Home

Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

This is a discussion on Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!! within the Madden NFL Last Gen forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > Madden NFL Football > Madden NFL Last Gen
Madden NFL 22 Scouting Update Pushed to Mid-October - More Details Revealed
NBA 2K22 Review: The Best 2K Game in Years
FIFA 22 First Impressions
Poll: What's more important to you, when the time comes to purchase a game? (Click to vote)
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-06-2009, 11:38 PM   #57
MVP
 
mavfan21's Arena
 
OVR: 12
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by PacMan3000
One thing I'm very concerned about is that it seems like a rookie's success in the game will be pre-determined. His potential is pre-determined from the get go, and it seems like your ability to draft a gem or a bust is pre-determined if all of these rookies are created by hand.

I think that's a mistake, because potential (and in turn, progression), should be based on a significant amount of issues.

If in the 2009 draft, the Baltimore Ravens select Rey Maualuga, his potential should be through the roof. He should have a higher chance of success because he went to a great team, a great linebacker core/defense, and will play opposite Ray Lewis who will certain keep him in line.

Contrast that with a team like, say, Detroit. If Maualuga goes to the Lions, his potential will be signficantly lower. Doesn't mean he won't have success, but one would assume that his ceiling would be lower compared to if he went to Baltimore.
But by that logic Ernie Sims should have never progressed and gotten much btter, which he did. I think supporting cast can be over-rated.

Andre Johnson shouldn't be a stud...but he is. Miles Austin, Sam Hurd, Reggie Brown, Todd Pinkston, Freddie Mitchell, etc. never got much btter just becasue TO was around. But TO excelled everywhere with every type of QB.
mavfan21 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2009, 11:46 PM   #58
MVP
 
PacMan3000's Arena
 
OVR: 11
Join Date: Jul 2002
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by mavfan21
But by that logic Ernie Sims should have never progressed and gotten much btter, which he did. I think supporting cast can be over-rated.

Andre Johnson shouldn't be a stud...but he is. Miles Austin, Sam Hurd, Reggie Brown, Todd Pinkston, Freddie Mitchell, etc. never got much btter just becasue TO was around. But TO excelled everywhere with every type of QB.
No question. Some players are just athletic freaks.

I guess my issue is that I'm worried that this new progression system will take the fun out of scouting. If I know that there is a limit to my player's success from the get go--not based on the system I run, not based on my personnel, not based on his ability to learn the playbook--but instead based on his talent as a rookie...then I think that could possibly harm franchise mode.

I remember playing franchise in previous years--especially on, say, NFL 2K3 or 2K4--and I would have years where my player would have a monster season. Great stats. Pro Bowl.

But he never improved in regards to his progression. So my concern is that you're going to have guys that deserve to get better, but won't increase. It seems like it might become less about the stats, and more about how the developers created that rookie and his potential ability. If a WR I draft can't get past 88...despite multiple Pro Bowls...that doesn't mean he's still not an elite WR. But if he deserves to be a 97 due to his stats, but is stuck in the 80's...is that real progression? Or is it pre-determined progression?
PacMan3000 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 12:53 AM   #59
Rookie
 
OVR: 3
Join Date: Apr 2009
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by PacMan3000
I remember playing franchise in previous years--especially on, say, NFL 2K3 or 2K4--and I would have years where my player would have a monster season. Great stats. Pro Bowl.

But he never improved in regards to his progression. So my concern is that you're going to have guys that deserve to get better, but won't increase. It seems like it might become less about the stats, and more about how the developers created that rookie and his potential ability. If a WR I draft can't get past 88...despite multiple Pro Bowls...that doesn't mean he's still not an elite WR. But if he deserves to be a 97 due to his stats, but is stuck in the 80's...is that real progression? Or is it pre-determined progression?
It's an interesting conundrum, and one that brings to mind the relevance of actual NFL stats. In Head Coach, for example, my 3-4 linebackers would pretty much rack up sacks and go to the Pro Bowl as long as I called the plays. Even when their max potential, which they'd reach, was only in the low 80's they'd be going to the pro bowl with astronomical sack totals. As long as I called the plays. In Head Coach, I blitzed, and blitzed, and blitzed some more because it was the only way my defense ever seemed to accomplish anything. I tried to get better linebackers out of free agency and the like and did, but in the time I played I pretty much always had one or two guys rated in the low to mid 80's and, sure enough, they'd be going to the pro bowl at the end of the year.

It brings up a different debate. Was it the system, or the players? The preponderance of evidence, in this case, makes it fairly clear it was the system. It was set up to rack up lots of sacks and tackles behind the line of scrimmage. At what point do you say that a real team with, say, an extremely effective pass rush (like the Eagles over the last bunch of years) has more to do with the system than the players? I mean, sure, you take out some of the bigger name guys and the next guys struggle for a while. Eventually, though, they're pressuring QBs again quite successfully, despite the middling linebackers and revolving-door D-line. If you took out my starters and put in guys I rated at backup level they wouldn't necessarily do that well either.

So basically, my point is if you take a guy who isn't that talented and, in your system he racks up a monster year without improving in actual ability, doesn't that, by definition, make him a system player? Isn't that, dare I say it, sim?

It may not, however, be ideal, which is why I suggested making the "potential" rating optional for those who long for the glory days of roster management built around keeping together teams full of 99 OVR superstars. Hopefully the devs take their earlier post about customization to heart. I don't necessarily think either position on the potential debate wrong, just different. Similarly, some people like trigger jukes; I prefer a consistent (all players, all times) trigger sprint, like in the X360 Madden titles.
Rico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 12:56 AM   #60
Pro
 
Jump's Arena
 
OVR: 12
Join Date: Sep 2008
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

There is one major problem with players that don't have a potential rating.

When you are comparing two prospects in the draft and one has better workout times and reps, why would you ever choose the player who is not as physically gifted?

Last edited by Jump; 04-07-2009 at 01:00 AM.
Jump is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 01:07 AM   #61
Nza
MVP
 
OVR: 16
Join Date: Jan 2004
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jump
There is one major problem with players that don't have a potential rating.

When you are comparing two prospects in the draft and one has better workout times and reps, why would you ever choose the player who is not as physically gifted?
For better awareness and positional ratings I would guess.
Nza is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 04-07-2009, 01:43 AM   #62
Pro
 
Jump's Arena
 
OVR: 12
Join Date: Sep 2008
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nza
For better awareness and positional ratings I would guess.
Wow, massive brain fart, do not know what I was thinking.

Carry on.
Jump is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 01:49 AM   #63
Nza
MVP
 
OVR: 16
Join Date: Jan 2004
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Well that's how it always used to work in Madden anyway - technically awareness and positional ratings probably weren't anywhere near as important as physical attributes, particularly under human control.

I think a potential rating is a must, but it needs to be more than some static value that dictates an impenetrable glass ceiling for a player, let alone some some static value that dictates an impenetrable glass ceiling for a player that we can see well before hand. That sounds horrifically poorly thought out.

Last edited by Nza; 04-07-2009 at 02:20 AM.
Nza is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2009, 02:11 AM   #64
Pro
 
Jump's Arena
 
OVR: 12
Join Date: Sep 2008
Re: Do not set the potential of a player in stone!!!

Nza, if the potential number is an impenetrable number, then I will be very dissapointed.

I don't know how they are doing it but I sure hope they explain it soon.
Jump is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > Madden NFL Football > Madden NFL Last Gen »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:50 AM.

Top -