News Post

In sports video games, rookies are as big of a mystery as in real sports.

Some rookies come in and play exceptionally well, others come into the big leagues with a lot of hype and fall flat.

Rating rookies in sports video games such as Madden can't be easy. You are basically tasked with putting a number on the unknown. It's easy to assign a speed rating to rookies, but much harder to determine how accurate of a mid-range passer they are in the NFL game.

For basketball, it's easy to tell how good of a shooter someone is -- but it's impossible to tell if they will be able to shoot that well in the pros with a faster game and better players.

Rookies will remain an enigma in pro sports forever -- and in sports video games they'll be the source of great debate for years to come.

If you had to give rookies ratings, what would you cap their top overall ratings at? Vote in our poll and sound off with comments on how you'd rate rookies below!

Member Comments
# 1 GlennN @ 05/12/15 11:37 AM
I am not a fan of artificial limits, but at the same time, the vast majority of rookies would not be that highly rated. There have been players that came in and performed like 90+ rating guys, but they are few and far between. Don't have certain limits, but grade conservatively.
# 2 kjcheezhead @ 05/12/15 11:38 AM
Depends on the sport, but in football most times having a rookie be able to start right away and contribute is a win. So I'd say average rating for a starter for the best rookies. Ratings are updated throughout the year anyways so when a rookie season like Randy Moss' happens the developer can adjust the ratings as it unfolds. No need to get carried away right out of the gate.
# 3 Ghost Of The Year @ 05/12/15 11:39 AM
83 max. Give your franchise a reason to play, & develop the player into a 99.
Beyond the rookie year, I have no problem with a second year player having a 99, provided they have the stats to back it up. And if they suffer from the dreaded Sophomore Slump/Jinx, then you have a truer idea of where those numbers need to be.
# 4 AvengedAgainst @ 05/12/15 11:41 AM
I would say no rookie should be above a 79, but higher round draft picks have higher upside.
# 5 dk6663 @ 05/12/15 11:55 AM
First round 85-89 + is ok, look at Odell Beckham and other standout rookies. 2nd round , 80-85, 3rd round 79 and below.
# 6 BlessingSpore72 @ 05/12/15 12:28 PM
I think in very rare circumstances a rookie could be rated say 85-86 right out of the gate. Like Connor McDavid will probably be 86 in NHL 16. Someone like OBJ could be boosted throughout the year to over 90, if they put up the kind of numbers he did. I do remember in NBA live 04 when lebron was rated 69 and Bosh was only a 59. Oh how times have changed
# 7 Dr. Poe @ 05/12/15 12:41 PM
depends on the sport. If you have a lebron james type, then he could be rated higher. If you have a rory mcilroy then he can be rated high. If you have a jameis winston then he can be rated around 83.
It's harder to make an impact in certain sports and certain positions. Rookies should be rated lower and given time to develop.
# 8 CM Hooe @ 05/12/15 01:24 PM
I voted no limit, but I am qualifying that opinion with a caveat.

If real-world scouts (as opposed to those in the media) think a player is already among the best in his peer group, I want him rated appropriately. Hypothetical example - when LeBron James entered the NBA, I'd wager he was a Top 30 player in the league the moment he was drafted. If the real-world NBA scouts thought that, then he should have been rated as such.

I specifically don't want to see rookies being handed high ratings left and right on account of hype only, however. Many sports games don't have enough variance in their ratings as is, and the last thing I want to see is ratings artificially pushed upward.
# 9 thawkprime 21 @ 05/12/15 01:44 PM
I dont have a problem with rookie rateings and the overalls that they currently get. Where i think games need to make changes is with teams playing more rookies or younger players over veteren players who may be rated higher. This is becasue rookies or young players have teh potential to develop more throughout a season then a veteren that you know what you are going to get from them.
# 10 juice2142 @ 05/12/15 02:47 PM
everyone's rating needs to be lowered in Madden. Look at FIFA- there are only a handful of players rated over 90. This makes those superstars standout and noticeable. Not so much in Madden as so many players are rated higher and close together. Should drop everyones rating so starters are in the 80's and only top players are in 90's.

Messi's standard Ultimate team card is rated 93 or something in FIFA. Best player in the world and a generational player is 93!!! Madden probably has a dozen or more people rated higher than that. I just feel like all rating should be dropped across the board
# 11 worstsportsgamer1977 @ 05/12/15 03:44 PM
i play alot of 2k and i hate the way they rate cards. i think there could be a rookie that started in the 80s and by the end of the season be in the early 90s. i honestly think that there should not be a player in the game under 75. To me any professional athlete is at least a 75. so no i do not think rookies should be low balled.
# 12 Lisac @ 05/12/15 04:26 PM
No regular player should have a rating over say 90 to 93 and no rookie should be higher than 75
# 13 tril @ 05/12/15 04:26 PM
I dont think overall ratings should be given to rookies. I think their individual attributes should be given ratings, and pending how much that player practices and plays will determine their ratings throughout the season. Id also factor in potential and a players attitude in that equation.
# 14 Gdbraden @ 05/12/15 05:37 PM
The answer depends on progression. If the devs could get progression right a rookie could start in the 70's an earn their rating on the field. There is no right answer without smart progression.
# 15 Hassan Darkside @ 05/12/15 06:26 PM
Originally Posted by Gdbraden
The answer depends on progression. If the devs could get progression right a rookie could start in the 70's an earn their rating on the field. There is no right answer without smart progression.
Agree with this.

I prefer rookies rated on the low side and working their way up.
# 16 Deezo @ 05/12/15 07:07 PM
High 80s are a strech...I'd like to see the "top" players rated in the 80-83 range. Maybe guys like La'el Collins and Shane Ray a little high than where they were drafted but as long as no rookie is at 88-89+.
# 17 snc237 @ 05/12/15 07:22 PM
If ncaa was still around. I would expect a 99 overall guy from ncaa to be in mid 80's. If they were 90 overall I'm thinking mid 70s.
# 18 Skyboxer @ 05/12/15 08:48 PM
Since I'm against the current crappy "ratings' system we have.... I could care less.
Should have had that as one of the answers.
# 19 CaseIH @ 05/13/15 01:23 AM
Personally I don't think any rookie should start out higher than 79 especially not in basketball or baseball. Football is a little different so I can see the rare player being in the 80's, except for probably a QB, as unless they are rare like say Marino was and excelled at the start, most go thru growing pains.
# 20 Snkrluvr @ 05/13/15 07:34 AM
I'm a basketball guy and I think the top 3 players should be rated 75-80. Everyone else should be under 75.
Throughout the year reevaluate their ratings. Some number 1 picks are not worthy of the honor, while some later draft picks play better.

« Previous12Next »

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.