Someone explain this potential thing to me

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by Boling4Humor

What about the players who don't really ever touch the football though. I had Orton over Tebow in an old franchise and when the next season came Tebow increased 7 points overall. He never even touched the football that season. I can understand if he was behind a future hall of fame QB. Sort of like the Brett Favre & Aaron Rodgers scenario, but this is Orton we're talking about. It's not the coaching staff either so lets not go there.

Many players get better in the NFL with little to no playing time. Even practice squad players get better. If they didn't, why would NFL teams have a practice squad. It's a function of practice, work ethic, potential, coaches ability to teach, head coach down to positions coaches, etc. It's highly realistic for players to progress with little to no actual game time. Madden should really be incorporating more of this into the game. GM's, Coaches, Assistant Coaches, Positions Coaches, and Scouts, should have much more of a function and impact on player development and team success. It would make for a much more in depth franchise.

[Richieh]

Quote: Originally Posted by Boling4Humor

But this is where its broke. You shouldn't give a huge boost in ratings like that. There's so many flops who probably had an A pot in previous Madden games (and at some point in the future, this game) who increase when there technically was no reason for them to have such a big bump. I don't think progression is completely broke, but in this aspect it is. But this is all subjective so I guess to each his own.

Why wouldn't a player get a bump like that after an off-season though? How else did the likes of Miles Austin and Tony Romo go up?

I think people often confuse real life progression and Madden progression. Real life progression is actually a ratings correction:
A player doesn't do much so EA give a low rating.
He then produces, EA realise his rating was wrong, so they correct that rating to reflect their updated perception of his abilities.

In the video game, a player always play to his ratings, rather than an external perception of them, so a re-evaluation isn't necessary. A player producing big numbers doesn't need a re-evaluation because he's already playing to his ratings.

Old Madden progression was basically replicating that re-evaluation process. Put up stats and get re-rated. That couldn't replicate the likes of Romo and Austin, or even Culpepper (who didn't play in his first year) or Peyton Manning (who's poor year 1 stats could have seen him re-evaluated to a lower rating)
The new potential system can finally do that.

[ABR173rd]

Quote: Originally Posted by raggBAGG

Some? He instantly became the second best CB on my team.

Right and sometimes it happens that way. Look at Miles Austin he didn't get any real playing time until his 3rd or 4th season and when he did he was a beast. Some players can sit on the bench for a year or two and still progress and some players can start right away and then end up never doing anything.

It's hit or miss and like someone else stated the game cant mimic real life in terms of each play specifically. We can now edit players and from most of the Dev interviews recently it has been made clear that they are going to try to make the game as user customizable as possible in the future.

I don't think there is a valid complaint with potential aside from users should be able to edit that to. For the most part I actually think the Madden team was generous with potential ratings this year, look at most of the rookie QB's I think even Terrel Pryor has ''A'' potential ......

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by Richieh

Instantly? It took the whole off-season.

Agree. There should also be more of an off-season, where we can assign specific things for each player to try and work on during the off-season. We should also have a training camp where we can set a training schedule for players, individual workouts for specific things to work on and team workouts for overall improvements. And a choice of what to work on for team workouts, playbook - awareness, athletic - speed, agility, acceleration, working out - endurance, etc. The things we work on in the off-season, training camp, and pre-season along with Coaches ability to teach, Team mentors, player work ethic, playing time, etc would determine how much players and the team progresses and what they progress in.

I think previous maddens (many years ago) had something like this. I know Sierra Front Page Sports NFL had something like this, where you gave percentages of time to certain training aspects, including team activities to increase chemistry.

I don't know why it seems like we go so far backwards in Madden to then see improvement in areas that used to be better in previous maddens.

[Rhone]

Quote: Originally Posted by Boling4Humor

But this is where its broke. You shouldn't give a huge boost in ratings like that. There's so many flops who probably had an A pot in previous Madden games (and at some point in the future, this game) who increase when there technically was no reason for them to have such a big bump.

I'm not quite sure if I understand precisely what the complaint is, here. Is it that you don't think a player should be able to improve that much? I don't know how the game calculates progression, but IMO youth + difference between starting and potential OVRs should = progression (of course, there can be other variables in there like mentors, coaches, etc, but the main thing is that more room for growth means more growth, with most of the growth taking place in a player's first 2 or 3 seasons). If Tebow has a high potential and a low starting OVR then he should see good progression in his first few 2-3 years.

If you're complaining that you specifically think Tim Tebow shouldn't have progressed that much, then you're essentially complaining more about how they rated Tim Tebow, which is a whole other topic. IMO there is no one in the world who can accurately rate the potential of every player in the NFL, and that's something we just have to accept if we want to enjoy Madden.

[Rhone]

Quote: Originally Posted by raggBAGG

I had Dowling sitting because I (for really no reason) let rookies sit when I have seasoned vets ahead of them.

That's fine--that's what real NFL teams do and what Madden used to punish players for trying to replicate..

Quote:

The following season comes around and McCourty progresses to a 90, Dowling jumps like 9 points to a 80 and every one else stayed the same. So now I feel forced to bump Dowling up on the depth chart, even though the guys ahead of him played fantastic. Currently a 2nd year player in my franchise who never saw the field is the same rating as another guy on my team who just won the Dback of the year award.

So you have a seasoned vet who overachieved last year, and a young guy who has learned a lot from practice, training camp, and off-season programs and came into this year looking like he could challenge the vet for playing time? That stuff happens every year in the NFL and I'm not sure why it's so upsetting that it can happen in Madden now too. Previous Maddens encouraged players to dump all their vets because playing rookies was the only way to make them progress. With your playing style, I would think the new system would be better for you.

Quote:

Oh and "sitting and watching" progression? Mallet (A pot) sat behind Brady and didnt get a single bump. I'm guessing someone here is now going to tell me Malletts work ethic stopped his progression now, right?

Honestly, I don't know how progression is calculated and I'm not going to suggest it's flawless. There are precisely 2 things I am defending:

1) The existence of potential.
2) A decrease in the emphasis on in-game statistics for determining progression.

[Boling4Humor]

And this is where we reach our crossroads. It's a difference of opinion and whether realism was implemented in the "off season" through drills and excellent work ethic, or whether the progression system is simply broken. I choose the second and you choose the first. I've read all your comments that you've disected from my point of view as well as raggBaAGG's. I can only speak for myself though when I say my opinion is unchanged on this subject and I appreciate your thought process on the potential.

[Bucky60 likes this]

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by Boling4Humor

And this is where we reach our crossroads. It's a difference of opinion and whether realism was implemented in the "off season" through drills and excellent work ethic, or whether the progression system is simply broken. I choose the second and you choose the first. I've read all your comments that you've disected from my point of view as well as raggBaAGG's. I can only speak for myself though when I say my opinion is unchanged on this subject and I appreciate your thought process on the potential. [Bucky60 likes this]

And that's fine. You like what you like. I would be open to having progression and potential being an option. Let's say an option to have stick skills progressions or realistic progression. You can have your stick skills improvements and we could still have our realism.

But if EA only gives a choice of one or the other, I have to go with realism.

And I do like what those guys are saying because what the say makes sense if you want REALISM in the game and want it less arcady.