Scouting Reports need to be even more enigmatic

[BestServedCold]

First off let me say that I am a former Maddenite turned Madden *****. I have been trying to replace Madden with other games for the past few years now (Backbreaker, NFL 2k, Football Mogul, finally settled on Pro Football Simulation), but I am very excited now for Madden 12. I applaud Looman, Frazier, and Ambroski for their work.

Now, with that said, I am still not a huge fan of the scouting report system. It seems like you get near perfect scouting reports if you scout a guy through all of the stages. So, you are telling me that guys like Ryan Leaf, Jamarcus Russel, and the plethora of Bengals busts weren't scouted completely before their selection? I'm pretty sure most teams spend a lot of time thinking about who they are going to select, but Madden seems to say that scouts can tell you exactly how a player will perform. PHaw! The reason why the draft is so interesting is because of the fallibility of scouts and NFL GMs. Does anyone really know how well Cam Newton will be? I think not.

What needs to change? Scouts need that fallibility. Scouting is an imperfect art as it is, so I think that players rating should be partially affected by what they did in college. Lets say you have a guy who is rated 76 coming out of college. But, he beasted it up his senior year, was a heisman candidate, and won a major bowl game. This should create a lot of hype for the guy, which should influence how your scouts and other teams see him. Now, he might be scouted as a 84 overall quarterback.

On the other hand, lets say another guy rated 82 coming out of the draft had a freaking awful senior year. Now he has an negative hype, making scouts see him as a lesser player. His rating might now be projected as 75 overall.

Players from small schools should always be more difficult to scout (Alex Smith). In general, what I'm getting at is that what happens in NCAA should affect the NFL draft. I feel like your scouts should rate players intangables (sic) higher or lower based on what they did in college.

All players should be an unknown quantity to you. You should know their basic rating, but how well they play should affect how good your scouts say they are. So, you would pretty much know that Peyton Manning, who has played 14 season, is rated 99, but a guy who has only played a few years should not be as clearly defined. The more years a player plays, the closer your scouts should get to actually knowing how they are rated. However, their biases on a player should stick after a player starts to decline. Your scout shouldn't know if a player is decline or how badly a player is declining. They might think that Chad Pennington has nothing left in the tank and rate him as a 73 due to a combination of injuries and lack luster play or as high as 81 citing previous success.

Player rating should be amorphous and hard to truly determine. That is why you see so many busts selected and why you see idiotic trades like Rick Mirer to the Bears for a 1st round. I fully trust Josh Looman to bring a system like this to Madden of his own accord, but I just wanted to voice my barely understandable suggestion (more a rant) to see if anyone agreed.

I can't wait to see where Looman and Ambroski take this game
Good luck

[mjhyankees]

regarding scouting...I'm sure if some players here got a bust in the first round of the draft after extensive scouting, they'd complain a ton. As is M11 seems to at least have good players in later rounds and busts earlier on mixed in . I simply don't scout...I just look at the draft day report...I mean really....I dont' care what the scouting report says....on draft day if my guy has the nice full pentagon I get him. If its a lopsided look, I pass. So I dont' bother with the scouting report. I assume that on draft day the report I see is mine. You're right they should have some occasional random thing where a guy rated highly is a bust etc, but again I think there'd be tons of complaints.

[CRMosier_LM]

the one thing the players you mentioned didnt have was intangibles and common sense... that is kind of hard to gauge.

[CM Hooe]

Right with you on this. I hope that future Maddens expand on the inexact science that is player evaluation.

That said, I feel like the way minicamps and the preseason are handled this year is a significant step in the right direction to this end.

[Mauler97]

Well if the ratings are more fluid with DPP, it could be just perfect. What if Ryan Leaf ended up in a great situation, wit ha coach he respected, great players around him, ect. Is there no way Leaf could have ever been a great QB?

Anyway so you grab a guy and his rating is 80, well if week to week he just bad heis ratings should just drop based on production and how good your coaches are to coach them. And it works the other way around too. Great coaches increase how quickly guys progress, and limit how bad they could get, all based mainly off of performance week to week. DPP sounds even better that they happen actually in-game.
That way "potential" is just that, the players have to have good coaching and perform to reach it. Off all of the amazing additions to Madden 12, DPP is "potentially" the greatest.
Also NFL HC'09 was smart how each team ranked players differently based on their scouts and systems. So if my team ranked a guy a 90, another team could have him as a 70. I'm hoping some of that is in here.

[BestServedCold]

Quote: Originally Posted by ScriptOhio

the one thing the players you mentioned didnt have was intangibles and common sense... that is kind of hard to gauge.

To the poster above you Script, I hate that video games are being dumbed down to appease the unthinking majority

It is a trend I have noticed (Dragon Age II) and it is quite depressing.


Now for Script's comment: The developers could add personality traits (pertinent to football) just like they added the confidence rating. Here are a few that I can think of:

Work-ethic (1-5 stars like Confidence)- What separates many players in the NFL is the commitment to keeping their skills and their body ready for the game. Guys like Michael Irvin and James Harrison made themselves superstars because of their work-ethic. Harrison for instance went undrafted and played on the practice squad for many years and got cut 4 times before finally earning a roster spot on the Steelers. He achieved his success through extreme dedication to the game. Guys like Albert Haynesworth or Jamarcus Russel have no work ethic whatsoever. This trait could affect how swiftly players decline. If a player has poor work ethic, he will decline swifter, because he cannot adapt to the game without his previous physical acumen. Guys that have a strong work ethic should not decline as quickly due to their ability to keep themselves at the top of their game at all time and due to their ability to adapt to their lesser physical skills.

Lonewolf- This player is not a good leader. Players like this are Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, Jeff Garcia, and TO. They all had trouble winning the confidence of their locker room and this lessened their ability to play their position and remain with their team. This should negatively affect morale on their side of the ball. Lonewolves cannot earn the team mentor trait.

Distracted- This player is more interested in other things then the game of football. Leinart and Marinovich (former raiders bust) are good examples of this trait. Leinart cared more about partying while Marinovich only wanted to do drugs. This trait decreases work ethic and increases the likely hood of gaining the underacheiver trait (already in game).

Playbook Knowledge (this should be a %)- Rookies start with 0% of course and gain knowledge primarily through training camp and preseason. This should be based on an intelligence rating, but I kind of feel like that would be frivolous, so I'd base it on awareness. Playbook knowledge affects how well a player executes a play. A player with a low playbook knowledge should suffer an awareness drop. Players who have a low work ethic suffer a hit to their ability to learn playbooks.

Diva- This player always wants to be the center of attention. This decreases morale for this player faster than other players and can decrease work-ethic if combined with Distracted.

Alright, I think you get the point. I can understand why EA would be hesitant to implement these though. I can't imagine how upset a guy like TO, Ochocinco, or Haynesworth would be receiving one of these negative traits.

[RedZoneD25]

Quote: Originally Posted by BestServedCold

Lonewolf- This player is not a good leader. Players like this are Brady Quinn, Matt Leinart, Jeff Garcia, and TO. They all had trouble winning the confidence of their locker room and this lessened their ability to play their position and remain with their team. This should negatively affect morale on their side of the ball. Lonewolves cannot earn the team mentor trait.

I agree with this except for the bolded. Majority of Garcia's career, sure...but he was most DEFINITELY a leader in Philadelphia. 5-1 as the starter, led the team to the divisional round...I'd love for someone generally regarded as a journeyman to come to a team and really rally them in Madden.

[FlyEaglesFly3]

I think that it is too hard to put all of the factors that go into a draft into a video game. At least right now, think about the process we see on T.V. Visiting them, watching, bringing them in for workouts, combine, interviews. Then factor in previous injuries, off the field issues, maturity, work ethic, all things that are going to be VERY, VERY hard to replicate.