[Vaporub83]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dj_MyTime

I like the drop in overalls, but IMO the ovr rating is irrelevant. It's a place-holder fro the CPU depth chart. Example Wes Welker is the highest rated Patriots receiver, their playbook is designed to have the no. 2 WR (Wes Welker) in the slot by DEFAULT (no manual/formation subs); but, because of the way things work currently he would line up at no. 1 without user adjustments and in any game vs the CPU you get a less realistic experience from an X's and O's stand-point as far as where he'd normally line up. IMO the rookies 'positional stats' are too high and leave little room for improvement/progression. See Below... 1 Andrew Luck QB Colts ovr 85 spd 82 agi 84 inj 98 awr 62 tpw 92 tas 93 tam 92 tad 75 2 Robert Griffin III QB Redskins ovr 83 spd 93 agi 96 inj 85 awr 55 tpw 96 tas 82 tam 86 tad 88 Those are their ratings coming out. I'm not saying they won't have great careers but Luck is better/as good as guys like Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers accuracy wise right out the box. I'm not saying he isn't an accurate QB but 93 SAC, and 92 MAC as a rookie, he may as well not even progress. I'd think low to mid 80's, since he likely has 'A' potential he will progress quickly and reach the 90's in accuracy but having them that high from the beginning is a bit much IMO. Griffin's aren't as high but he's already on par with Matt Schaub's accuracy if memory serves, and he's a pro-bowler. I understand these are supposed to be once in a generation type players, BUT they still have to play first, I'd be much more in agreement with under-rating players coming out, then adjusting once they play in the NFL.

Realistically there isn't a way to fix that. Bottom line if you are a rookie or a veteran physical attributes should be on a standard scale. Accuracy is a physical thing that shouldn't change just because you are in the NFL