[Flipmo23]

I wouldn't change it at all, especially if you're talking about overall ratings. I've played 11 seasons with 4 friends in franchise, and the one thing we all have come to realize is that in this game, some players just play better than others regardless of overall. Whether it's certain attributes like consistency or composure, the overall rating never tells the whole story.

With that said, if you MUST change their ratings to reflect starter status, I guess you could go with composure/consistency/leadership. Consistency in particular makes the biggest difference in overall rating.

What I absolutely do NOT believe in is changing ratings that shouldn't be changed, i.e. making a player faster than he should be. Is it fair for me to speed up Larry Johnson just because he became the starter? I mean, his speed rating was based on his 40-time, so he shouldn't be any faster in the game than he is in real life. Stuff like that, I try to avoid because it throws off the balance of the game more than you think.

In the OSCD roster for example, we compensated for this by increasing all the composure/leadership/consistency ratings for the top players. Look across the board at all the leaders of every team, and you'll see they have really ratings in these areas.

But I personally do not believe that players with higher overall ratings are always better, since any long time player knows that it's just not true. So really, I focus more on editing players so that they play like their real life counterparts, not just so they are comparatively on point. That usually leads to an unbalanced roster full of biased ratings.