39 speed & 99 acceleration!

[JVM]

CPU has a DT with 39 speed and 99 acceleration; 2 years experience, and rated 87 OVR. And I have a WR with 99 speed and 91 acceleration for 2-3 years with no boost for acceleration, and a HB with 98 speed and 92 acceleration 3 years with no boost for acceleration. I call this discrimination.

[billsmetalbooze]

Quote: Originally Posted by JVM

CPU has a DT with 39 speed and 99 acceleration; 2 years experience, and rated 87 OVR. And I have a WR with 99 speed and 91 acceleration for 2-3 years with no boost for acceleration, and a HB with 98 speed and 92 acceleration 3 years with no boost for acceleration. I call this discrimination.

this is one of the ridiculous things i've hated FOR YEARS about CPU-gen rookies. making guys really, really, really slow in long distances, but man can THEY BURN IT UP IN SHORT BURSTS!!!

it's just not realistic. or a WR with 99 speed but an agility in the 70s or something. if a guy has world-class-track speed, he will all-around have a pretty athletic body and at least decent agility, etc. i'm not saying 99 speed should mean 99 Agiliy, but no less than, for example, 87.

the crazy CPU-gen rookies simply have no real-life counterpart and that's proof that the ratings are matched unrealistically.

show me one real NFL player with 99 Accel and 39 speed.

just one. ever.

show me one real life NFL player with 99 speed but 80 accel. just one. but i've seen CPU-gen players like that.

or a running back with 99 speed and 99 trucking. doesn't exist. yes, Peterson comes close but he's not the fasted player in the league and i bet as strong as he is he's not the best tackle breaker.

they need to make overall player types: fast + quick/reasonably agile. or strong and not so quick. yes, you'll get freaks like Patrick WIllis but the CPU-gen rookies go way beyond that.

just take real-life players and use them as benchmarks in terms of rating "matching."

this has annoyed me forever. another example of botching realism. yes, there's a lot realistic about Madden but a lot that isn't too.

i railed about this on the IGN forums for years and no one cared. it seems the OS forum has a higher football IQ so i hope others here care too. but i'm not holding my digital breath.

[JVM]

I agree with you. And I see it going a lot further than generated rookies, such as with progression. I see too many of the CPU players with 99 acceleration and boosted AWR while many of my A rated players see no AWR boost from their rookie year to year 7 and beyond!

I guess the CPU is using Star Player on some of its players.

[adembroski]

Acceleration is relative to speed.

Acceleration indicates the time it takes for you to get from dead stop to max speed. It doesn't make your max speed higher than someone who has a higher speed. That depends on the curve.

I'm not running the game, I'm going to use examples from my head to illustrate my point.

A guy who has 99 acceleration and 40 speed vs. a guy with 40 acceleration and 99 speed, running a 40 yard dash.

The first guy will reach his stop speed at, say, the 10 yard mark.

The second guy hits his top speed at the 20 yard mark.

However, at the 10 yard mark, the second guy is already moving faster than the first guy... because he has greater ground to cover, his speed increases faster.

It is actually extremely UNREALISTIC to insist that everyone's acceleration is close to their speed. There are plenty of guys with ridiculous speed that never get anywhere because they lack explosiveness or burst. That's what acceleration measures.

If you were to create a sound way to measure a player's acceleration, I'm willing to bet a defensive end would be the best in the league. Acceleration is primarily tied to hip and thigh strength, offset by body mass. Speed is dictated by fast-twitch muscle fibers.

Good example: Frank Gore vs. Bryant Westbrook. Gore is 215, Westbrook 205... close enough for comparison.

Gore is the stronger back, Westbrook the faster. Gore's elite ability comes from his elite acceleration into the hole. His has great hip strength, this allows him to reach speed faster. However, Westbrook's agility (fast twitch muscle fiber) allows him to reach a greater maximum rate.

The idea that acceleration must be close to speed is wrong. Acceleration and speed are entirely different issues. Having high acceleration does NOT allow one to move faster than their speed permits, even over a short distance. It only dictates the rate at which players reach the rate their speed allows.

If you don't think a guy with relatively poor top speed can be among the most explosive players in the NFL, go back and watch some tapes of Bryant Young and Warren Sapp... guys that make the most agile runningbacks look sluggish into the hole.

The greatest acceleration in a back of all time came from Barry Sanders... I don't think anybody would argue he was the fastest. Greatest acceleration from a receiver would be Rice, his ability to get back to stop speed out of a break was unmatched. Again, not nearly the fastest.

Acceleration is a product of strength vs. weight.
Speed is a product of agility vs. weight.

[JVM]

The point here is a player with 39 speed having 99 acceleration, which is unrealistic. Look at all the players in original roster or any updated roster and find me one with such a wide difference--at any position.

[JVM]

By the way, size, in this game, does not correlate with speed and strength.

[adembroski]

Quote: Originally Posted by JVM

The point here is a player with 39 speed having 99 acceleration, which is unrealistic. Look at all the players in original roster or any updated roster and find me one with such a wide difference--at any position.

And my point is that it's NOT unrealistic. There are two reasons this doesn't occur in the default roster.

1. People just as uninformed on the physics of it raised hell last gen and they changed it.
2. NFL players tend to be among the best athletes of their type in the world... few players make it to the NFL that don't have acceleration to match their speed.

Because of reason #2, players with degree of difference between speed and acceleration should be few and far between. Because of reason #1 they are not accurately represented in the game at all.

Quote: Originally Posted by JVM

By the way, size, in this game, does not correlate with speed and strength.

The game doesn't have to represent the strength vs. weight ratio if the acceleration is already rated based on the player's observed explosiveness.

If speed and acceleration correlated to the degree that people seem to think they do, only one rating would be necessary.

[billsmetalbooze]

Quote: Originally Posted by JVM

The point here is a player with 39 speed having 99 acceleration, which is unrealistic. Look at all the players in original roster or any updated roster and find me one with such a wide difference--at any position.

exactly.

adam, point to one real NFL player in the game with 39 speed and 99 accel.

show me one real NFL player in the game with 99 speed and 80 accel.

show me a linebacker with elite speed (87+) but 67 Agility -- i've seen lots of computer gen rookies like this.

show me one real NFL NFL HB with 99 speed and 99 trucking.

i totally get that each rating is independent -- to a degree.

but the CPU creates rookies with unrealistic skill "sets."

i totally get that a DT can have 66 speed and 92 accel. or a WR can have great straight line speed, say 95, but only 87 Accel.

but the total sets have to be realistic.

again, i point to "real" NFL players. show me examples of real 2010 players on the roster that disprove our point. there is some leeway, but only to a realistic point.

thanks for reading.