Madden NFL 17 News Post

Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers

11:31 AM - July 23, 2016 by smiley3

EA Sports has continued revealing their Madden NFL 17 player ratings today, as they announce the top 5 wide receivers in the game. More detailed ratings can be seen in the official blog.

Check them out and post your thoughts!

Antonio Brown (Overall 97)
Julio Jones (Overall 96)
A.J. Green (Overall 93)
Odell Beckham Jr. (Overall 93)
DeAndre Hopkins (Overall 93)

Previously released Madden NFL 17 player ratings:

Madden NFL 17 screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: Madden NFL 17Reader Score: 8/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 17 - View All

Member Comments

# 41 mrprice33 @ 07/23/16 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013


	We'll agree to disagree. I have played with JJ Watt and watch him get manhandled one on one consistently. I've played with bad offensive lineman and felt like I had just as much time as when I had better OL. I can't feel the difference between Julio Jones and Breahaud Perriman unless you're talking Aggressive Carch, and even then it's 50/50. Same with Latavius Murray and AP. Same with Richard Sherman and Jalen Collins And DTs have almost 0 differential to me. Maybe it'll change this year.

I agree in that I don't think past Maddens did a good job differentiating those guys. While 17 is much better in this regard, I don't think ratings were as much of a problem as programming. A lot of Madden's interactions are based on dice rolls, so what you see as a "the ratings aren't spread out enough" problem I see largely as a "the dice rolls aren't scaled correctly for ratings differences" problem.

Let's pretend we're talking about a game where 2 trucks travel at each other, and the one that can knock the other off course "wins." If one truck was much larger and had much more weight than the other, but the game was programmed to make each collision a 50-50 proposition, you wouldn't necessarily blame the way the game portrays the size of the trucks for the problem, right? You'd blame the way the game simulated the collision of the trucks, the way the game chose which truck-crashing animation to play out, etc.

What's happened in Madden in the past is sort of what I just described, except instead of trucks crashing into each other it's whether or not a QB's pass is going to be inaccurate, whether or not a WR was going to beat a jam at the LOS, whether or not a DE was going to get past an OL, whether or not a WR would catch a ball, or an RB fumble, etc etc. Widening the scale *could* make those things feel more realistic because you're introducing such extreme variables that the game cannot help but generate the desired result (maybe, in the truck game example above, the only way to guarantee that the larger truck pushed the smaller one off-course is if it was the size of a large house). But, it doesn't fix the actual problem. That's how you get situations where people put kickers at G and they can block Aaron Donald a quarter of the time.

# 42 BreakingBad2013 @ 07/23/16 02:54 PM

That makes sense. So is this still an issue?

# 43 The JareBear @ 07/23/16 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013


	We'll agree to disagree. I have played with JJ Watt and watch him get manhandled one on one consistently. I've played with bad offensive lineman and felt like I had just as much time as when I had better OL. I can't feel the difference between Julio Jones and Breahaud Perriman unless you're talking Aggressive Carch, and even then it's 50/50. Same with Latavius Murray and AP. Same with Richard Sherman and Jalen Collins And DTs have almost 0 differential to me. Maybe it'll change this year.

I definitely agree about the bold. Have experienced these things myself

# 44 dayornite @ 07/23/16 02:57 PM

Psh. Forget Dez "Dropped it" Bryant. Where is AR15? Allen Robinson was unstoppable last year. Tied the league in TD receptions, lead the league in catches 20 plus yards and has the most TD's as a WR in one season since the Jags began in 95.

# 45 mrprice33 @ 07/23/16 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013


	That makes sense. So is this still an issue?

From my experience with 17 it's been adjusted a bunch. I know from talking with Rex that it was a priority for this year. Whether or not it plays out that way in retail...we'll see.

# 46 The JareBear @ 07/23/16 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The JareBear


	Allen Robinson, Mike Evans, Emmanual Sanders.....yeah a lot of guys had good years last season. I could see quite a few in the high 80s

Quote:

Originally Posted by dayornite


	Psh. Forget Dez "Dropped it" Bryant. Where is AR15? Allen Robinson was unstoppable last year. Tied the league in TD receptions, lead the league in catches 20 plus yards and has the most TD's as a WR in one season since the Jags began in 95.

I think he's definitrly gonna be in the 89-91 range. Dude had a monster year for sure

# 47 jsteele14 @ 07/23/16 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cowboy008


	Even though those guys are some of the best WR's I still think those ratings are too high. Also think even though he didn't play all season last year that Dez should have been in the top 5.

I think the top few players at their respective positions need to be very high so that there is a reasonable drop off to the next tier.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

# 48 jfsolo @ 07/23/16 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrprice33


	I agree in that I don't think past Maddens did a good job differentiating those guys. While 17 is much better in this regard, I don't think ratings were as much of a problem as programming. A lot of Madden's interactions are based on dice rolls, so what you see as a "the ratings aren't spread out enough" problem I see largely as a "the dice rolls aren't scaled correctly for ratings differences" problem. Let's pretend we're talking about a game where 2 trucks travel at each other, and the one that can knock the other off course "wins." If one truck was much larger and had much more weight than the other, but the game was programmed to make each collision a 50-50 proposition, you wouldn't necessarily blame the way the game portrays the size of the trucks for the problem, right? You'd blame the way the game simulated the collision of the trucks, the way the game chose which truck-crashing animation to play out, etc. What's happened in Madden in the past is sort of what I just described, except instead of trucks crashing into each other it's whether or not a QB's pass is going to be inaccurate, whether or not a WR was going to beat a jam at the LOS, whether or not a DE was going to get past an OL, whether or not a WR would catch a ball, or an RB fumble, etc etc. Widening the scale could make those things feel more realistic because you're introducing such extreme variables that the game cannot help but generate the desired result (maybe, in the truck game example above, the only way to guarantee that the larger truck pushed the smaller one off-course is if it was the size of a large house). But, it doesn't fix the actual problem. That's how you get situations where people put kickers at G and they can block Aaron Donald a quarter of the time.

Bingo. I don't know specifically what causes it, but elite CPU controlled players, can't play up to their ratings, utilize all their skills and take over games. I always control a Dlineman. If I have a 10 point or more advantage over the olineman across from me, he gets totally destroyed all game. I'm relentless, the CPU doesn't bring that kind of heat.

# 49 jfsolo @ 07/23/16 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsteele14


	I think the top few players at their respective positions need to be very high so that there is a reasonable drop off to the next tier. Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

When I'm playing with my Rams and I got low 70's olinemen and WR's(or high 60's), I'm not going to be thinking that the ratings are too high, LMAO.

# 50 83evans @ 07/23/16 03:13 PM

I would advise people to look at my thread because I have an answer to spreading these rating even more

# 51 mrprice33 @ 07/23/16 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jfsolo


	Bingo. I don't know specifically what causes it, but elite CPU controlled players, can't play up to their ratings, utilize all their skills and take over games. I always control a Dlineman. If I have a 10 point or more advantage over the olineman across from me, he gets totally destroyed all game. I'm relentless, the CPU doesn't bring that kind of heat.

Dice rolls are also slanted in the favor of the user, AFAIK. As I'm talking more with the dev team, I'm understanding more and more how the different things in the game actually work. It's really interesting to learn about how they try to balance the "game" with the "simulation."

The hope is that they further balance the game part of it with the simulation part, making sure that if they have to use dice rolls for interactions due to CPU/physics limitations, to at least making sure they feel right and have the animation coverage for the results.

# 52 crackdownjr @ 07/23/16 05:03 PM

I think a lot of guys are thinking about ratings all wrong. I think everyone would agree that none of these wrs are on Jerry Rice's level career-wise. But over the last 2 seasons, AB has put up Rice-esque numbers ( 2014 - 129 catches, 1,698 yards, 13 tds, 2015 - 136 catches, 1,834 yards, 10 tds. So there is nothing wrong with him being 96 OVR because if he put up those numbers every year for the rest of his career, he would be in the conversation for greatest wr of all time. Same with julio, o'dell, etc. That being said I think that the ratings are on the right track.

I also disagree with ratings being spread out from 0-100 unless it's just OVR. I don't believe that NFL starters' skills have that much disparity. It's more of a combination of many different things. Antonio Brown's route running isn't so revolutionary that he should be at 98 while the Vikings wrs should be at 40 or lower, for example. He deserves to be at 98 RR, but his agility is what brings it to the next level, and then his acceleration out of his cuts is what gets him open consistently. There are players with great physical skills but not his RR, & players with good to great RR but without the same physical skills, so that is what should make him stand out from the rest.

# 53 BreakingBad2013 @ 07/23/16 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crackdownjr


	I think a lot of guys are thinking about ratings all wrong. I think everyone would agree that none of these wrs are on Jerry Rice's level career-wise. But over the last 2 seasons, AB has put up Rice-esque numbers ( 2014 - 129 catches, 1,698 yards, 13 tds, 2015 - 136 catches, 1,834 yards, 10 tds. So there is nothing wrong with him being 96 OVR because if he put up those numbers every year for the rest of his career, he would be in the conversation for greatest wr of all time. Same with julio, o'dell, etc. That being said I think that the ratings are on the right track. I also disagree with ratings being spread out from 0-100 unless it's just OVR. I don't believe that NFL starters' skills have that much disparity. It's more of a combination of many different things. Antonio Brown's route running isn't so revolutionary that he should be at 98 while the Vikings wrs should be at 40 or lower, for example. He deserves to be at 98 RR, but his agility is what brings it to the next level, and then his acceleration out of his cuts is what gets him open consistently. There are players with great physical skills but not his RR, & players with good to great RR but without the same physical skills, so that is what should make him stand out from the rest.

Also a different league, more passing, more rules, more protection for pass-catchers.

# 54 OhMrHanky @ 07/23/16 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JayD


	I really wish the Falcons would switch back to those uniforms but with the black helmet

Yup. I HATE the current red uni's, man. Lol. And, hate is a strong word. But, I had season tickets as a kid. And, when Glanville went 'back in black', I was LOVING IT. The only jersey I will buy is all black, man. I have a retro black Julio now as my main Falcons apparel. But, yeah, can't go wrong with black jerseys and black helmets. In madden, I play with either black retro uni's, and NEVER red. Lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 55 crackdownjr @ 07/23/16 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013


	Also a different league, more passing, more rules, more protection for pass-catchers.

There haven't been any significant rule changes to help WRs since Rice retired. "Illegal contact" was implemented in 1978, before he entered the league.

Anyway these ratings don't matter as much as the gameplay, so let's hope they translate well in-game.

# 56 mtmetcalfe @ 07/23/16 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crackdownjr


	There haven't been any significant rule changes to help WRs since Rice retired. "Illegal contact" was implemented in 1978, before he entered the league. Anyway these ratings don't matter as much as the gameplay, so let's hope they translate well in-game.

There may not have been a rule change but there was a significant crackdown on how aggressively defensive backs could play receivers after the Colts/Pats AFC championship game that clearly benefited wide receivers.

# 57 Mdnghtmgcn1 @ 07/23/16 08:20 PM

DeAndre Hopkins > Dez Bryant? Alright...

# 58 JKSportsGamer1984 @ 07/23/16 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BreakingBad2013


	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

A 0-100 scale would make more sense for a College football game. In the NFL, the talent level is not that drastically spread out (with the exception of the quarterback position). Every player in the NFL can play. There are no bums. These players made it to the NFL for a reason. For the most part NFL games are closely contested & the difference between winning or losing normally comes down to play calling or turnovers. I think a 0-50 scale fits the NFL.

# 59 BreakingBad2013 @ 07/23/16 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKSportsGamer1984


	A 0-100 scale would make more sense for a College football game. In the NFL, the talent level is not that drastically spread out (with the exception of the quarterback position). Every player in the NFL can play. There are no bums. These players made it to the NFL for a reason. For the most part NFL games are closely contested & the difference between winning or losing normally comes down to play calling or turnovers. I think a 0-50 scale fits the NFL.

I see where you're coming from. But this is based on NFL talent. This isn't saying ones a HS caliber player. This is just comparing NFL players to other NFL players. I hear you all saying everyone in the NFL can play, well that's just not true. There are certain players who just can't compete in the NFL wether it be mental, technical, devotion, or just not plain skilled enough to crack a roster. We hear it all the time when players just CANT get on the field, it's not because he's so good that he couldn't get on the field. It's because he's not good enough to beat out the players around him, at least in the system.

Again 0 doesn't equal can't play in college, 0-10 are those guys who just aren't ever going to make it. They're not talented enough or don't have the physical stature to compete. Like an undersized CB or small DT. Etc. these scales would be in comparison to other NFL talent. Is there not a difference between Julio Jones, Martavis Bryant, Stephen Hill, Darren Waller, and Chris Conley? All of them are tall and fast, but all of them will not be superstar WRs. It's not just QBs, honestly.

# 60 SolidSquid @ 07/23/16 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JKSportsGamer1984


	A 0-100 scale would make more sense for a College football game. In the NFL, the talent level is not that drastically spread out (with the exception of the quarterback position). Every player in the NFL can play. There are no bums. These players made it to the NFL for a reason. For the most part NFL games are closely contested & the difference between winning or losing normally comes down to play calling or turnovers. I think a 0-50 scale fits the NFL.

I get your logic but we are comparing NFL players to NFL players. Sure there are no bums in the NFL if you're comparing them to the rest of the population but when comparing them to over NFL players there are certainly bums

« Previous 1 234 5 6 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 17 Player Ratings - Top 5 Wide Receivers