ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

[macbranson]

There is definitely something wrong with the CPU's ability to scout rookies. In my franchise, the Washington Redskins have FOUR rookies rated over 80 and only on e of them was drafted in the first round. And I have encountered rookies throughout the league with low ratings (like 71) who were drafted in the first round and given big contracts. This doesn't make sense. I think the CPU is just as confused with this rookie scouting thing as we are.

Some guys think it's okay to have a steal in the late rounds or a bust in the early rounds. While I agree with that, rookies are rated based on how good they look coming out of college, not performance in the NFL. If someone looks like a 70 coming out of college, he's not going to go in the first round. Likewise an 85 rated WR isn't going to go in the fourth round. Now the 70 rated player may have a great rookie season and should progress accordingly.

Look at all of the Madden games. The highest drafted rookies are always the highest rated. Why? Because they look like the best players coming out of college. This game takes that and just throws it all out the window and random players are drafted at random times. The ability to scout rookies on this game is so poor, even the CPU is confused by it. What a shame.

[Beeks]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

Where is the 'dislike' button?

You missed the boat completely on this one.

Apparently you're under the impression that scouting is a perfect science, when in fact, it NEVER is... See: Ryan Leaf.

I like the fact that not every first round player is a LOCK to be 80+ with A potential. That would be the most boring draft ever. That's the only reason I stopped importing draft classes, because they are so ridiculously predictable, and take any and all skill out of scouting.

You've made a terrible complaint here, and I hope I'm not the only one who disagrees with you.

[Old School SD Fan]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

Where is the 'dislike' button?

You missed the boat completely on this one.

Apparently you're under the impression that scouting is a perfect science, when in fact, it NEVER is... See: Ryan Leaf.

I like the fact that not every first round player is a LOCK to be 80+ with A potential. That would be the most boring draft ever. That's the only reason I stopped importing draft classes, because they are so ridiculously predictable, and take any and all skill out of scouting.

You've made a terrible complaint here, and I hope I'm not the only one who disagrees with you.

Co-sign. I agree completely, I like this year's lottery approach, it mimics IRL.

[untrugby]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

i think you guys are missing hes point hes talking about how madden rates IRL rookies vs how the turn out in the franchise drafts. IRL the rookies are saddled with the 50/60s rating and D potentials in the late rounds because most of the time they are and if one happens to be good madden just makes a roster update and their potential magically jumps to B or A. did they all of a sudden get bigger, faster or stronger? but in madden you can grab a late round pick whos already an 81 with an A potential before the ever step on the field. The difference being IRL picks have to prove it on the field to get better ratings and they are just given to them in madden. I like the gems you can find in the draft but it should just be expressed as potential instead of ratings and potential

[macbranson]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

What??!!! Yeah, Ryan Leaf was terrible. We saw that AFTER he played in the NFL. But coming out of college, he was viewed as the best quarterback besides Peyton Manning. He was probably rated pretty high on Madden. But guess what, Madden's ratings are based on the previous year's performance, not how good the player is going to be. Why would a team draft a 71 overall rated MLB before he's played a single down in the NFL? They don't expect him to perform as a 71 overall or else he wouldn't be drafted so high. The highest rated players are picked based on how they performed and how they're expected to perform. Anyone drafted high, should be EXPECTED to perform well, and therefore have a high overall rating. If they play and perform poorly, their overall rating should drop accordingly.

You guys are saying that drafting isn't an exact science and I know that's true. But you seem to be missing my point that the draft is based on expectations and previous performance and ratings on Madden are based on previous performance alone. Madden ratings don't predict how good a player is going to be. You have it backwards.

Look at any previous Madden games. The highest draft picks are always the highest rated rookies. That's how it should be with a CPU generated draft. I understand some players are rated high, then perform poorly. That will be reflected in their rating the NEXT season.

[Beeks]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I'm not missing your point at all. But in a game where performance is based directly on OVR rating in CPU games, (unfortunately), busts must be pre-determined in franchise. Progression in the current system will never produce a bust, so it has to be done like this. I think it's stupid, but it's the only way to have any semblance of realism with the system Madden has.

On the same token, since OVR represents physical and mental attributes, a 70 OVR guy could easily be taken in the first round because he played well in college... but in Madden, since production is not an attribute, you won't see that. Back to my Ryan Leaf example, if he came into Madden as an 85 OVR, he would have NEVER been a bust in the game. I don't agree with HOW Madden does it, but within the current system, it works for me and I certainly don't mind it.

[Pandetta]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

Look at any previous Madden games. The highest draft picks are always the highest rated rookies. That's how it should be with a CPU generated draft. I understand some players are rated high, then perform poorly. That will be reflected in their rating the NEXT season.

The problem is - as has already been pointed out - then they won't be busts because the rating has already been given, they won't suddenly be magically reduced next season when the prospects are supposed to 'bust'.

The current system is pretty good, if they changed it to what you are proposing you would never have any busts, which would not work at all.

The perceived high rating is mimicked very well by the projected draft rounds - why fix what isn't broken?

[untrugby]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

The current system is pretty good, if they changed it to what you are proposing you would never have any busts, which would not work at all.

you could still have bust in the system he proposed you would just have to have full time hidden potential and have players be able to have a potential below their OVR skill level. Like if you drafted a top pick bust he would have a 75 OVR rating but a D potential and he would lose ratings proportional to how much he played until he got to his ratings. IRL they say it takes about 3 years to judge a draft pick. So id say after they play roughly 30 games or so they show their real ratings.

The perceived high rating is mimicked very well by the projected draft rounds - why fix what isn't broken?

it works well for the CPU but its easy to cherry pick the high potential players for a USER. They made it a bit tougher this year but overall still pretty easy.

[macbranson]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I see what you guys are saying, but it seems kind of stupid to me that it's done that way. I think they should re-do the whole player ratings system. Instead of progressing, the CPU should do a whole re-evaluation of players and rate them according to their stats from the previous season. That's what happens every year when we get a new Madden game, why not make it so the CPU does it on it's own? This way you could have first round busts and guys who have break out seasons. There should be at least one or two players every season who go from like 70 to 90 because of a break-out season. Or maybe an 80 to 90.

I had Charles Johnson break the sack record with 23 sacks and in the offseason, he didn't change one single point. ANd he has A potential. I don't even understand that. He should have jumped to like a 94 or 95.

I understand that it's rare to see a player's performance warrant such a large increase or decrease in overall rating, but it definitely happens and the game just doesn't reflect it. Using the same reasoning you guys are using where busts are pre-rated by having low overall ratings, how can you explain players who have great seasons, but don't improve in overall rating?

[Pandetta]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

how can you explain players who have great seasons, but don't improve in overall rating?

Unfortunately that is why they have editing in the game, Charles Johnson would probably never do that in real life so his in game rating is ok, but in your franchise that is a different "world" so you would need to edit him to reflect that world.

[Legionnaire]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I have no problem with low round picks being rated high. It's very realistic. Sometimes a team just gets lucky, picking a guy who is that good right away. Like the Saints picking Marques Colston as the 252nd pick of the draft, and having him come in and catch 70 balls for 1000 yards and 8 TDs as a rookie.

And I have no problem with high round picks being rated low. Like WRs who came in that same draft Colston did, guys like Chad Jackson and Sinorice Moss who were utterly useless.

It definitely makes the draft more fun and realistic to know that your 7th rounder could be a stud (if you play your cards right) and your 1st rounder could be overpaid trash (if you don't do the due diligence). Makes scouting actually matter. So you can't just pick guys based on where they're projected to go, and expect that to mean you're picking the best available guy.

[macbranson]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I don't think that's why they put editing in the game. I think they put it there because people have been demanding it. They need to re-work the whole player progression system. i don't want to have to go around editing players attributes. That's EA's job to program the game to do it right.

[KalimbeNaire]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I think I liked the way NFL Head Coach 09 did the rating thing. First of all, players were rated differently based on your system. For instance if you ran a west coast offense, you'd probably prefer a speedy back that can catch. In the draft their might be a highly rated big back that is a bit slower, doesn't have great hands, and isn't going to work in a spread offense. He might be an 87OVR coming out of the draft, but that might also be the ceiling of his potential in your West Coast style. Meanwhile if you preferred a bruiser back, that same guy might be a 95 in your system.

They would give you an OVR rating and then a potential rating with numbers. You could quantify the player more easily.

I think what is going on with the draft in Madden is that they aren't really looking at the OVR number. They are drafting on potential, which is what the NFL really does. The CPU knows a "A" potential player is eventually going to be a 90+OVR player, so they don't care if he's a 70 coming out of the draft.

I think I prefer this way of scouting than the older gen Maddens with the mini camp drills and only being able to scout 8 players or so.

[Pandetta]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

I don't think that's why they put editing in the game. I think they put it there because people have been demanding it. They need to re-work the whole player progression system. i don't want to have to go around editing players attributes. That's EA's job to program the game to do it right.

I'm not saying that is the only reason they have editing in the game (why do people have to be so literal >.<) but it is a reason to have to it, and a reason to use it.

When a minority/individual doesn't like the rating on a player, or in this case the system used to get that rating, then yes it probably IS your job to change it, not EA's.

[ghostlight85]

Re: ROOKIE SCOUTING CONFUSION

Instead of progressing, the CPU should do a whole re-evaluation of players and rate them according to their stats from the previous season. That's what happens every year when we get a new Madden game, why not make it so the CPU does it on it's own? This way you could have first round busts and guys who have break out seasons. There should be at least one or two players every season who go from like 70 to 90 because of a break-out season. Or maybe an 80 to 90.

This just might do the EXACT opposite of what you want it for the progression in franchise. Sure, it would work on your team where because of flaws in gameplay and different play styles the ratings don't really determine the production... but on the cpu teams where the ratings govern how well the players play it would have a different effect.

Simulate a few seasons on Madden with a 65 rated HB in the starting lineup and tell me what happens. His stats will not be good. Ever. Because Madden's simulation engine generates more realistic results than it does when you insert user control into it, in many cases.

The only team with aberrant players who produce far above what they should be doing would be the user controlled team.

The other problem with this is that it wouldn't be able to rate backups correctly. How could Matt Schaub ever have been valued enough for the Falcons to get anything for him when he'd never put up the numbers to be reevaluated to a high rating?

How would it rate a player like Nnamdi or Revis? Good cornerback play can't be measured in tackles, and interceptions can be very misleading. Madden would have NO CHOICE but to make Antonio Cromartie a better player than Darrelle Revis.

This is backwards. YES, production and a small amount of projection determine the ratings each year when a new madden comes out. But the game should then translate those ratings into a realistic football game. Maybe some of the real life players prove themselves to be different, but I'd rather have a game that accurately plays out what they've told it to have happen than have one where ratings don't have anything to do with what happens on the field.

I don't get why people want this kind of thing.

I would love for a system almost like you described if it had nothing to do with changing a player's abilities, but instead just determined the player's VALUE in franchise. How pursued he is and how much money he will make. But if it changes his overall ratings like you are asking for, I think it would be a true game killer for me and for many others.