Madden 09 News Post

Madden NFL 09 Quarterbacks Analysis

12:34 PM - June 3, 2008 by RaychelSnr

Richard Chavez checks in today with a take on which quarterbacks in Madden NFL 09 were hosed with their ratings and which ones must've paid money to EA under the table to get the ratings they did. Check out his take here.

Quote:


	"For the most part, the guys at EA get their ratings largely correct. Every year, there are some suspect ratings that drive people nuts. For now, I�m going to take a look at the quarterbacks you�ll be playing with in August to determine if EA was right or wrong with their ratings. You�ll see which ratings are downright suspect and which quarterbacks made those extra calls to EA."

Madden NFL 09 screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: Madden NFL 09Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: NDS / PS2 / PS3 / PSP / Wii / Xbox 360Votes for game: 88 - View All

Madden NFL 09 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 Scott @ 06/03/08 12:40 PM

I agree with those....what I don't like is the rookies being rated so high though..

# 2 cdon2k @ 06/03/08 12:55 PM

I think what they were thinking with the ratings was this:

Madden 08 was the first year they really attempted to keep up with the season with roster updates. I saw my Colts average rookie corners become mainstays in the league. At the end of the year I believe they ended up in the high 80's which was a long way from the low ratings they started out with. I think EA's past stance on rookies was "Let them prove themselves, have them suck until they do". And this stance was no more evident than in Lebron James Debut in NBA Live. He sucked so bad I couldn't even use him, I think he was like a 74 or something lol. I think towards the end of the season they got him up to like a 78, but still no where near his real ability. Now consider that with what they are trying to do with the roster updates online and you can see them giving the benefit of the doubt to rookies leading to smaller sways in the ratings upgrade. Basically by starting them out higher, it will be more natural to bump them a few points and get them where they need to be. And hey, if they do suck, say if Matt Ryan flops, downward progression can be swift instead up upward progression.

Cdon

# 3 N51_rob @ 06/03/08 01:10 PM

Don't forget to mention the huge bump that Todd Collins got for playing well in only 4 regular season games and poorly in one playoff game. But as a skins fan I agree with you about Campbell's rating being really low. I thought that he was gonns be atlest an 86 or 87 in maddens world.

# 4 SmashMan @ 06/03/08 01:21 PM

QBs we'll be playing with in August? Please...some of us will be the Bears and will be using Rex Grossman.

...Oh, I get it now.

# 5 ronnyballgame @ 06/03/08 01:26 PM

I think Madden's ratings are always inflated, and this years rookie crops are a little high, but you know, is there a potential ratings floating in there possibly to make it a bit higher than what we would expect? I have no problem with the ratings at all, you know, since they are based on what, like 20+ caterogories!

# 6 callmetaternuts @ 06/03/08 01:26 PM

Those are some good examples of disparity.......its all conjecture my friend until they start playing the games

# 7 ronnyballgame @ 06/03/08 01:29 PM

Although Eli doesn't deserve to be in the 90's for what he did last year in 4 games...

# 8 michapop9 @ 06/03/08 01:48 PM

If you dont agree with the ratings you can still edit them to your liking I hope....

# 9 jertwa @ 06/03/08 03:09 PM

I read that they gave Dennis Dixon a 60 speed rating. I know he tore his ACL, but come on! That's absolutely rediculous! I don't expect his ratings to be amazing, but that should have been one of the good ones.

# 10 N51_rob @ 06/03/08 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jertwa


	I read that they gave Dennis Dixon a 60 speed rating. I know he tore his ACL, but come on! That's absolutely rediculous! I don't expect his ratings to be amazing, but that should have been one of the good ones.

I am inclined to agree with you. Plenty of guys have come off ACLs and run just as fast straight ahead speed. If they wanted to show the effects of the injury, they could've lowered his agility and or acceleration.

# 11 bad_philanthropy @ 06/03/08 04:22 PM

Very strange about Dixon, especially since he has been running pretty well for two months now and had 4.4 speed before, which he showed off several times last year. I would imagine that Pittsburgh will use him in gadget plays and maybe eventually convert him to WR, so it's a shame his speed isn't higher in the game. Agree about reducing the agility rather than speed. But his overall rating seems pretty reasonable.

# 12 Scott @ 06/03/08 04:24 PM

He ran a 4.58 at the combine though...So he's not running 4.4 anymore.

# 13 smithc6 @ 06/03/08 04:38 PM

Jake Delhomme is good, but to be honest I dont think he will play all that much this season because of the Tommie Johns surgery. No starting QB in the NFL has ever had or come back to play with that type of surgery yet, so I have my doubts. I think his rating should be higher, but it wont matter...

# 14 Ceothachosen1 @ 06/03/08 04:52 PM

no way leinart deserves to be a 85 and how is rodgers rated the same as campbell another thing how is matt ryan rated higher then russell who was the first pick in the draft and a much better prospect

# 15 DJ @ 06/03/08 05:15 PM

I'm a Giants fan and even I think Eli's rating is too high.

I really like the system used in All-Pro Football, listing the player's attributes instead of just slapping a number on a guy. Players that excel in several areas are noted as such, while other QB's may only be good at 1-2 things, or just average in all.

# 16 JimmyDeicide @ 06/03/08 05:22 PM

If they do it similar to NHL then the rookies and younger guys will have a lower composure rating which will effect the players stats on key situations so the overall shouldnt be looked at as the defacto figure. In theory.

# 17 allBthere @ 06/03/08 05:36 PM

all are way too high. Why is a rating in the 80s bad all of a sudden. Kitna imo should be 78.
Actually the whole thing needs to be ajusted to the GOAT, not relative to who's the best this year and rate everyone esle accordingly etc.

imo. there should be 2 ab's in the 90s - peyton and brady - that's it. No one else has shown that they'll be a first ballot HOF. That's what HOF's are= 90s, very very good - great players are high 80s, good players are 70s, average are 60s. Everyone needs to come down almost 10 pts.

I saw brady's arm strength 99. LOL! his arm isn't strongest in the league let alone close to the GOAT. It would be nice if we could get the ratings back to this planet and down to reality. - maybe then the game would play a little better.

# 18 Vast @ 06/03/08 05:48 PM

Im glad to see Eli's rating up there, but im not sure how it compares to the rest of the QBs. I believe this year we'll see a pro bowl bound Eli. I think the ratings in general are too high. no one should be higher then a 96 imo.

# 19 swanlee @ 06/03/08 05:52 PM

Atlanta this year does not have issues at WR, Roddy White showed he is a legit #1 WR last year, Jenkins is a good End Zone threat, Laurent Robinson came on very well when he was used and Harry Douglas was said to be a steal in this years draft.

Atlanta has 4 young but very talented WR's. Atlanta's biggest issue when it comes to the QB is O-line not WR's. Sam Baker at LT and Blalock in his second year should improve the o-line

# 20 Matt Diesel @ 06/03/08 05:55 PM

numerical rating systems are whack. there are so many intangibles in football that you cannot possibly quantify them.

you cannot possibly set an exact value for an attribute.

it would be better if they said : he excels in run blocking and is a good pulling guard. give their 40 times and other general athletic attributes, a wonderlic score and leave it at that. part of the fun is finding out who is good.

« Previous12 3 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 09 Quarterbacks Analysis