Combine Number/Rating Analysis

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

The result is a chart that shows how a player should be rated upon knowing the agility drill marks and standards. Using this method, there were a total of 13490 40 times taken during this time period. Of these there were only 348 players who achieved a SPD rating of 90 or higher (2.6%), 3959 with an 80 SPD or higher (29.3%), and 7919 with a 70 SPD or higher (58.7 %). It truly makes that 90 SPD rating elite. The second method I utilized was setting the population average to the average Madden 11 SPD, ACC, AGI, etc. This means that since the average 40 time is 4.81 and the average Madden SPD is 74, a 4.81 40 time = 74 SPD. The upper and lower bounds were also used as in the first method. This led to some very different results. For the SPD rating, out of the 13490 players that were calculated, a whopping 691 had a SPD above 90 (5.1%), 5689 were above 80 (42.2%), and 9225 were above 70 in SPD (68.4%). These are very different numbers from one method to the other. The inflation of the ratings in the present system provided by EA is evident even when using standardized data! My questions for the community are: 1. Which method do you prefer and why? 2. What would you do differently to determine attribute ratings using hard data, if anything? I want it to be quite clear that I would like thought provoking opinions and advice as what is said here may determine how the attributes are FBG ratings are calculated. Thanks for the time and sorry for the novel. Dan B. www.fbgratings.com/members

The lower method is exactly how I'm applying ratings to NCAA 11

It just makes the faster players on my roster file like Deion Sanders Of Florida St or Johnny Rogers of Nebraska stand out from all the rest on the field.

That way of ratings also stops rosters from being overrated because the speed ratings drive up the overall ratings. You can use acceleration to make up for it IMO which helps the players in the 1st 20 yards before speed takes over.

That is what i want to see a guy like Sanders in file after 20 yards sperate from everyone else on the field. The lower speed chart posted is perfect for me and it has worked out great on my created teams so far

[DCEBB2001]

Wow, so far the voting is in vast favor of the overhaul to make a 90 more elite. That means that some of your favorite players may not get that 90 speed rating just so you all know. That includes Adrian Peterson, and Joseph Addai, Jerious Norwood, Troy Polamalu, Dwayne Bowe, and Eric Berry who all just missed with a 4.40 (4.39 is the requirement for the 90 SPD rating based upon my research as previously stated)

[sniperhare]

I'd like for it to be accurate across the board, I want to be scouting a player and say "wow, that 6'0 218 lb. Safety ran a 4.38 and had the fastest 3-cone at the combine, I wonder if we could move him to offense..." And I should fail, or have a project player that takes 4 years to be an impact.

Right now, physical ability makes up for a lack of skill at a position, which doesn't make sense. How many times in the NFL do you see a player with bad technique, but is fast, have an impact? Now how often do we see a player who is slower, or smaller but has greater skill/determination dominate?

I don't like limits on OVR ratings and how it affects players being accurately rated. If a certain player would equal a 103 OVR rating they should give him that instead of toning down his ratings to keep him below a certain level. I'd rather see the OVR go away.

[Megatron2k7]

Excellent Thread Dan...... nice work, once again.

I too voted on the first option... much, much, better IMO.

Just for one example, I'd like to question some of the physical attirbutes of someone like...... Dallas Clark. I'm not a Colts *****, by any means, and I know that Clark is a damn good TE, but just to make sure he's a good TE in the game, it's my opinion that EA (Donny) has inflated his physical attributes to an unrealistic level. I don't belive he really deserves an 86 speed rating.

Some of you have also pointed this out, and this is one of the biggest problems IMO.

Dan, could you please give us an example of what Dallas Clark's physical attributes should look like, by using your actual, real-life data, instead of the inflated ratings we've been seeing ? Thanks.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by Megatron2k7

Excellent Thread Dan...... nice work, once again. I too voted on the first option... much, much, better IMO. Just for one example, I'd like to question some of the physical attirbutes of someone like...... Dallas Clark. I'm not a Colts *****, by any means, and I know that Clark is a damn good TE, but just to make sure he's a good TE in the game, it's my opinion that EA (Donny) has inflated his physical attributes to an unrealistic level. I don't belive he really deserves an 86 speed rating. Some of you have also pointed this out, and this is one of the biggest problems IMO. Dan, could you please give us an example of what Dallas Clark's physical attributes should look like, by using your actual, real-life data, instead of the inflated ratings we've been seeing ? Thanks.

Sure here is how he would grade out physically.

STR 74
SPD 77
JMP 81
AGI 75
ACC 80

He would be a very effective TE with these ratings. His CTH abilities would be high as well as his AWR would be around 88.

[at23steelers]

I accidentally picked the wrong option. So, if you are wondering what type of idiot would choose the 2nd option, well it was me, but on accident. The 1st one is clearly a better option, especially since you are scaling back all the other ratings as well.

[tlc12576]

Quote: Originally Posted by at23steelers

I accidentally picked the wrong option. So, if you are wondering what type of idiot would choose the 2nd option, well it was me, but on accident. The 1st one is clearly a better option, especially since you are scaling back all the other ratings as well.

Thanks for clearing that up because that's exactly what I was wondering. LOL

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by tlc12576

Thanks for clearing that up because that's exactly what I was wondering. LOL

Man 16-0 in favor of making 90 more elite for measurable data...wow. This is nice to hear now, but I can hear the whining already when someone's favorite player isn't a 90 SPD...too bad those people won't consider that their opposing CB/WR/RB is lowered too