The solution to the ratings is more ratings?

[devinewon]

I see the outcry from many people about the ratings system in this game. When I watch football everyone is a specialist in some way shape or form. I think the best thing would be to take away the overall rating and add two ratings instead.

On defense everyone can be classified in two categories and that is run defense and pass defense. If on defense had two overall ratings I think you would see more clearly where your guy specializes or excels. Its easy to see that no CB should really be a great run defender but if he is don't expect him to be a great pass defender too. Same thing goes for almost all defensive players. Really there are only a handfull of players that have equally great talents.

Offensive Lineman and TE's can be Qualified in this way also. Wr's may have to be designated for their Slot or Wide talents and RB's as a 3rd down every down or change of pace back. The only RB in the league that I know that is as good of a third down back as a every down back is Maurice Jones-Drew.

Its funny because the only position where they actually have already pre-setup this skill set is at QB. They have a lot of ratings that clearly specify the skill set of each player.

[DocZulu]

Good post.

I agree to an extent. Currently our defensive playbooks fail to identify whether a play is intended to stop the run or combat the pass; i.e. is it a run stopping blitz or a pass rushing blitz.

There are more nuances they could add as well, especially given all of the different forms of Cover 3, but the start to such a process would be defensive specialization.

If they can't add true gang tackling to the game then this would certainly help linebackers and defensive linemen.

Run stopping in this game needs to be fine tuned, anyway. And although a high block-shedding rating is supposed to indicate this, I don't believe it takes into account height/weight.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by devinewon

I see the outcry from many people about the ratings system in this game. When I watch football everyone is a specialist in some way shape or form. I think the best thing would be to take away the overall rating and add two ratings instead. On defense everyone can be classified in two categories and that is run defense and pass defense. If on defense had two overall ratings I think you would see more clearly where your guy specializes or excels. Its easy to see that no CB should really be a great run defender but if he is don't expect him to be a great pass defender too. Same thing goes for almost all defensive players. Really there are only a handfull of players that have equally great talents. Offensive Lineman and TE's can be Qualified in this way also. Wr's may have to be designated for their Slot or Wide talents and RB's as a 3rd down every down or change of pace back. The only RB in the league that I know that is as good of a third down back as a every down back is Maurice Jones-Drew. Its funny because the only position where they actually have already pre-setup this skill set is at QB. They have a lot of ratings that clearly specify the skill set of each player.

I tend to believe that the biggest problem with the ratings is that we simply have far too many of them. I am in favor of also getting rid of the OVR rating. I can remember back to Madden 98 where you had to set up your depth chart without an OVR rating category. It took me forever to find a CB to cover people so I traded for Ed McDaniel of all people. Although he was only like a 78 OVR, he covered AWESOMELY because he had the ratings that mattered to me the most and made him effective. Not having the OVR forces the player to scout your team effectively.

I am also NOT in favor of making those two ratings because you will always have guys that do both well and thus do not fit one category. An example would be Charles Woodson. He is aggressive against the run, a solid tackler, but also has great coverage skills. I wish instead that EA would do more research in making their ratings. It seems that when a player is doing well they simply add SPD, STR, ACC, etc to make them better in the game instead of paying attention to HOW they actually performed better on the field through things like route running, catching, reading defenses, tackling, etc...

[guaps]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I tend to believe that the biggest problem with the ratings is that we simply have far too many of them. I am in favor of also getting rid of the OVR rating. I can remember back to Madden 98 where you had to set up your depth chart without an OVR rating category. It took me forever to find a CB to cover people so I traded for Ed McDaniel of all people. Although he was only like a 78 OVR, he covered AWESOMELY because he had the ratings that mattered to me the most and made him effective. Not having the OVR forces the player to scout your team effectively. I am also NOT in favor of making those two ratings because you will always have guys that do both well and thus do not fit one category. An example would be Charles Woodson. He is aggressive against the run, a solid tackler, but also has great coverage skills. I wish instead that EA would do more research in making their ratings. It seems that when a player is doing well they simply add SPD, STR, ACC, etc to make them better in the game instead of paying attention to HOW they actually performed better on the field through things like route running, catching, reading defenses, tackling, etc...

Good post. I agree that Madden on this generation of consoles suffers from too many ineffective ratings, but I'm not opposed to the idea of an overall rating. I think that FIFA 11's ratings system does a pretty good job and keeps the overall ratings 'dynamic'. Also they have in-season player progression instead of weekly downloadable roster updates, which just gives the game a completely different feel.

Personally I'm a big fan of the no-ratings approach used in 2k8 where players are "generic" in ratings according to position, but are giving abilities to make the stand out from each other - no ratings, numbers, just pure abilities. As a gamer I felt that this system appealed to me both as a 'hardcore' football fan because if its 'realism', but also if I just wanted a casual game of football without going through 22 players individual ratings.

[Blaze688]

If it were up to me...

I'd have two main categories for ratings.

A set of static Physical Attributes, described by words and not numbers:
- Strength
- Speed
- Jumping
- Agility
- Balance

and Position-Specific Skills like Catching, Throw Power, Kick Power, Throw/Kick Accuracy, etc., which are measured on the usual numeric scale.

Physical Attributes usually don't change by the time a player's professional. I think measuring them with words instead of numbers would create a generalization -- a sort of blueprint -- for what type of player you're dealing with. Speed, for example, could be Plodding, Slow, Average, Fast, and Burner, then be further specified by a player's height and weight.

A 6'5", 250lb Burner wouldn't be as fast as a 5'11", 180lb Burner, but a 6'2", 240lb Powerhouse would be stronger than a 5'9", 205lb Powerhouse. Dwight Freeney and DeSean Jackson would both be classified as Burners, but I wouldn't place much money on Freeney in a race over 15 or 20 yards.

The physical attributes would dictate things like tackling, blocking, and pressing/beating the press (Strength), starting-and-stopping, acceleration, squirming away from tacklers (Agility), engaging/disengaging blockers and defenders, breaking tackles, coverage (Balance). Some skills, like route-running and pass-rushing moves, would be a mix of Speed, Agility, and Balance.

Strength and speed disparity in today's NFL is so minuscule that it's nearly invisible. The difference between a 4.2 and a 4.6 over 40 yards is only a couple feet, and rarely -- within the boundaries of a football field -- is a players athletic potential completely maximized on any given play. I think that, by generalizing the physical attributes, we allow ourselves to further segregate the superstars by inflating their numeric, football-related skills.

Jerry Rice and Deion Sanders's Catch ratings, for example, would be through the roof. Not only would Walter Payton be a Strong, Quick, Balanced runner, but his Ball Carrier Vision would be ridiculous. Warren Sapp's Speed and Agility would be top-notch for a 300lber, but his ability to read plays and penetrate would set him apart.

Just a thought, anyway.

[mestevo]

I'd be in favor of more stat as long as they're relevant. Simply masking titles over stats I don't like, which is what would happen with some of the descriptions here. Someone who is a 80-92 strength might be a powerful runner, hit 93 and then he's a great runner, or something.

Don't really care about overall, as long as it's less cryptic. Build it so that the game teaches you to look past it, but explaining what goes into it for each position, and have that accessible via help screens at any point that you're viewing a roster. That's the only way you'll see OVR gone, and even then it'd simply be a toggle. Keep in mind as ideal as this idea sounds, it's not for the typical Madden gamer, so you've got to convert them too, to make it worth it.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by Blaze688

A 6'5", 250lb Burner wouldn't be as fast as a 5'11", 180lb Burner, but a 6'2", 240lb Powerhouse would be stronger than a 5'9", 205lb Powerhouse. Dwight Freeney and DeSean Jackson would both be classified as Burners, but I wouldn't place much money on Freeney in a race over 15 or 20 yards.

I take significant issue with using weight as a property of speed/agility/acceleration. By speed we are referring to velocity which is mathematically described as distance/time. Mass (or weight at earth's gravity) does not figure into that equation and we do have data that we can use to help determine the velocity of how fast players move in an environment. I would be in favor of using this data, as long as we do NOT use weight within the equation of determining speed. It is a HUGE fallacy to believe that a 300lb DT that runs a 4.80 is faster or slower than a 220lb TE who runs a 4.80 simply because the DT is larger. In reality, the time and distance is equal for both, making their velocity over the course of the 40yard run equal as well. SO please do not try to come up with something that will defy logic as EA has done for years now. I hate the fact that WRs and CBs have to be faster than QBs who run the same 40 times simply because they are WRs or CBs...simply illogical.

[Sven Draconian]

That already exists for most positions....just look at the ratings.

High RBK ratings and Low PBK already exists for lineman.

Some RBs have better receiving, blocking, trucking and agility ratings than others...specialize how you like.

DL are either big and slow, or small and quick.

Receivers tend to be "Big" traditional types, or smaller quicker types. Again, put them where appropriate.

The only area where clarification is needed is the defensive back 7 (LB + DB). They already have the zone/man defense ratings, but I don't really know what PRC and AWR control. I"d like it to sort out that AWR control the run/pass read (including PA). Play-Recognition applies to the run "awareness" and the coverage ratings remain as they are. Maybe it does work like that, I've never really tested it.

Viola, all the specialization you want.