potential rating should be changed during progression.

[vaibhavp3]

Quote: Originally Posted by jimmyy201

So ur saying that a player that on madden has a trucking of about 20. Yet has 3-4 broken tackles(by running over or trucking someone) in a game should not get a ratings boost in trucking?

thank you someone who understands me.

[Tengo Juego]

Quote: Originally Posted by Richieh

But "the game" doesn't really work like that, so nor should the game. Players don't improve in ability after having a good year, otherwise they would be in a constant spiral of improving numbers until injury or retirement. It's "ratings" that cause performance, not performance that causes ratings.

Agreed. Fluctuating potential doesn't really make sense. Otherwise its not a true potential rating.

[Metsfanx]

I think they just need to eliminate potential. It has no statistical basis, it's just a random assignment that unfortunately affects progression. I get what they are trying to simulate, but the way it's implemented just doesn't work.

"Potential" should never be restrictive. There are plenty of players with a very low potential that become superstars IRL, and vice versa. But to actually restrict a player's progression based on a made up value is bogus.

I think if they are going to keep potential that they should weigh it differently for starters and for backups, or for guys w/ less than 3 years experience vs veterans. Like make progression based 80% on potential and 20% on stats for players w/ under 3 years experience, and then flip it (20% on potential and 80% statistics) once they have more experience. That would be more realistic in my opinion. Would at least give you the chance to develop guys w/ a low potential by playing them, but also give rookies and backups a good chance to develop while riding the pine in the early years.

Just my opinion anyway, but I agree in a sense that "Potential" should not be restrictive or limiting.

[CM Hooe]

Progression of the player potential rating defeats the purpose of the potential rating entirely. I vote no.

[vaibhavp3]

Quote: Originally Posted by Metsfanx

I think they just need to eliminate potential. It has no statistical basis, it's just a random assignment that unfortunately affects progression. I get what they are trying to simulate, but the way it's implemented just doesn't work. "Potential" should never be restrictive. There are plenty of players with a very low potential that become superstars IRL, and vice versa. But to actually restrict a player's progression based on a made up value is bogus. I think if they are going to keep potential that they should weigh it differently for starters and for backups, or for guys w/ less than 3 years experience vs veterans. Like make progression based 80% on potential and 20% on stats for players w/ under 3 years experience, and then flip it (20% on potential and 80% statistics) once they have more experience. That would be more realistic in my opinion. Would at least give you the chance to develop guys w/ a low potential by playing them, but also give rookies and backups a good chance to develop while riding the pine in the early years. Just my opinion anyway, but I agree in a sense that "Potential" should not be restrictive or limiting.

also the progression is pre-determined i get backup Rb who haven't played a lot progress like 3 points.

[4949]

I get what you're saying but I have to disagree, for any player in the NFL having a great season does not mean you improve the next season. If the LE#3 gets the 16 sacks why does he need to improve? He is already good enough to get 16 sacks. Realistically its possible that this is as good physically and mentally as he gets and that he will never get 16 sacks again.

In the NFL guys off the bench who didn't so a thing one year can suddenly become good. Sometimes guys have a great season and the next year they can suck. (If a player on Madden had ratings go down after a great season people would say progression is broke but in the real world guys have great seasons all the time then their play drops off the next year) (especially after they get that huge contract, lol)

I like the potential rating because it sets a ceiling for some guys who no matter how great they play this is it they aren't going to have a better season than the year before every season. My only problem is that realistically I think the potential rating should be internal and we should never see it. I personally find it fun to try to get a play to play at a high a level dispite not having a high potential.

[steveo]

I say it doesn't really matter. If you have a guy who isn't rated high yet can have good seasons then what difference does it make? Is it simply for trade value? Simulation? I mean I get it for those but if you plan to just play the games it shouldn't matter.

So for me, keeping it the same or doing what you say is fine either way.

[Richieh]

Quote: Originally Posted by Metsfanx

"Potential" should never be restrictive. There are plenty of players with a very low potential that become superstars IRL, and vice versa.

No there aren't. That's the whole point of the rating. The players that became superstars did so because of what Madden rates as potential....and with the new system could well have started out with low ratings but a high potential rating. And vice-versa.