Madden NFL 15 News Post

Madden NFL 15 Ratings Release Monday, Watch Rookies React After Hearing Their Rating

08:25 PM - July 18, 2014 by Steve_OS

Donny Moore, the "Ratings Czar" for Madden NFL 15 will start revealing player ratings on Monday. During the developer livestream earlier, they revealed that some of them will be revealed, not all of them. So we will no doubt see them trickle out every week or so, before release on August 26th.

EA Sports did release this video, showcasing quite a few rookie reactions, after hearing what their rating is in the game. Those players include Johnny Manziel, Jadeveon Clowney, Khalil Mack, Mike Evans, Sammy Watkins, Blake Bortles and more.

Blake was only interested in his punt ratings, find out what the other rookies thought of their ratings here.

Game: Madden NFL 15Reader Score: 6.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 42 - View All

Madden NFL 15 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 DCEBB2001 @ 07/19/14 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve_OS


	Donny Moore, the "Ratings Czar" for Madden NFL 15 will start revealing player ratings on Monday. During the developer livestream earlier, they revealed that some of them will be revealed, not all of them. So we will no doubt see them trickle out every week or so, before release on August 26th. EA Sports did release this video, showcasing quite a few rookie reactions, after hearing what their rating is in the game. Those players include Johnny Manziel, Jadeveon Clowney, Khalil Mack, Mike Evans, Sammy Watkins, Blake Bortles and more. Blake was only interested in his punt ratings, find out what the other rookies thought of their ratings here.

If these kids really knew what their ratings SHOULD be compared to the ENTIRE professional and amateur population, they would be even more upset. They should be thanking their lucky stars that Donny Moore over-inflates every single rating category beyond anything that REAL data suggests. These kids, however, are used to being told that they are the fastest/strongest/greatest since they were in middle school. Why else do you think you had over 100 juniors declare and just under half of them went undrafted? They are receiving poor advice from people telling them that they are the best. It hasn't gotten real for them until the moment they realize that they are not as good as they thought they were.

The same goes for these kids and their Madden ratings expectations. When the guy rating your abilities uses faulty logic, the wrong data, and youtube scouting abilities, you get a complete mess. It would be much more accurate to rate players based on DATA from trusted sources. Instead, Donny Moore utilizes conjecture and seems, quite literally, AFRAID to rate a player below an 80 in any important category for fear of backlash. I mean, one player in this video even said something to the effect of "what is the guy's email?".

This is complete crap. EA needs to rate players using real, verifiable, data and needs to use LOGIC when doing so. Also, they need to stop making the best in each category a 99 every single year. Ratings need to carry over year to year so we can see how players develop. Alas, this would put an end to their ratings-driven hype machine, so I doubt that would ever happen.

I am tired of seeing rookies come in with attributes as high as HOF-level players. It doesn't happen people! Sure, maybe you get a rookie with exception physical skill (think Randy Moss his rookie year), but the physical stuff is verifiable! You can measure it and compare it to those who were rated before and will be rated after. Believe it or not, there is a ceiling to much of this stuff. The scouts know what qualifies as a "99" THP or a "99" TAK. How many players do you think ACTUALLY have that grade right now in the NFL? NONE! Not ONE! Why? Because scouts know that a "perfect" grade in those categories is 1) impossible, and 2) was probably achieved by someone who came before or will come after those who are currently in their database. Scouts don't hand out "perfect" grades to the highest players at any time - they hand them out to the highest players OF ALL TIME, and use that as a standard of comparison.

So, in summary, what EA and Donny Moore is doing here is complete crap. EA has already created a game where "if you are below an 80, then you suck" is the norm, and now, these players know it. Really, Johnny Manziel, you will be upset if you are not rated a 90+ in any throw accuracy category? Do you even realize how RARE a 90+ at any throw-level is? Of course you don't! EA has been making you think that every QB in the NFL today is among the best ever at throwing accurately because passing stats are at an all-time high. I bet the likes of Starr and Unitas would beg to differ.

Rant over.

# 2 oneamongthefence @ 07/19/14 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	If these kids really knew what their ratings SHOULD be compared to the ENTIRE professional and amateur population, they would be even more upset. They should be thanking their lucky stars that Donny Moore over-inflates every single rating category beyond anything that REAL data suggests. These kids, however, are used to being told that they are the fastest/strongest/greatest since they were in middle school. Why else do you think you had over 100 juniors declare and just under half of them went undrafted? They are receiving poor advice from people telling them that they are the best. It hasn't gotten real for them until the moment they realize that they are not as good as they thought they were. The same goes for these kids and their Madden ratings expectations. When the guy rating your abilities uses faulty logic, the wrong data, and youtube scouting abilities, you get a complete mess. It would be much more accurate to rate players based on DATA from trusted sources. Instead, Donny Moore utilizes conjecture and seems, quite literally, AFRAID to rate a player below an 80 in any important category for fear of backlash. I mean, one player in this video even said something to the effect of "what is the guy's email?". This is complete crap. EA needs to rate players using real, verifiable, data and needs to use LOGIC when doing so. Also, they need to stop making the best in each category a 99 every single year. Ratings need to carry over year to year so we can see how players develop. Alas, this would put an end to their ratings-driven hype machine, so I doubt that would ever happen. I am tired of seeing rookies come in with attributes as high as HOF-level players. It doesn't happen people! Sure, maybe you get a rookie with exception physical skill (think Randy Moss his rookie year), but the physical stuff is verifiable! You can measure it and compare it to those who were rated before and will be rated after. Believe it or not, there is a ceiling to much of this stuff. The scouts know what qualifies as a "99" THP or a "99" TAK. How many players do you think ACTUALLY have that grade right now in the NFL? NONE! Not ONE! Why? Because scouts know that a "perfect" grade in those categories is 1) impossible, and 2) was probably achieved by someone who came before or will come after those who are currently in their database. Scouts don't hand out "perfect" grades to the highest players at any time - they hand them out to the highest players OF ALL TIME, and use that as a standard of comparison. So, in summary, what EA and Donny Moore is doing here is complete crap. EA has already created a game where "if you are below an 80, then you suck" is the norm, and now, these players know it. Really, Johnny Manziel, you will be upset if you are not rated a 90+ in any throw accuracy category? Do you even realize how RARE a 90+ at any throw-level is? Of course you don't! EA has been making you think that every QB in the NFL today is among the best ever at throwing accurately because passing stats are at an all-time high. I bet the likes of Starr and Unitas would beg to differ. Rant over.

I hope one day you get to have some input in ratings. Other sports games utilize a much more broader spectrum. I think there needs to be more disparity between each single point. A guy who has 85 accuracy still is too much like a guy with 95 accuracy. Either use a wider scale or make each point matter more.

# 3 Smoke316 @ 07/19/14 11:36 AM

Can't wait for Monday!!

# 4 DCEBB2001 @ 07/19/14 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	Well I consider it a good sign at least that no rookie in that clip seemed to agree with their ratings. That said, I hope on Monday Donny Moore unveils some kind of new ratings system scale. It's frustrating to see ratings continue down the same ole Madden path, while other aspects of the game seem to be going for more authenticity and listening to what hardcore gamers have been saying for years. From what I understand, marketing likely has the most influence over ratings, so if that can't be overcome for whatever reason, I would like to see editable draft classes added, since we have the ability to roster share. @DECEBB, if they ever do add editable draft classes, would you consider doing projected ratings for existing real life collegiate players or would that be too much? Meaning outside of the incoming rookies, there are at least 4-5 years worth of real collegiate players on rosters that will make up future real life NFL drafts, would be interesting to see FBG or something similar, take on using those real player's existing data and potential, to project at least 4-5 years of NFL draft classes. I guess technically with all the data out there even for High School prospects, the projection model could even go as far as 8 years, lol. I know that's a little pie in the sky like but it would be an interesting project, imo.

The biggest problem, to me, isn't the lack of editable draft classes. The biggest issues is that so much of the game is coded according to these crappy ratings. In all honesty, if we were rating players outside of the crappy Madden box we are trapped inside and forced to use, there should only be 8 players in the entire world rated over 90 OVR. I wonder what would happen in the game if your average NFL player no longer had a STR rating of 71 but 44, like the data suggests by using a TRUE linear model. At present, Madden skews everything. The average Madden player has a STR of 71, but when you average out a player's 3 core 1-rep-max efforts (Bench Press, Squat, and Clean), you find that the average NFL player should only have a STR of 44, with 99 being ranked the best and 1 being ranked the worst (can we really quantify absolute peril (0) or perfection (100)?) With the research I have done on NFL2K's ratings, they obviously used real data because many OL were rated in the 60s and 70s for STR, with very few players up over 90. However, would the game behave with ratings where each interval between points is equal behave differently? If there were only 20 players rated over 80, would it break?

That being posited, IF we were able to edit draft classes, I would have no problem producing the NCAA player data that I have on the website. I have data on some 70,000 players in the pros, on the street, in college, and even in high school, so the data is there. The automation is there as well. It isn't hard, just a little time consuming. I can post the ratings on the website, but I cannot edit the draft classes. The community would have to do that.

I go back to the big question, however. Would it work in Madden? Would editable draft classes fix your franchise mode? Would contracts work correctly if your best, pro-bowl caliber, QB is now a 72 OVR? Last year, I did the "right" thing and published equal-interval ratings on the website. Many gamers were FURIOUS! They did not like how they couldn't use them in their franchise (even though I argued that ANY realistic ratings system is useless in Madden).

One person on OS, however, actually recorded some vids of the gameplay using the equal-interval methodology: Playmakers.

Look at his post from March in the FBG thread:

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...post2046069885

That video gives this system, with equal-interval ratings, such HUGE promise. Players were behaving more like their NFL counterparts than ever before. BUT, once again, the ratings were useless in Madden 25 outside of the Play Now mode. So, I had the choice of continuing with the equal-interval ratings, switching up to rating players exactly how EA does so draft classes work, or altering the ratings so that the average physical attribute is set to 70 (true mean). Rating players how EA does just makes me feel dirty...can't do it. True mean I can deal with, but I know deep down that the equal interval is the BEST, MOST ACCURATE, way to rate players. Despite this fact, many people did not like their favorite player, perhaps a popular player (pro bowlers are the result of popularity, not skill, FYI) being rated in the 60s or 70s.

Either way, I can't win because Madden limits what we can do. IF the following were met for Madden 15, I would go back to equal-interval and rate players as realistically as possible:

1. Madden must allow us to edit draft classes in franchise mode.

2. The game must not break when using lower rated players in regards to trades, contracts, etc in franchise mode.

If these two criteria are met, then I would gladly publish draft classes for the community to accurately create and distribute for personal use. Until we know the answers to these questions however, my efforts may be useful in other endeavors.

# 5 DCEBB2001 @ 07/19/14 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneamongthefence


	I hope one day you get to have some input in ratings. Other sports games utilize a much more broader spectrum. I think there needs to be more disparity between each single point. A guy who has 85 accuracy still is too much like a guy with 95 accuracy. Either use a wider scale or make each point matter more.

What EA needs to do is take the "it is what it is" approach. Rate players how they are without getting the marketing department involved. When I had my job interview with EA for Donny's position in 2011, two things were made very apparent:

1. The devs are hamstrung by the marketing team when it comes to ratings, preventing them from rating players accurately.

2. They know their system is severely flawed, and were seeking outside opinion.

3. They are more interested in publicity than making a great game.

I could not live with myself working under those conditions and sacrifice all the work I have put into FBG Ratings to only have them perverted by people who care more about selling video games than attempting to depict reality.

# 6 azdawgpound @ 07/19/14 12:45 PM

lmao did manziel say its gonna be hard to throw with that kinda accuracy? Donny musta gave him some low TA's then.

# 7 oneamongthefence @ 07/19/14 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	What EA needs to do is take the "it is what it is" approach. Rate players how they are without getting the marketing department involved. When I had my job interview with EA for Donny's position in 2011, two things were made very apparent: 1. The devs are hamstrung by the marketing team when it comes to ratings, preventing them from rating players accurately. 2. They know their system is severely flawed, and were seeking outside opinion. 3. They are more interested in publicity than making a great game. I could not live with myself working under those conditions and sacrifice all the work I have put into FBG Ratings to only have them perverted by people who care more about selling video games than attempting to depict reality.

I feel like this is why they gave us hot and cold streaks and consistency ratings. They can't rate him low but give him 0 consistency and they won't play up to their ratings very often.

I get that Marketing drives a.lot of what they do But it would seem like eternally they could give more disparity between ratings. Visually we see two guys who are a point overall different. But under the hood it equals two or three. I would think everybody wins.

Option 3 would be having sliders similar to speed threshold where a greater number made the attributes more apparent or less apparent. One end could be arcade where all the ratings play close together and SIM where you could actually tell a difference between having 90 awareness qb and 89 awareness qb.

# 8 CM Hooe @ 07/19/14 01:29 PM

Having played games in Madden 25 with Dan's player rating methodology (I believe his current ratings are set for his "true mean" system, correct me if I'm wrong) I feel like his re-ratings do offer a more measured and more strategic game within the confines of the game Madden offers. I have come to prefer them to the default ratings set.

# 9 The JareBear @ 07/19/14 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azdawgpound


	lmao did manziel say its gonna be hard to throw with that kinda accuracy? Donny musta gave him some low TA's then.

I doubt it is that low, I guess we will see though.

# 10 oneamongthefence @ 07/19/14 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The JareBear


	I doubt it is that low, I guess we will see though.

85 is considered low compared to most other qbs So that's subjective I'm sure.

# 11 Johnson Forty Eight @ 07/19/14 03:05 PM

I suspect the full ratings won't be posted to stop this happening again:
http://www.operationsports.com/forum...box-360-a.html

# 12 DCEBB2001 @ 07/19/14 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CM Hooe


	Having played games in Madden 25 with Dan's player rating methodology (I believe his current ratings are set for his "true mean" system, correct me if I'm wrong) I feel like his re-ratings do offer a more measured and more strategic game within the confines of the game Madden offers. I have come to prefer them to the default ratings set.

Correct, right now everything is set to True Mean. That means that instead of using a high and low point only and then using linear regression, there is a third point added at the population mean. For example, a QB's THP ranges from 99 to 70 in our system. The average is 84. So we set the maximum grade (5.0) to 99, the minimum grade (1.0) to 70, and the average grade (2.5) to 84. Create a nice polynomial curve and you have a regression that covers all QBs based on their scouting grades.

# 13 William85 @ 07/19/14 04:01 PM

Clowney 85
Bortles 79
Manziel 78
Bridgewater 78
Watkins 83

# 14 The JareBear @ 07/19/14 04:10 PM

In my humble opinion the default ratings and the weekly updates from Moore are maybe the least realistic part of Madden. EA just doesn't take a good approach to ratings and it shows when you can use a re-rated roster from OS that literally makes the game better, improves the experience, makes sliders more effective, shows off more animations, more varied outcomes.

Hardest part will be for me to wait for a good OS roster before starting my CFM.

# 15 William85 @ 07/19/14 04:23 PM

[quote=The JareBear;2046404364]In my humble opinion the default ratings and the weekly updates from Moore are maybe the least realistic part of Madden. EA just doesn't take a good approach to ratings and it shows when you can use a re-rated roster from OS that literally makes the game better, improves the experience, makes sliders more effective, shows off more animations, more varied outcomes.

Hardest part will be for me to wait for a good OS roster before starting my CFM.

Where would I find these ratings ?

# 16 K_GUN @ 07/19/14 05:37 PM

I sure wish MK Knight did rosters for Madden as well....best roster guru on this website ( capa classic rosters for 2k were awesome too )

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 17 Danimal @ 07/19/14 05:41 PM

This should never be an issue, hire a guy who has a degree in relevant fields that actually qualify him for this job.

I would really love to see what DM qualifications are that he is in charge of this.

# 18 oneamongthefence @ 07/19/14 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danimal


	This should never be an issue, hire a guy who has a degree in relevant fields that actually qualify him for this job. I would really love to see what DM qualifications are that he is in charge of this.

From what DCEBB said it seems like it wouldn't matter who would be doing the ratings. They'll be at the mercy of marketing and we would continue to have biased ratings.

# 19 DCEBB2001 @ 07/19/14 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oneamongthefence


	From what DCEBB said it seems like it wouldn't matter who would be doing the ratings. They'll be at the mercy of marketing and we would continue to have biased ratings.

Donny Moore specifically asked me what I would do if someone from the marketing department or an executive told me to change a rating for a player. The example he used was, "If you had Larry Fitzgerald rated as a 93 OVR but a suit came down and told you to change it to a 99, what would you do or say?"

I answered his question with a question: "Why would an executive have any say over how a player is rated". His response was that it was a "hypothetical" question. I said that I wouldn't like it one bit because it would undermine the system. Needless to say, I guess I wasn't willing to "play ball" enough to get hired for the job.

# 20 strawberryshortcake @ 07/19/14 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Donny Moore specifically asked me what I would do if someone from the marketing department or an executive told me to change a rating for a player. The example he used was, "If you had Larry Fitzgerald rated as a 93 OVR but a suit came down and told you to change it to a 99, what would you do or say?" I answered his question with a question: "Why would an executive have any say over how a player is rated". His response was that it was a "hypothetical" question. I said that I wouldn't like it one bit because it would undermine the system. Needless to say, I guess I wasn't willing to "play ball" enough to get hired for the job.

Do what's need to get in through the door. You could very well have said, "Perfectly fine. Sure I'll change Larry Fitzgerald's OVR from a 93 to a 99."

And you follow up by changing the universal rating scale. Maximum now would be 106 as oppose to the standard 100. So, technically Larry Fitzgerald would definitely be a 99 but on an adjusted scale of 1-106, Fitzgerald would still have an OVR attribute of 99 but in the overall scheme of things he would still be a 93.

"Suits, Larry Fitzgerald is now literally, numerically a 99 as you wanted."

« Previous12 3 4 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 15 Ratings Release Monday, Watch Rookies React After Hearing Their Rating