We NEED to know how well Progression works

[Deegeezy]

Quote: Originally Posted by turfguy23

I don't think I'm looking at it wrong. I think I'm looking at it right. But we'll agree to disagree. Players should be rated on where they get drafted. 1rst round pick are near the top and 7th round picks are near the bottom. Then you play the game. Every player, IMO, should have a 99 potential. But it is much harder for a 6th round pick to achieve this rating. A 1rst round pick is has more potential than a 7th round pick. In a sense, you create your own sleepers and bust. I feel like with the "potential cap limit" that essentially the cpu picks who will bust and who will be a hidden gem. I should determine that by making that player produce on the field. If I draft a WR in the 7th round but play real good with him and he get 60 catches in his rookie season.......then he should progress. Then maybe after 3 or 4 seasons a player can earn the "bust" or "hidden gem" label. I don't want the player to be pre-determined. It's really simple logic in my head. Maybe I'm completely off base but I want control over the progression. And with the progression cap I lose control.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there...What you essentially are saying is that you should be able to make the player good if you want him to be. That's not true to real life. I like the CPU randomly picking who will be gems because it makes it the same crapshoot as real life.

There are certain guys that are destined to be nothing more than a career back up or role player and that's how it should be in Madden. There are guys destined to explode in real life despite their draft status. A player doesn't become good because the coach forced into the lineup and forced him the ball 60 times. They caught the ball 60 times because they were good to begin with and were "undiscovered." Everyone that gets picked IRL does not have the potential to be good and that's how it should be on Madden. And if you are catching 60 passes with a 50 rated guy then maybe it is time to re-evaluate your slider and game settings.

[salbowski]

Quote: Originally Posted by Deegeezy

Actually we can edit ratings this year once franchise has started so if you choose to, you can fix situations like this.

Good point.... i never change ratings myself so this skipped my mind. Are you sure we can change potential ratings too??

[adembroski]

Here's the sticking point... Tom Brady was never a 60. We just thought he was. He was an 85 the day he stepped on the field for Bledsoe, it just took the season to prove it.

I am of the opinion that production should have almost nothing to do with progression. Overall is a numerical representation of a player's ability, not the fans/medias perception of his ability.

Improvement creates production, not the other way around. Progression should be based on a combination of coaching, potential, and work ethic.

[salbowski]

Quote: Originally Posted by Deegeezy

I'm going to have to disagree with you there...What you essentially are saying is that you should be able to make the player good if you want him to be. That's not true to real life. I like the CPU randomly picking who will be gems because it makes it the same crapshoot as real life. There are certain guys that are destined to be nothing more than a career back up or role player and that's how it should be in Madden. There are guys destined to explode in real life despite their draft status. A player doesn't become good because the coach forced into the lineup and forced him the ball 60 times. They caught the ball 60 times because they were good to begin with and were "undiscovered." Everyone that gets picked IRL does not have the potential to be good and that's how it should be on Madden. And if you are catching 60 passes with a 50 rated guy then maybe it is time to re-evaluate your slider and game settings.

Exactly

[NoFear]

Quote: Originally Posted by turfguy23

Yeah, I read the blog, The progression based off potential doesn't make sense to me. Was Tom Brady a "potential 99" when he was picked by the Patriots in the 6th round? I don't think so. But he was productive on the field and raised his Madden rating. Why should their be a limit to where a player can progress? The progression system should only be based off production, and nothing else. It's about what you do on the field. Ryan Leaf had a ton of potential. So did Joey Harrington. But ultimately it comes down to production on the field. I completely disagree with putting a cap on a player based off potential. Every player should be able to progress to the highest point. Not every player will but there should be no limit to any player.

Completely agree.

adem, thank you. I will be checking that thread out now.

And to the people bashing me for saying that we "NEED" to know this...well I think we DESERVE to know this. Based off of the lies in that article last year and based on how badly progression was implemented into last years game.

[turfguy23]

The entire NFL draft is based off potential.

1rst round picks (by educated guesses) have more potential than do 2nd round picks, and so on.....

So in real life potential is based off where you get drafted. Aaron Curry has more potential (by most accounts) than does Zack Follett.

Production on the field is what should be used as a progression system. If a 6th round pick produces....then he should progress. If a 1rst round pick stinks it up on the field.....then he should not regress. It's simple.

I want control. It's still a guessing game. You draft players based on their college production, skill level, attributes, etc. You make the best guess possible that the player you drafted can produce for your team. Low round draft players should come into the league with lower ratings. High round draft picks should come into the league with higher ratings. Then you play the game. How the player plays on the field should determine their respective ratings.

So what if in Madden, the cpu logic puts a 80 cap rating on Tom Brady coming into the draft. The highest Brady could be is an 80 overall. That's not what happened in real life. Brady came in with low potential and produced on the field when he got his chance. Simple.

With all that being said. The lower round draft picks with lower ratings will be very tough to produce with. They don't have the skill level as do the higher draft picks. So the difficulty level increases with lower rated players making it more difficult to find "hidden gems". Intern, high draft picks would have higher ratings and it would be easier to produce with that player. You draft a 1rst round RB and he doesn't produce on the field for the first 3 seasons, he becomes a bust (Cedric Benson). Or you draft a lower rated WR in the 7th round and he produces big his rookie season (Marquise Colston) then his ratings should progress and he becomes a "hidden late round gem".

I don't want the CPU guessing for me and predicting the future. The future should be controlled by the user.

[adembroski]

Quote: Originally Posted by turfguy23

Yeah, I read the blog, The progression based off potential doesn't make sense to me. Was Tom Brady a "potential 99" when he was picked by the Patriots in the 6th round? I don't think so. But he was productive on the field and raised his Madden rating. Why should their be a limit to where a player can progress? The progression system should only be based off production, and nothing else. It's about what you do on the field. Ryan Leaf had a ton of potential. So did Joey Harrington. But ultimately it comes down to production on the field. I completely disagree with putting a cap on a player based off potential. Every player should be able to progress to the highest point. Not every player will but there should be no limit to any player.

"Having potential" and "Reaching potential" are two different things. Same thing with Madden. Potential means "It ain't done yet".

Having a 100.1 QB Rating does not make a Hall of Fame QB make... ask Jim Harbaugh. Sometimes a player's production is beyond his ability... because of the players around him, because of good coaching, maybe he just has a few lucky bounces.

If production = improvement, Jeff Garcia would be the greatest QB in 49ers history, not Joe Montana. It's Garcia, not Montana, not Young, that holds virtually every team passing record in SF.

Potential doesn't dictate on the field performance... ability does. And ability is represented by current ratings. Tom Brady didn't become a great QB his first year under center, he already was one. His improvement happened in the previous year learning the pro game, that preseason, getting reps. Then he stepped into the game ready to go... just because we didn't know how good he was doesn't mean he wasn't that good yet.

Madden ratings don't represent what the public thinks of a player, they represent what he actually is. If you've got an 85 as a backup QB in Madden, the general public would think of him as a 60... until he came into the game and showed how good he really is.

[adembroski]

Quote: Originally Posted by turfguy23

So in real life potential is based off where you get drafted. .

Wrong... where you get drafted is based on your potential.