FIX FRANCHISE MODE: Remove Potential Rating.

[King Gro23]

I agree scrap the potential for every player in the NFL the sky is the limit. The stones just have to fall in the right place for any player succeed.

[Reejer]

Actually, I think the easiest way to fix the potential rating mess is to have an annual re-eval for all players (if the player has a good year have the potential increase, and if he has a bad year have it decrease), and most importantly make it editable for existing players. So people aren't upset when their favorite underdog is rated an F.

Because I think that alot of the fun of franchise mode is to build a team up from a bunch of unknown players, based on skills not overall ratings. (Back on my PS2 M-06') I used to trade one of my favorite players, Favre for the Bengals Bramlet, and build my team around him. It was fun to watch him progress over the years. And progression/regression was much better back then (when it would occur about every 4 weeks).

[King Gro23]

Quote: Originally Posted by GreenReign86

Marice Clarrett would like to speak with you.

Maurice Clarrett had potential but he blew it with his manners and attitude along with off the field issues.

If I ever ever asked my strength and conditioning coach if I could, "Go get my goose on." I'd hope he drop me too. Thats just ridiculous

[DrewsLions]

Quote: Originally Posted by Xeper84

i don't get it. Why was there a potential shift with romo? He always was a A potential player but started with a low ovr and had to learn the NFL.

If Madden had potential in the system when Romo came in as an undrafted player, do you think he would have been an "A"? Not even close. Maybe a "C". But the year after he took over for Bledsoe, he would have shifted to an "A". Right now, that's not possible.

And I'm talking Madden... not IRL. Yes, IRL his potential was always there... somewhere.

[Richieh]

Quote: Originally Posted by DrewsLions

If Madden had potential in the system when Romo came in as an undrafted player, do you think he would have been an "A"? Not even close. Maybe a "C". But the year after he took over for Bledsoe, he would have shifted to an "A". Right now, that's not possible. And I'm talking Madden... not IRL. Yes, IRL his potential was always there... somewhere.

Well.....yes. Based on the fact that you could pick up "A" players in late rounds.
Of course the previous system where players had to play to progress would have seen a Madden Romo regress in those first years in the league and never make it.

The only fix needed for progression is to hide the rating. Give an estimate of player potential, and then let that estimate improve after the player has been at the team for a time.

[DrewsLions]

Quote: Originally Posted by adembroski

I actually sent Ian, Phil, and Josh a 6,000+ word document outlining how I'd replace potential. God I need a life.

On behalf of all of us, thanks for doing that. Hopefully, they listen and understand that you represent the masses. Was this a recent submission or something sent several years ago? I'd like to think they are considering it for Madden '12 (unofficially dubbed "The Year of the Franchise").

[DrewsLions]

Quote: Originally Posted by Richieh

Well.....yes. Based on the fact that you could pick up "A" players in late rounds. Of course the previous system where players had to play to progress would have seen a Madden Romo regress in those first years in the league and never make it. The only fix needed for progression is to hide the rating. Give an estimate of player potential, and then let that estimate improve after the player has been at the team for a time.

I see your point, but simply hiding the rating doesn't remove the cap on potential. To me, that's the crux of the problem... that and showing the potential immediately after signing your picks. I also think that progression and potential are two different animals. They certainly are linked and should affect each other, but they should be attacked differently from a "fix" perspective.

Progression is a much deeper problem and should involve a very complex formula based on many factors. Potential is fairly simple, but should just not be absolute. The potential range should be varied so that a player's capped OVR is not the same for every potential ranking. I hate the fact that if I get a "B" rated player that he is immediately capped at 89... although hiding it really does mask most of the problem.

[shanew21]

I like the way the NHL series does it. Higher potential simply means that you have do less stats/playing wise to increase the overall. Obviously if the player simply doesn't produce, he won't increase in overall at all really, but if a player with a low potential puts up monster stats, he can still increase his overall into the 90+ range.