Progression Frequency Poll

[stux]

I have to ask you were you came up with that name?

I mean I have a pretty good idea with the name, the 3 6's, but don't get the 3 at the end?

I would be fine with something like that btw.

I actually like the preseason idea but like to also add older players that never really played that much because there were backup.

[damien6663]

Stux, i think there should be a limit on age for pre season progression, because if they are 27-28 they have played in many pre-seasons and not progressed so we can assume they have hit their ceiling from pre season ball.

[stux]

I just feel there has to be some way of addressing players like Aaraon Rodger and Steve Young. The types who have great potential or turn out to be great player but didn't start until a later age because they are sitting behind HoF players.

I do know what you mean though. We don't want progression to get out of hand. Neither do I. Your idea would probably work best. But sometimes you do see backup converter to starters or backups traded to become starters and it would be nice to see a slight preseason progression in those circumstances.

You never answered my name question? If you don't want to for whatever reason no big deal just let me know.

[damien6663]

my name is damien, so the 666 is a joke =)

[stux]

What about the 3?

Thought that had something to do with the holy trinity hehe.

[18manning18]

Quote: Originally Posted by Canadeion

The problem with that though, is it turns into a vicious cycle. Say Manning gets dropped to an 89, that means his attributes are that of an 89, so he'll continue to PLAY like an 89, especially if he's controlled by the CPU. When he was rated a 99, the WORST he could probably play is at about an 85 level, we'll say. Now that he's an 89, the worst he could play is a 75... so it would not be accurate at all to have numbers fluctuate so much. It would lead to terribly inaccurate stats. Peyton Manning will never play at a 75 OVR rating... Maybe for one or two games, but not for long enough to drop his rating like that.

Well with proper tweaking i think that's kind of the point. 10 years ago you could've used Bret Favre instead of Manning and you would say Favre will never be a 75...now it's like well after the season with the Jets that might not be too far off. Eventually if Manning plays too long he's gonna fall off, everybody does, but in Madden people are peaked at 99 until they retire basically. To go from 99-85 though is drastic and i'm talking small dropoffs so after one bad game maybe 98-97, so you would have to really stink it up to get that low.

[damien6663]

Quote: Originally Posted by stux

What about the 3? Thought that had something to do with the holy trinity hehe.

hahaha no im not that intelligent...the 3 was just because on my aim name some1 had damien666...so i used damien6663 (random number).

So since im a ****** i use the same user name for everything so i cant forget.

[damien6663]

Quote: Originally Posted by 18manning18

Well with proper tweaking i think that's kind of the point. 10 years ago you could've used Bret Favre instead of Manning and you would say Favre will never be a 75...now it's like well after the season with the Jets that might not be too far off. Eventually if Manning plays too long he's gonna fall off, everybody does, but in Madden people are peaked at 99 until they retire basically. To go from 99-85 though is drastic and i'm talking small dropoffs so after one bad game maybe 98-97, so you would have to really stink it up to get that low.

ehhh i really hate that system of progression, it would actually be a game killer for me, i wouldnt buy madden 11.