Madden 10 Team Ratings from PastaPadre

[Piderman]

Raiders at 71,something feels like its missing

[Fox]

Quote: Originally Posted by Piderman

Raiders at 71,something feels like its missing

It's the Raiders. Everything's missing.

J/k, man...I like the Raiders too. Not my favorite team, but they're okay.

[Smoke316]

i think a 71 for the raiders is fair considereing they arent that good

[bigsadd]

The Raiders couldn't be better that the Bengals plus the Bengals had a top 15 defense list is watered down.

[tonnyrat]

Everyone also underestimates the Phins :/

Bills and Jets @ 78 is laughable if Miami is 77.

Bills lost a premier LT and added an aging TO.

Jets lost their best QB and drafted a rookie with relatively limited starting experience. New coach as well.

Miami lost who? Practically no one. Smiley is back from injury. Jake Grove is the type of smashmouth center the BP regime likes. We added Jason Taylor back and intend to use him as an OLB like his DPOY season, not at LDE like the Skins did. Ricky and Ronnie are back, Ronnie is 2 yrs removed from his ACL injury. Chad had a great season last year despite his noodle-arm and really fits the scheme they have him in.

How do the AFC Champs of last year get a lower rating than the Bills and Jets, who have had major turnover at key positions.

[Outkizast]

The Raiders at 71 seems perfect to me.... They are not a great team.. but they have enough talent to be above a 70... it fits IMO...

[SoxFan01605]

Quote: Originally Posted by CatMan72

Someone please explain to me how the Cowgirls are rated higher than the Panthers??? Panthers 2008 = 2nd seed in the NFC Cowboys 2008 = 3rd place in the NFC EAST

lol...we've had about 5 threads discussing these team ratings, and still people don't seem to get it. The ratings aren't Team Performance ratings. They're representative of the personnel on the team. The Cowboys underperformed based on perceived talent. Much like the Chargers...though at least they had injuries as an excuse...lol...the Cowboys just had rediculous drama and crappy play.

People have been griping left and right about the Cowboys and the Chargers being too high. They were both widely considered two of the most talented teams in the league last year...not much has changed, in terms of talent level. So, it would make sense they're still relatively higher rated (I could point out the seeding you bring up is moot as the Cowboys finished 3rd in their division and are ranked third in terms of rating...lol...but again, that has nothing to do with the ratings in the first place).

Simply put, high rated players make for a high rated team. If people want to argue about players being overrated (and thus their teams being overrated), that's fine. I think it's silly, but everyone's different. Argue away. I'm simply saying the arguments based off of seeding and record are getting a bit silly at this point though...lol.

[polamalu82]

Isn't the team ratings based off of everyone on the teams OVR ratings averaged? That's the only way I could see some teams being lower than others.