This is YOUR CHANCE to make a difference in Madden Ratings!

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Well that's the goal...a universal system. The only problem with the bench is that if you use it you get RBs and WRs that do more reps than OLmen. Does that mean they are legitimately stronger? Case in Point: Tommy Saunders of Missouri holds the record for WRs with 30 reps. That's better than a guy like OT Mark Tauscher who only did 22 reps. The NFL average since 1998 is 20 reps...so Tauscher should only have about a 74 STR? The WR should have a 82 STR? Really? There has to be something better. Any more thoughts? If I can find a way to square this away I will do a few players and post them for you guys so you can take a look.

The real problm here is you are using a test of endurance and trying to use it to determine a person's strength. This would be like having all the players complete a 2 mile run and using that to determine there speed.

Once a player has lifted the weight 1 time they have shown they have the strength to lift it. After that all that is being shown is endurance. Also, when judging strength with bench press things like arm length really need to be considered. The longer a player's arms the further he needs to move the weight.

Strength should be measured by how much weight the player can move, not by how many times they can move it. The biggest problem here is there is no widely publicized measure of all player's bench and squat maxes as there is with bench reps. That would be the best way of rating strength though. Also, should probably be split into upper and lower body strength, but that is another issue.

[GAM3R4LYF3]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

If you read the first post you would realize that the ratings are not updated for every player. This includes Floyd, Reed, Davis, and Cason as well as Sproles and Turner.

Sorry my mistake, I thought you meant those with the "O" in their profile hadn't been updated and the ones with "Wk 15" were.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by kcarr

The real problm here is you are using a test of endurance and trying to use it to determine a person's strength. This would be like having all the players complete a 2 mile run and using that to determine there speed. Once a player has lifted the weight 1 time they have shown they have the strength to lift it. After that all that is being shown is endurance. Also, when judging strength with bench press things like arm length really need to be considered. The longer a player's arms the further he needs to move the weight. Strength should be measured by how much weight the player can move, not by how many times they can move it. The biggest problem here is there is no widely publicized measure of all player's bench and squat maxes as there is with bench reps. That would be the best way of rating strength though. Also, should probably be split into upper and lower body strength, but that is another issue.

This is exactly why I do not like the bench unless you use a conversion to determine an estimated 1RM like many lifters do. A guy does 225 30 times so his estimated max is X. Now some suggest that you divide that by a person's weight to determine a ratio of strength to body weight. Once again, there is still that endurance deal to mess around with.

I think I would prefer something based upon weight or body composition to determine strength.

[beastsofboston]

I like some, i dislike some.

Heres some things:

Brady a 90? And manning a 99? I think thats pritty unfair considering brady had a seperated shoulder and a dislocated thinger for half of the season, and still put up great stats.

And Goskoski( whatever his name is ) a 79? He missed like 2 or 3 kicks last year. I get the strecheted ratings, but on kickers and punters I think they should stay arround the same.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by beastsofboston

I like some, i dislike some. Heres some things: Brady a 90? And manning a 99? I think thats pritty unfair considering brady had a seperated shoulder and a dislocated thinger for half of the season, and still put up great stats. And Goskoski( whatever his name is ) a 79? He missed like 2 or 3 kicks last year. I get the strecheted ratings, but on kickers and punters I think they should stay arround the same.

According to Profootballfocus.com (who specialize in statistical analysis) Brady was only the 10th best QB overall last season. Now, I have him as the 8th best QB right now. Remember, if you have read my posts, that INJURIES do determine an OVR rating! His injuries have not helped him. Also keep in mind that there are only 91 guys in the 90s at this point...Brady being one of them. So he is still a top 100 guy overall in the NFL. That is pretty fair for a guy who is injured if you ask me.

Manning is still the best QB in the league but he has not been updated as he is now a 98, not 99, currently that is. All of the players with the "O" as their status (stands for Offseason) are complete. Any player with the last name starting in M is NOT an updated player.

As for Gostkowski, he has also not been updated. He is now an 82 OVR. Statistically, he was the 3rd best K last season. However, past performance does matter. He was 17th in 2008 and 14th in 2009 which hurts him. He had 5 misses last year, not only 2 or 3. This was only 83.3%...22nd in the league last season! That's not that good man. You should be happy he is an 82 OVR and not worse.

[Pringles]

i think having more ratings will give players a persona
i mean they added the swagger rating they should add some kind of celebration rating as well and what about composure under pressure
behind in the fourth qtr the list could go on and on
a must rating to me for qbs is shotgun not all qbs should be able to function like a tom brady shotgun rating should effect the odds of muffing the snap and the ability to read a defence.

what about staying in the pocket rating /scrambling rating
what about playbook rating
what about uneccsary ruffing rating
what about mutiple nfl ref crews and each crew has a penalty calling tendacy
that adjusts sliders so each crew is different.
what about coaches rating on how often they challenge a play or the types
i seen some throw it on every big play no matter what then i seen coaches eat it because they were afraid to lose a time out.

[beastsofboston]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

According to Profootballfocus.com (who specialize in statistical analysis) Brady was only the 10th best QB overall last season. Now, I have him as the 8th best QB right now. Remember, if you have read my posts, that INJURIES do determine an OVR rating! His injuries have not helped him. Also keep in mind that there are only 91 guys in the 90s at this point...Brady being one of them. So he is still a top 100 guy overall in the NFL. That is pretty fair for a guy who is injured if you ask me. Manning is still the best QB in the league but he has not been updated as he is now a 98, not 99, currently that is. All of the players with the "O" as their status (stands for Offseason) are complete. Any player with the last name starting in M is NOT an updated player. As for Gostkowski, he has also not been updated. He is now an 82 OVR. Statistically, he was the 3rd best K last season. However, past performance does matter. He was 17th in 2008 and 14th in 2009 which hurts him. He had 5 misses last year, not only 2 or 3. This was only 83.3%...22nd in the league last season! That's not that good man. You should be happy he is an 82 OVR and not worse.

yes he only had 2 or 3 misses. I guess I know whos roster im using now,

[hiuhyoi]

Quote: Originally Posted by beastsofboston

yes he only had 2 or 3 misses. I guess I know whos roster im using now,

But.. he had 5 misses...