M11 Rookie Ratings(last roster update) vs. M10 Rookie Ratings

[seriousluboy83]

Aight so here we go...rating rookies can be a tough task...(thought bubble) hell rating any player can be a tough task...so I just want to throw these numbers out here and see what the community thinks of them...rookie draft classes differ from year to year and I believe this years class(M11) is deeper than last years class(M10)...

The total number of rookies in M11 is 281...with Ndamukong Suh being the highest rated at a 89 overall...there are 18 rookies rated in the 80+ ratings zone...78 in the 70+ ratings zone...149 in the 60+ ratings zone...35 in the 50+ ratings zone...and 1 in the 40+ ratings zone(Erik Lorig of TB moved from DE[66] to FB[41])...

In M10 there are 263 total rookies with B. Cush being the top rated at a 87 overall...20 rookies in the 80+ ratings zone...78 in the 70+ ratings zone...123 in the 60+ ratings zone...38 in the 50+ ratings zone...3 in the 40+ ratings zone...and 1 in the 30+ ratings zone(Nick Miller of OAK)

As a guy that firmly believes there should be a rookie rating cap...I'm going to leave the judgement of this years M11 rookie class in the hands of y'all...oh yea don't forget to vote Mike Williams of TB for R.O.Y.

[Beeks]

I'm not entirely sure what point you're trying to make here, other than to solicit votes for Mike Williams.

The two draft classes seem almost identical.

Am I completely missing your point, or do you have one?

[whoRweNATION]

So the point of this topic is...

[fhhs63]

So even if they play good, their ratings should be capped?

[seriousluboy83]

Quote: Originally Posted by fhhs63

So even if they play good, their ratings should be capped?

No there are those guys who are instant starters...Suh, Bradford, McCoy, but they still have a learning curve to go through...those that don't should be awarded with the highest rookie rating...and even still at some point in their rookie years they'll hit the rookie wall and if not there will be a sophmore slump usually

[s38s38s]

I believe what he's getting at is that the ratings start off too high...other than a few rookies (Suh, Bradford, Williams (TB), etc) how many are performing at a starting caliber level I belive was the original point.

In short ratings for rookies should have a ceiling so that those who perform their ratings will reflect it, and for those who don't it will do the same. If the ratings started lower there would be minimal adjustments week to week. Personally I think the roster updates should have atleast a three week interval so trends can be accounted for. Seeing a rating drop after one game, then jump up is pointless, when we could get a balanced rating and not have to download an update every week and reset the DC over and over again. Just my opinion.