Team goals are Tough!

[sls25]

I was also under the impression that being the coach you could assign the xp to whoever you wanted not who necessarily earned your team the xp. So if your top wideout had a huge week with 2 TDs you could use some of that xp on non starters or is that not how it works?

[mestevo]

Quote: Originally Posted by sls25

I was also under the impression that being the coach you could assign the xp to whoever you wanted not who necessarily earned your team the xp. So if your top wideout had a huge week with 2 TDs you could use some of that xp on non starters or is that not how it works?

Every player earns their own experience based on their performance that can only be spent on that player.

Coach experience is used to increase the experience of specific positions, and other things like improve the likelihood players will re-sign with you, etc.

[brandon27]

Quote: Originally Posted by sls25

I was also under the impression that being the coach you could assign the xp to whoever you wanted not who necessarily earned your team the xp. So if your top wideout had a huge week with 2 TDs you could use some of that xp on non starters or is that not how it works?

That was my impression of it too when It was initially introduced, however as mestevo states below, that is not the case.

Playes earn XP on their individual stats, coaches earn XP that can do other things more coach related.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by nosaints26

Which is the whole point of a "performance-based" progression system that everybody has been hoping for in Madden... I don't get it. How would any player truly get any better without playing time on the field? Breakout season performances require time on the field, n'est ce-que pas?

Not everyone has been asking for it. Not hardly.

You don't get better because you did well, you did well because you got better. That's why potential was a much better system. Far from perfect, but better.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by nosaints26

Have you ever played team sports? You can practice practice practice all you want, but you don't truly ride the learning curve until you start subbing into games. An engineer can draft plans in his cubicle but will never be able to build what he writes down until he goes out into the field and observes or partakes in the process. The most experience comes from actually playing, which is any football player's objective. I just don't get your point. Madden did it in the best way possible in order to not make it so arcadey and easy to bump up every player's attributes on your team.

Wow, really? Do you know how much work Aaron Rogers or Steve Young or other get in practice? They work a lot. They don't have to be on the field on Sunday to get experience. My QB shouldn't need X passing yards on Sunday to improve. He gets to work with the first team offense X hours a week and with the second team offense Y hours a week... spends time in the film room, weight room, etc. Sunday is where you put it all together. I don't get better at football because I ran a great route and caught a TD. I ran that great route and caught that TD because I studies film and worked on my route running and have a great QB throwing me the ball.

[juggalotusx]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

Not everyone has been asking for it. Not hardly. You don't get better because you did well, you did well because you got better. That's why potential was a much better system. Far from perfect, but better.

I honestly did not like the old system, I thought having a C rated OLB that got 130 3 years in a row and was still in the high 70s was non-sense. Now if they would have had the option to move his potential up to a B or A with a points system then Im all for it. But to say and gues what a players potential is, is well say nicholas cage will never make a good movie again. Ya just never know...

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by juggalotusx

I honestly did not like the old system, I thought having a C rated OLB that got 130 3 years in a row and was still in the high 70s was non-sense. Now if they would have had the option to move his potential up to a B or A with a points system then Im all for it. But to say and gues what a players potential is, is well say nicholas cage will never make a good movie again. Ya just never know...

First, ignore the OVR rating. Just ignore it. It is the computers point of view of how good your player is or isn't. Form your own opinion. What are that OLBs positional ratings? What is his tackle rating? Hit Power? Pursuit? Man/Zone coverage ratings? Power/Finesse move ratings?

Also, ignore his potential. You SHOULDN'T see it anyway. It's bad that EA showed us that in the first place. How does he play on Sundays? does he get the job done? Yes? Then keep him on you team. If not, look to replace him.

The OVR value is really there to help the AI sort a depth chart and estimate a players value in a trade or for contracts. honestly, even that should be true. Production shouldn't determine progression ,but it should have a direct impact on trade value and contracts.

If that OLB gets 130 tackles for you in a contract year, he should ask for big bucks. You should look at him and say "I can get someone a lot cheaper to come in and replace him" and let him go sign a big deal somewhere else. Let another team over value him... or if you think he plays better than hi ratings and want to keep him... then pay the man.

Also, potential allows a player to be a 67 OVR rookie with A potential sit on the bench, gain 5 points of OVR in the first off season and turn into a 72 OVR, and then 3 or 4 the next year to be a 75 or so OVR the next year. In year 3 maybe he goes up 2 points to a 77 OVR. Maybe now he starts for his team instead of that veteran with C potential that declined into a 76 OVR. With XP I just don't see that 67 OVR rookie getting any love by the AI.

[brandon27]

Jake Locker is another perfect example of what I'm talking about in this thread. He's had basically no time on the field last season except for near the end when he was forced in due to injuries I believe. He started the season this year as the #2 QB behind Hasselbeck. Locker has recently been named the starting QB for the Titans. Not because he performed well and got better last year, but because his abilities were enhanced by coaching, and training etc through practices and his own abilities and traits as a player/person. He didnt go out and throw 35 td passes, or over 3500 yards in order to improve. He simply got better as his career progressed and he learned the game at the pro level.

Like I said earlier, I understand why XP is tied to stats for the game, I really do. It's the only measurable there that the user can see. However, it's not all about game performances. There's players that won't get in the game, but should still progress. Jake Locker is a perfect example of that. Or any QB you may draft in CCM to replace your aging starter. That new draftee won't progress until you put him on the field, that is flawed logic right there 110%.

Which is the reason why, as I stated, the coaches XP points should be able to apply to anyone on the team, and/or every player should get a set amount of XP weekly based upon their fit in the system the coach runs, the coaches prestige rating, etc, etc. Similar to NCAA's recruiting those factors should be able to change as the season/career rolls on. As the coaches performance gets better, his players accumulate more XP. Again, I'm not saying give them 5000 XP a week, but at least something that can build up and be applied. Obviously you dont want them to progress crazy fast since they do lack that in game experience, but they should still be able to progress based upon coaching alone. I mean, hell, you're playing CCM as the coach... why shouldn't you be able to affect the players!