Home

Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

This is a discussion on Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression within the Madden NFL Last Gen forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > Madden NFL Football > Madden NFL Last Gen
ESBC Roster - The Best We've Ever Seen in a Boxing Game?
PES 2021 Team Spirit Guide - Understand Chemistry on a New Level
MLB The Show 21 Diamond Dynasty Budget Beasts
Poll: What's more important to you, when the time comes to purchase a game? (Click to vote)
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-04-2009, 04:36 AM   #25
Rookie
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Aug 2008
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
Wait, why? Not having to make plays makes Nnmadi a better player? shutting down the opposition's # 1 reciver does.And it's important to realize that that is what "progression" is. It is a player increasing their ability level. It is not a re-evaluation of the players ability level (which is what mid-season roster updates are).

madden is supposed to be simulation of real life..so, if my 55 overall FS has 5 years of 10+ picks, should he not be "re-evaluated" and rewarded with ratings that resemble his production?

here's a novel idea, make it extremely hard for 55 overall guy to produce such stats on the the higher CPU difficulties. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
It makes no sense to re-evaluate the a Franchise player's ability level,

then why roster updates? oh wait, maybe because they dont know exactly!..my whole point

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
because we know precisely what that ability level is

.
who does? Donny Moore, who has never seen the guy play because that player was only in on a handul of snaps the year before. Let Donny have the say in the intial rating. Let the player have the say in his future progress.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
Matt Cassel last year started the season with his Madden rating at ~70. He probably finished it at ~85. Now let's think about what happened. Did he really get 15 points better over the course of the season? Or was he really an 85 all along, and we just didn't know it (this one)?

pretend brady never got hurt in real life..now pretend, he did get hurt in your franchise and Cassel produced exactly how he did last season...should he not be rewarded for it?..after all this is supposed to be a simulation and he was rewarded when he did it IRL


Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
The "performance-based potential" arguments mistake the cause and effect relationship between ratings and performance. High ratings are not a reward for performing well.

yes they are..like your example of Cassel in real life when he was "re-evaluated"..

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
1. There's a flaw in the game (and this is entirely possible: if you're getting 1600 yards with a 65 OVR running back, something ain't right)
2. You've designed your system around the player, and/or put him in a position personnel-wise to be successful (i.e. he's a product of the system)
3. You just got lucky (i.e. he's a one-year-wonder)


again make it extremely difficult for the low rated player to produce such high numbers..and if he does anyway, give the kid some cred

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
we know that players get better from practice, from working out, from studying film, from training in the offseason; but not from catching 6 balls versus 3 on Sunday.

well, these arent in the game but their production on the field is

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
Sorry if this seems kind of rambling, but IMO performance-based potential is a franchise killer,

its quite the opposite, IMO

cliff's notes: one guy in an office somewhere should not have all the say in progression because even he realizes his mistakes and corrects them w/ roster updates..AKA real life progression/regression

Last edited by tooldude79; 09-04-2009 at 03:31 AM.
tooldude79 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 09-04-2009, 04:37 AM   #26
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: Apr 2009
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamBuilder
You and I can just raise the difficulty level so the running back can progress a little if he performs a little better than his rating indicates.
This is the part that you aren't getting, though. The bolded phrase is impossible. The only thing determining how good a player is are his ratings. It is therefore impossible for him to play better than his ratings.
jip4 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 04:37 AM   #27
MVP
 
TeamBuilder's Arena
 
OVR: 15
Join Date: Jun 2009
Blog Entries: 5
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glorious Arc
If he does that IRL then they will edit his abilities accordingly with a roster update. That is the only flaw in a potential system but it has to be done to make the game realistic. They can slowly edit things along to correct each player and that is the best they can do to prevent a complete league of 99 overall players. Current players are the only question marks because like I said before "No one really knows what their potential is until that moment" So EA has to keep changing their stats to reflect what they do and how well everyone thinks they will do.

Seriously, you have not read a single word I have said in my last posts and I am done dealing with this conversation with you until you can read what I wrote.
I'm talking about franchise progression, I wouldn't be starting a new franchise every time there is a roster update.
TeamBuilder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 04:42 AM   #28
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: Apr 2009
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by tooldude79
Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





Wait, why? Not having to make plays makes Nnmadi a better player? shutting down the opposition's # 1 reciver does.And it's important to realize that that is what "progression" is. It is a player increasing their ability level. It is not a re-evaluation of the players ability level (which is what mid-season roster updates are).



madden is supposed to be simulation of real life..so, if my 55 overall FS has 5 years of 10+ picks, should he not be "re-evaluated" and rewarded with ratings that resemble his production?

here's a novel idea, make it extremely hard for 55 overall guy to produce such stats on the the higher CPU difficulties. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





It makes no sense to re-evaluate the a Franchise player's ability level,



then why roster updates? oh wait, maybe because they dont know exactly!..my whole point

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





because we know precisely what that ability level is



.
who does? Donny Moore, who has never seen the guy play because that player was only in on a handul of snaps the year before. Let Donny have the say in the intial rating. Let the player have the say in his future progress.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





Matt Cassel last year started the season with his Madden rating at ~70. He probably finished it at ~85. Now let's think about what happened. Did he really get 15 points better over the course of the season? Or was he really an 85 all along, and we just didn't know it (this one)?



pretend brady never got hurt in real life..now pretend, he did get hurt in your franchise and Cassel produced exactly how he did last season...should he not be rewarded for it?..after all this is supposed to be a simulation and he was rewarded when he did it IRL


Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





The "performance-based potential" arguments mistake the cause and effect relationship between ratings and performance. High ratings are not a reward for performing well.



yes they are..like your example of Cassel in real life when he was "re-evaluated"..

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





1. There's a flaw in the game (and this is entirely possible: if you're getting 1600 yards with a 65 OVR running back, something ain't right)
2. You've designed your system around the player, and/or put him in a position personnel-wise to be successful (i.e. he's a product of the system)
3. You just got lucky (i.e. he's a one-year-wonder)




again make it extremely difficult for the low rated player to produce such high numbers..and if he does anyway, give the kid some cred

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





we know that players get better from practice, from working out, from studying film, from training in the offseason; but not from catching 6 balls versus 3 on Sunday.



well, these arent in the game but their production on the field is

Quote:

Originally Posted by jip4





Sorry if this seems kind of rambling, but IMO performance-based potential is a franchise killer,



its quite the opposite, IMO

cliff's notes: one guy in an office somewhere should not have all the say in progression because even he realizes his mistakes and corrects them w/ roster updates..AKA real life progression/regression

Last edited by tooldude79; 09-04-2009 at 03:31 AM.

Forgive me that I just skimmed your post (it's late and you aren't exactly covering new ground here). Two points:

1. Ratings aren't rewards.

2. Roster updates = re-evaluation. Players getting better through practice = progression. It doesn't make any sense to re-evaluate a 65 OVR running back, because that's precisely what he is: a 65 running back. Conversely, Real Life Matt Cassel didn't come with a convenient label telling the world how good he was. It makes perfect sense to re-evaluate him as we get a better sense of how good of a player he really is.
jip4 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 04:43 AM   #29
MVP
 
TeamBuilder's Arena
 
OVR: 15
Join Date: Jun 2009
Blog Entries: 5
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by jip4
This is the part that you aren't getting, though. The bolded phrase is impossible. The only thing determining how good a player is are his ratings. It is therefore impossible for him to play better than his ratings.
I totally see what you're saying, and I logically agree with you, it makes complete sense. But I just don't think it can work logically in Madden because you will have players that were drafted this year in rounds 4-7 that can never become elite because their potential ratings won't allow them to. So Yes in future drafts you will have later round gems, but what about the rookies in 09-10?
TeamBuilder is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 04:44 AM   #30
MVP
 
OVR: 26
Join Date: Sep 2008
Blog Entries: 1
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamBuilder
I'm talking about franchise progression, I wouldn't be starting a new franchise every time there is a roster update.
I am telling you, that when you start a franchise, it is a fantasy world. If the world IRL thinks that X player is only going to produce with a C potential then EA has to make his potential a C until he proves otherwise IRL. Just because you put him in a situation where he can produce numbers that seem high for his overall doesnt mean he is any better IRL or in the game.

There is no way to make Bradys with this years rookies under this system unless there is a roster update. But it is the closest representation to what happens in the real world and that is why it is best.

Last edited by Glorious Arc; 09-04-2009 at 04:46 AM.
Glorious Arc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2009, 04:45 AM   #31
Rookie
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Aug 2008
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benzhiyi
I'm with you.

So often in real life a skill player who's been drafted early won't get hot until their second or even third year. Or an underrated player suddenly comes good after a year or two on the practise squad. The current progression model nicely mimics that. The one people are clamoring for does not - it means the only way of improving a late round QB or WR is to keep playing them, when in real life they would learn from being on the sideline and training every week. I absolutely HATED the old progression model for that exact reason.

Please don't go back, EA. Please.
a player's AWR should progress each year no matter how many downs played... like in reality, ..you dont have to throw out performance based progression because of this
tooldude79 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 09-04-2009, 04:47 AM   #32
Banned
 
OVR: 9
Join Date: Aug 2009
Re: Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

Quote:
Originally Posted by Glorious Arc
No, that is not the flaw. It is the realism. If a player with D potential is producing great numbers then either the game is broken, you are playing on to low of a difficulty, or he has great WRs/Oline to support him.

Just because you have a great career does not mean you have any real talent. It means you had enough talent to produce in that given situation.(great WR core/Oline)

Have you ever heard of Timmy Smith? I doubt it but he ran for over 200 yards in super bowl 22. Do you think he should have had a 10+ in his current 60 overall? If you did you would be wrong because following that he never produced anything else in his career. He was able to put up big numbers because of his offensive line.

This is the biggest reason why we need a potential cap. To make Madden more realistic and more sim. Performance based progression ruins any type of progression that would relate to RL.
Think of Matt Cassel last year... think of Gus Fererotte back in 2003 when Culpepper went down. Think of Ryan Fitzpatrick toward the end of the year in 2005 when he was with the Rams. Low rated players with talent around them. I definately agree with Glorious on this one. Matt Cassel is garbage, he deserves that 70 overall. He had Randy Moss, Wes Welker, all these weapons to make him good.

On the other hand, someone like Kelly Holcomb for what he did toward the end of the season in 2002, that is someone who should progress. The Browns stunk and he was a stand out QB.

Jay Fiedler, a low rated QB who had like a 35-17 record as a QB at one point. Because of the talent around him. God forbid they gave Jay Fielder a 90 for that record, it would definately be worth complaining but he was always low - 75-80 overall.

My boy Jake Delhomme, he made the best of it with the talent around him. Chris Weinke and Rodney Peete had the same talent but did not do a thing. Jake progressed and he doesn't really need Steve Smith or Muhsin Muhammad to put up good numbers. Remember what he did with Keary Colbert in 04, made him look like an elite WR with those beautiful passes.

Jake Delhomme is very underrated, easily top-5 Quarterback in the NFL. I'd have to go... Tom Brady first, Peyton Manning second, and Jake Delhomme third, Drew Brees 4th... and 5th is a hard one but i'd have to say Ben Roethlisberger (not saying Kurt Warner or Favre, cause of their age.) I am not sayin Phillip Rivers cause he has Norv Turner who made Alex Smith look good that one year, specialty with the QBs. (quote on quote: HoFer Troy Aikman said he is the best offensive coordinator in football) who can argue with that?

but in the player progression thread, i discussed about how a coach should be responsible and your accolades determine your attribute points.
2Koalition 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 07:56 PM.

Top -