Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

[snc237]

I wonder if they speed ratings been tuned or everything's just poorly worded. Same thing as yesterday's RBs (I'm paraphrasing) "the guy has break out speed" he has like 92 speed then they say "this guy won't be running past anyone" the guy has 90 speed". Plus I also noticed the fast guy we have seen so far has 93 speed, which makes me wonder if there's a big difference between an 86 speed and 90 per say.

[Yazan Gable]

Re: MADDEN NFL 17 Player Ratings: Top 5 Wide Receivers

Interesting that they consider the best WRs to be better than the best RBs. I agree with that.

That's a weird thing to note. I'm sure there'll be Kickers better than Adrian Peterson in OVR, doesn't really mean much.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: MADDEN NFL 17 Player Ratings: Top 5 Wide Receivers

Love the consistent arbitrariness of NINETY PLUS IS HALL OF FAME. As if we're supposed to predict an entire player's career ahead of time. Or that a player who is a Hall of Famer but is at the tail end of their career is garbage so suddenly they're not a hall of famer (Peyton Manning). Fewer players at the tip top is good, but there are still going to be plenty of very good players who deserve to be up there. Except nowadays it's a lot easier than before to get star wide receivers (nearly every team has at least one) so if there are loads of low-90s high 80s it would fit with how the league looks right now.

Understandable, is Tom Brady a Hall of Famer? Is JJ Watt HOF caliber? Is REVIS going to be a hall of famer? Being high 90s is about being consistent and playing at an elite level. That's how I would value someone. If you're a 77 and for 6 years you solidify yourself as one of the best, year in and year out, you'll be a HOF or whatever. There have been flash in the pan players, and they shouldn't be rated season by season, but career production and consistency. Nick Foles should've been a 90s few years ago based on 27 TDs 2 INTs, now look at em.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

Also it's not arbitrary. 90+ is the highest you can go in madden. Isn't the highest level of football to be a hall of famer? It makes perfect sense

[Yazan Gable]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

Also it's not arbitrary. 90+ is the highest you can go in madden. Isn't the highest level of football to be a hall of famer? It makes perfect sense

No, the highest you can get is 99. And it depends on your performance that season. 2015 Peyton Manning should have been in the mid-70s range based on his performance, but he's still a hall of fame quarterback. Got to stay at mid-80s since for whatever reason the person rating him didn't want to admit (?) that Peyton became worse than Josh McCown. Also so what if Nick Foles was a high 80s/low 90s player? That's how good he was that season and it reflects on his performance. Until they do transparent analysis of these ratings and expanded mechanics involving the scheme and playcalling you're not going to accurately reflect that Nick Foles looked great because the playcalling gave him clear and easy reads passing to great receivers who bailed out his bad passes and a great offensive line protecting him.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

No, the highest you can get is 99. And it depends on your performance that season. 2015 Peyton Manning should have been in the mid-70s range based on his performance, but he's still a hall of fame quarterback. Got to stay at mid-80s since for whatever reason the person rating him didn't want to admit (?) that Peyton became worse than Josh McCown. Also so what if Nick Foles was a high 80s/low 90s player? That's how good he was that season and it reflects on his performance. Until they do transparent analysis of these ratings and expanded mechanics involving the scheme and playcalling you're not going to accurately reflect that Nick Foles looked great because the playcalling gave him clear and easy reads passing to great receivers who bailed out his bad passes and a great offensive line protecting him.

The caliber of a player is based on consistency and long term. Anyways, they need to spread ratings, you're focusing on the most minuscule thing in my entire post lol. 90+ to me should be compared to all time greats. Like Barry Sanders, Tom Brady, and Deion Sanders. There's certain players that may be great bust still not on their caliber.

[jsteele14]

Re: MADDEN NFL 17 Player Ratings: Top 5 Wide Receivers

That's my point. I prefer a spread. I'd like to see a 0-100 scale. But looking at the top 5 WRs, there are another 6 or 7, maybe even 8 or 9 that have to be up there. I think ratings will again be inflated, because they try to fit all of the NFL players from about 55/60-99. Where it should be 1-99. Especially squeezing 2200 or so players into 39 rating numbers. That gives you 57 players per rating number.

From our Madden experiences we look at some 70s as starters based on their skills. Imagine having:

Tom Brady 94
Matt Ryan 76
Sam Bradford 66
Kevin Kolb 43
Jamarcus Russel 13

Or something like:

Darrell REVIS 90
Jason Varrett 75
Jalen Ramsay 62
Dimitri Patterson 48
Etc.

You'd have a legit amount of super stars, feeling elite. And bums would be bums, huge liabilities.

Imagine the draft impact of you draft a 21 overall player first round, and pickup a 67 overall in the 6th round!

Overalls:
0-10 can't even get a tryout
11-20 project, has physical tools, just not technical or intangibles.
21-30 practice squad project
31-40 bench player

41-50 fringe starter
51-60 average starter
61-70 solid starter, just really solid in what he does.

71-80 really good player, not HOF caliber, but Pro bowl potential

81-89 Excellent player, just right under HOF, consistent All Pro, just not ground breaking

90+ First ballot HOF

I am all for wider ratings but this is too wide. It would make the superstar too powerful because you would likely be able to throw to that receiver nearly every time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Jershy88]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

"Put some respek on my name" -Dez

[XtremeDunkz]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

"Put some respek on my name" -Dez

I thought this terrible phrase was long dead.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: MADDEN NFL 17 Player Ratings: Top 5 Wide Receivers

I am all for wider ratings but this is too wide. It would make the superstar too powerful because you would likely be able to throw to that receiver nearly every time.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I could understand, but these are just overalls. The individual ratings would all be weighted by position, so a an 85 route could be elite where a 76 coverages would be able to keep up with them, not every single time, but not like 99 vs 10.

[Yazan Gable]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

I thought 90+ was elite.

The caliber of a player is based on consistency and long term. Anyways, they need to spread ratings, you're focusing on the most minuscule thing in my entire post lol. 90+ to me should be compared to all time greats. Like Barry Sanders, Tom Brady, and Deion Sanders. There's certain players that may be great bust still not on their caliber.

You would keep Peyton Manning 90+ OVR in the 2015 NFL season considering how atrocious he played?

[mrprice33]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

Also it's not arbitrary. 90+ is the highest you can go in madden. Isn't the highest level of football to be a hall of famer? It makes perfect sense

No it doesn't. The ratings scale doesn't work like that. The Madden ratings scale is more like US school grades than anything else.

90+ superstar player (A)
80+ solid starter (B)
70+ Fringe starter, solid backup (C)
60+ Replacement level (D)
50+ Below replacement level (F)

JaMarcus Russell being a 13 or a 51 doesn't really make a difference. He still stinks. And, if the NFL has shown us anything, it's that a lot of guys in the middle are interchangeable.

The only thing that really matters is the distribution of ratings. It should look like a bell curve, with the bulk of players falling somewhere between solid starter and slightly above replacement level, with a small set of players on one set of the curve representing superstars, and a slightly larger set (but still small) representing the dregs of the league.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

That's just to differentiate the caliber of players. A 95 vs a 76 doesn't mean the 96 will win all day every day. That 76 is still a really good player. But if you catch yourself in a bad situation with a 43 overall pass blocker on Von Miller, you probably need a TE or RB to stay in to help. Now Von won't win every play, but he'll absolutely make an impact more often than not.

[Yazan Gable]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

That's just to differentiate the caliber of players. A 95 vs a 76 doesn't mean the 96 will win all day every day. That 76 is still a really good player. But if you catch yourself in a bad situation with a 43 overall pass blocker on Von Miller, you probably need a TE or RB to stay in to help. Now Von won't win every play, but he'll absolutely make an impact more often than not.

Why won't Von Miller win every time against someone who is less than half his equal? That's an absurdly large gap in skill level. That player is effectively a turnstile or a gust of wind that mildly inconveniences Von Miller.

[BreakingBad2013]

Re: Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

No it doesn't. The ratings scale doesn't work like that. The Madden ratings scale is more like US school grades than anything else.

90+ superstar player (A)
80+ solid starter (B)
70+ Fringe starter, solid backup (C)
60+ Replacement level (D)
50+ Below replacement level (F)

JaMarcus Russell being a 13 or a 51 doesn't really make a difference. He still stinks. And, if the NFL has shown us anything, it's that a lot of guys in the middle are interchangeable.

The only thing that really matters is the distribution of ratings. It should look like a bell curve, with the bulk of players falling somewhere between solid starter and slightly above replacement level, with a small set of players on one set of the curve representing superstars, and a slightly larger set (but still small) representing the dregs of the league.

Most of the league falls into bench player or worse. And an even higher number falls into not being able to make it in the NFL. There are 255 players drafted every season, plus the signings of undrafted FAs. Of those, how many are 2nd string or even 3rd string players? How many are out of the league in less than 4 years?