backups Larry "Freaking" Izzo needs a boost, Eric "I'll bust your face" Smith needs a boost. I mean come on this is becoming a joke.

No, I didn't say any of those things.

Revis got his boost, Sanchez is still making rookie mistakes but we'll see what Donny (misspelled before whoops) thinks, the others I have made no mention of, either.

My point was that Donny has already admitted that he messed up on Harris thanks to his preseason performance, so now that he has actually performed on a higher level than any of the examples you provided, you're yelling at me for things I didn't even say? Terrible logic.

The bottom line is, they're a 3-0 team and the standout linebacker (key to a 3-4) is David Harris. He is currently rated at the ceiling of the "C" potential range, despite making plays that aren't told simply through statistics. As long as the Jets win (or put up a good fight) against the Saints and he isn't invisible, one would think Donny would take note of this.

I'm not begging you or anyone (even Donny) to make a change, I'm putting forth reasons for debate since you seem to have a problem with people that think this guy is underrated. If it bothers you that much maybe you shouldn't be checking an anonymous Madden Rosters forum for solace.

[AnthonyPhillips]

Quote: Originally Posted by KamikazeBlaize

No, I didn't say any of those things. Revis got his boost, Sanchez is still making rookie mistakes but we'll see what Donny (misspelled before whoops) thinks, the others I have made no mention of, either. My point was that Donny has already admitted that he messed up on Harris thanks to his preseason performance, so now that he has actually performed on a higher level than any of the examples you provided, you're yelling at me for things I didn't even say? Terrible logic.

First off i didnt say you said the things i posted. I said i have seen it said about Revis, Sanchez and now Harris. If Harris went from a 74 to a 79 in preseason and now by wrightnreyes thinking should be an 85 that means in 7 total games (Preseason and now 3 real games) he would have went up 11 total overall points. 11 Points!. Are you kidding me?

Also "so now that he has actually performed on a higher level than any of the examples you provided," well thats BS. Its on field production. Lofton has 38 tackles while Harris has 22 and Scott has 27. Lofton cant help it that he doesn't have the same players around him as Harris and Scott has.

If anyone has a gripe it would have to be the Denver fans. Their D is ranked #2 in the league and in truth all their D players need boost because they were all rated so low to start the season.

[KamikazeBlaize]

Quote: Originally Posted by AnthonyPhillips

First off i didnt say you said the things i posted. I said i have seen it said about Revis, Sanchez and now Harris. If Harris went from a 74 to a 79 in preseason and now by wrightnreyes thinking should be an 85 that means in 7 total games (Preseason and now 3 real games) he would have went up 11 total overall points. 11 Points!. Are you kidding me? Also "so now that he has actually performed on a higher level than any of the examples you provided," well thats BS. Its on field production. Lofton has 38 tackles while Harris has 22 and Scott has 27. Lofton cant help it that he doesn't have the same players around him as Harris and Scott has. If anyone has a gripe it would have to be the Denver fans. Their D is ranked #2 in the league and in truth all their D players need boost because they were all rated so low to start the season.

I know you didn't say I said it, so why bring it up? It's a completely pointless reference to attack me with ad hominem nonsense by generalizing me as the typical whiner that sees one good game and wants a guy to get a boost. Hell look at how things work now, Antwan Odom is suddenly a great DE for two single game performances...years ago, if Vonnie Holliday had his 6 sack game, do you think he'd go up 10-15 points in the next roster update?

Statistics aren't everything, yet you call it BS when you're only counting tackles and not sacks, int's, or pass deflections. Lofton has a forced fumble, but none of those other things. BS? Come on. Again, I wouldn't even care if nothing happened, but the point here is to discuss a discrepancy in your opinion, but you're trying to use these other players as reasons for the rest of us to shut up and that isn't right.

So Denver played...the surprisingly decent Bengals (respectable, but they won on a fluke play), the Browns (clearly the worst team in the league right now), and the Raiders (the most inept organization in the league led by a regressing QB and various other negative factors).

Yes, they deserve some recognition, but they didn't play the high-powered Texans offense and shut them down, they didn't play the Patriots that are playing a bit worse than their 2007 form and hold them to no offensive TD's, and they held Chris Johnson in check after a ridiculous performance and forced what was it, 8 or 9 straight incompletions for Mr. Reliable Kerry Collins who was pro bowl caliber last year for his consistency?

And you're comparing the Broncos to that now?

[AnthonyPhillips]

Quote: Originally Posted by KamikazeBlaize

I know you didn't say I said it, so why bring it up? It's a completely pointless reference to attack me with ad hominem nonsense by generalizing me as the typical whiner that sees one good game and wants a guy to get a boost. Statistics aren't everything, yet you call it BS when you're only counting tackles and not sacks, int's, or pass deflections. Lofton has a forced fumble, but none of those other things. BS? Come on. Denver played...the surprisingly decent Bengals (respectable, but they won on a fluke play), the Browns (clearly the worst team in the league right now), and the Raiders (the most inept organization in the league led by a regressing QB and various other negative factors). Yes, they deserve some recognition, but they didn't play the high-powered Texans offense and shut them down, they didn't play the Patriots that are playing a bit worse than their 2007 form and hold them to no offensive TD's, and they held Chris Johnson in check after a ridiculous performance and forced what was it, 8 or 9 straight incompletions for Mr. Reliable Kerry Collins who was pro bowl caliber last year for his consistency? And you're comparing the Broncos to that now?

Lets just keep this nice and simple. Cut out the BS.

Heres the question.
Should a players rating go up 11 total overall points within a span of 7 games and in those 7 games only 3 were games that were meaningful?

[KamikazeBlaize]

Quote: Originally Posted by AnthonyPhillips

Lets just keep this nice and simple. Cut out the BS. Heres the question. Should a players rating go up 11 total overall points within a span of 7 games and in those 7 games only 3 were games that were meaningful?

I just edited and added Odom. Did he get any sacks yesterday? No, but the point of his boost was to acknowledge that he was initially rated too low, which is the case for anyone that performs at an exceptional level despite having a mediocre starter's overall rating.

Obviously this was taken into account earlier thanks to the preseason, but now that on-field production (which you seem to only care about overrated tackle statistics) is proving him to be a top LB in a 3-4, you've gone out of your way to argue with me when I'm not even saying he needs a boost...I'm discussing why I feel there are valid points as to why it should happen. "Need" is not part of my agenda at all here, but I can see why that would annoy you.

Problem is, if I'm not saying it, you shouldn't be assuming I'm implying it and taking it out on me like I'm one of the other fellas.

[AnthonyPhillips]

Quote: Originally Posted by KamikazeBlaize

I just edited and added Odom. Did he get any sacks yesterday? No, but the point of his boost was to acknowledge that he was initially rated too low, which is the case for anyone that performs at an exceptional level despite having a mediocre starter's overall rating. Obviously this was taken into account earlier thanks to the preseason, but now that on-field production (which you seem to only care about overrated tackle statistics) is proving him to be a top LB in a 3-4, you've gone out of your way to argue with me when I'm not even saying he needs a boost...I'm discussing why I feel there are valid points as to why it should happen. "Need" is not part of my agenda at all here, but I can see why that would annoy you. Problem is, if I'm not saying it, you shouldn't be assuming I'm implying it and taking it out on me like I'm one of the other fellas.

Ok i don't think i received a real answer to my question in your post. Just in general should a player already rated in the 70's go up 11 total overall points after 3 games (7 total)?

[KamikazeBlaize]

Quote: Originally Posted by AnthonyPhillips

Ok i don't think i received a real answer to my question in your post. Just in general should a player already rated in the 70's go up 11 total overall points after 3 games (7 total)?

You didn't receive an answer? Odom went up 10 after 2 games.

Besides, Harris's initial rating was somewhat due to the fact he was injured a chunk of last year. Why are you counting something that had more to do with lack of evidence than the point that actual production (as you say) matters?

He started the season at 79, he has performed extremely well (and it isn't just about tackles, that's an absolute that only naive football fans look at) on a great defense against very good offenses, and that's that. He may get raised, or might not, but whining about people using the forums to discuss roster ratings in the Madden rosters subdivision is ridiculous.

[AnthonyPhillips]

Quote: Originally Posted by KamikazeBlaize

You didn't receive an answer? Odom went up 10 after 2 games. Besides, his initial rating was somewhat due to the fact he was injured a chunk of last year. Why are you counting something that had more to do with lack of evidence than the point that actual production (as you say) matters? He started the season at 79, he has performed extremely well (and it isn't just about tackles, that's an absolute that only naive football fans look at) on a great defense against very good offenses, and that's that. He may get raised, or might not, but whining about people using the forums to discuss roster ratings in the Madden rosters subdivision is ridiculous.

I like that little jab...
Heres the reality. Everyone wants the players on their team rated higher. So that leads to pointless threads saying that this player and that player needs a boost. I'm not saying that Harris isn't good im saying that in 3 games he hasn't done enough to deserve a rating higher than what he has. When this Madden came out it was said that 70's was the old 80's and so on but so much complaining has made the new rating system useless. If we go by old Madden then Harris would be rated an 89 (or 95 if wrightnreyes got his way). The point of the new rating system was to bring the ratings down and separate the greats from the rest but with all complaining about ratings by years end if everyone gets their way we will have 100+ players rated 95 and over. Im not a Jets ***** or anything like that im just talking in general about the rating complaints and Devin Harris is just the newest complaint that i stumbled across.