Re: FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game
FBG stands for FootBall Gaming. There is nothing out there that utilizes FBG ratings for other sports aside from football. I too, however, enjoy basketball so if I was able to get the correct data, I would love to rate basketball players as well. However, for now I need to hash things out on the NFL side of things before making the huge leap to rating college players.
I am still considering altering some of the formulas to make them better correspond to Madden ratings for franchise. The real problem is that Madden rates their rookies so darn high that it throws the population data off. However, the adjustment would be to go back to more "classic" (2001-2005) FBG Ratings. This scale would "fit" Madden's scale "better" but would be more of a warped impression of what the scouting data shows.
For instance, in 2005, FBG Ratings had 99 players rated 90+. Madden 25 has 142 players rated 90+. Scouts Inc in 2012 had only 19 players rated 90+ (http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story...layer-rankings). This year, FBG ratings has only 7 players rated over 90.
Now, lots of people disagree with my ratings because there are so few players rated 90+ (elite) but look at what Scouts Inc says for ESPN. They only had 19 players rated that high last year. Even the old FBG ratings had less than 100 players rated that high. Madden 10, that was to have more variance in ratings, still had 138 players rated 90+. Scouts Inc also only had 196 players rated 80+. FBG 2013 has 50 players rated 80+. I think that even if you don't trust my sources and the subsequent ratings, you can look at Scouts Inc to get an idea on how few of the really elite players there are in the NFL according to another premier scouting source.
So the big question is, do gamers want realistic Madden ratings that best mimic the real NFL, or do they want ratings that best mimic EA?
FBG stands for FootBall Gaming. There is nothing out there that utilizes FBG ratings for other sports aside from football. I too, however, enjoy basketball so if I was able to get the correct data, I would love to rate basketball players as well. However, for now I need to hash things out on the NFL side of things before making the huge leap to rating college players.
I am still considering altering some of the formulas to make them better correspond to Madden ratings for franchise. The real problem is that Madden rates their rookies so darn high that it throws the population data off. However, the adjustment would be to go back to more "classic" (2001-2005) FBG Ratings. This scale would "fit" Madden's scale "better" but would be more of a warped impression of what the scouting data shows.
For instance, in 2005, FBG Ratings had 99 players rated 90+. Madden 25 has 142 players rated 90+. Scouts Inc in 2012 had only 19 players rated 90+ (http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/story...layer-rankings). This year, FBG ratings has only 7 players rated over 90.
Now, lots of people disagree with my ratings because there are so few players rated 90+ (elite) but look at what Scouts Inc says for ESPN. They only had 19 players rated that high last year. Even the old FBG ratings had less than 100 players rated that high. Madden 10, that was to have more variance in ratings, still had 138 players rated 90+. Scouts Inc also only had 196 players rated 80+. FBG 2013 has 50 players rated 80+. I think that even if you don't trust my sources and the subsequent ratings, you can look at Scouts Inc to get an idea on how few of the really elite players there are in the NFL according to another premier scouting source.
So the big question is, do gamers want realistic Madden ratings that best mimic the real NFL, or do they want ratings that best mimic EA?
Comment