Madden NFL 10 Blog: Player Ratings - A New Philosophy, A New Era

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by youALREADYknow

If Madden is to be taken seriously, it needs to display the difference between absurd player dimensions.

You shouldn't even be able to make players of those sizes.

[glitchditcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

You are wrong. The DEEP MIDDLE is covered by an underneath defender in Tampa 2. The hole or "intermediate middle" is essentially uncovered as there is no "middle player," instead there are 2 hook/curl defenders that play aim closere to half way between the hash and the numbers (of course pattern reading could bring them inside farther) in Tampa 2. COVER 2 is a 5 under/2 deep zone coverage. Tampa 2 is actually a 4 under, 3 deep. You mentioned the speed rating, you said that LB's shouldn't be able to cover fast RB's and WR's. Yes, the 40 yard dash in exercise science is a measure of acceleration, yes top speed is rarely reached in football, I was only making it clear that your idea didn't make sense. Now, you're contradicting yourself by admitting that LB's DO cover receivers and your showing your lack of knowledge by not knowing the difference between Tampa 2 and true cover 2. There SHOULD NOT be anymore separation in madden, there should be far far far less.

If you could read in the first place, I am in no way contradicting myself. I never said LBs DONT cover WRs. I said they dont coverr them AS WELL as they do in the game in real life. And I do know the difference between tampa 2 and a cover 2. A cover 2 isnt even a scheme, its a play. The Tampa 2 is the scheme.

[Cryolemon]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

You shouldn't even be able to make players of those sizes.

What limits would you have?

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cryolemon

What limits would you have?

I have no problem with the 6'6 350 lb player, if he is a lineman, but not a ball carrier. I do, however, have a problem with any 5'4 150 lb player, that is well beyond realism.

As for the linemen type, size alone does not determine force. Offensive linemen, even though they are much bigger, would make terrible ball carriers (not just because of their lack of change of direction skills) because they are not nearly fast enough to get enough momentum to really run over players. This is not Varsity Blues, this is (should be) the real world. If you have ever seen a OL pick up a fumble or catch a batted ball, you'll agree that they almost always end up getting "trucked" because they move too slow and are huge targets.

Again, I am not arguing that the hit and momentum logic is screwed up in Madden. I agree with the points that were made, but I would rather have seen a video with a big back (Brandon Jacobs, perhaps) vs a smaller db type. But you still have to remember, even a big ball carrier can be put on his back by a smaller player if the bigger player isn't up to speed and the little guy gets a running start.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by glitchditcher

Linebacker Coverage One thing that drastically needs some changing is the coverage ratings of Linebackers. You have some linebackers with 70+ Man Coverage and 85+ Zone Coverage. That is absolutely ridiculous. Did you know that in Madden 09, if you put Brian Urlacher at CB his overall rating is an 86 ? Eighty effing Six. Brian Urlacher. That's higher than most #2 CBs in the game. It's absurd, man. I know guys like Brian Urlacher, Gary Brackett, and Kirk Morrison are some of the best coverage Linebackers in the game, there is no doubt about that, but you simply cannot have Linebackers with higher coverage ratings than some corners. The fact of the matter is, no LB in the game today is better at coverage than any CB in the game today. I don't care if you're talking about Jason David.. he still should have higher coverage ratings than any Linebacker. In Madden 09 you have most Linebackers running 30 yards downfield with WRs and HBs. Jumping 10 feet off the ground to blindly super swat a pass. That is asinine. There is no way in hell that would happen in real life. That's why coaches uses motion and try to get HBs one on one with a LB in real life. It's caleld match-ups. Because no LB is able to have good coverage more than 10-15 yards downfield. It just doesn't happen. The highest MAN COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 60. The highest ZONE COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 75. No if, ands, or buts about it.

Re-read your 2nd paragraph.

[shttymcgee]

Quote: Originally Posted by glitchditcher

If you could read in the first place, I am in no way contradicting myself. I never said LBs DONT cover WRs. I said they dont coverr them AS WELL as they do in the game in real life. And I do know the difference between tampa 2 and a cover 2. A cover 2 isnt even a scheme, its a play. The Tampa 2 is the scheme.

Tampa 2 and Cover 2 are completely different things. Cover 2 SCHEMES cover the deep part of the field with 2 defenders (each has half the field) and the underneath zones are covered by 5 defenders, 2 in the flats, 2 in the hook/curl areas and 1 in the hole. There are different ways to play cover 2: the underneath defenders could drop to a spot (like in madden, which by the way has gone the way of the dinosaur in much of modern football), they could wall off receivers(attempt to keep them from running crossing routes, thus running with them when they run vertical) or they could pattern read (adjust their responsiblities based on the stem of certain receivers, which is the now the most common form of any zone coverage, especially in college, think of pattern reading like a match-up zone concept used in basketball).

The only thing that makes Tampa 2 resemble Cover 2 is the split (middle of the field open) alignment of the safeties. In this coverage, the deep part of the field is covered in thirds by the two safeties and an inside lb (this is different than normal cover 3 versions in that neither one of the corners has a deep zone). The 3 deep defenders leave 4 to cover the underneath zones (corners and olb's).

There is a distinct philosophical difference between the two. One (cover 2) smothers the underneath areas and forces the qb to make strong, deep throws, the other (tampa) is used by defenses who want to take away the deep part of the field and force short throws and then (hopefully) tackle the receiver, limiting yards after catch.

I hope that maybe now you understand that the two are different and anyway, the original point was that LB's not only are capable of running more than 15 yds and effectively covering both WR's and RB's, but that they are asked (albeit more from some teams than from others) to do it relatively often.

[HitDoctor]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cusefan

I love it. Ian I have a feeling the Best madden players( the best Cheesers) are going to hate Madden 10 ! Thank you for re-introducing strategy.

This would be a good indication that madden is on point! (if the cheesers hate it, that is).

[glitchditcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by shttymcgee

Tampa 2 and Cover 2 are completely different things. Cover 2 SCHEMES cover the deep part of the field with 2 defenders (each has half the field) and the underneath zones are covered by 5 defenders, 2 in the flats, 2 in the hook/curl areas and 1 in the hole. There are different ways to play cover 2: the underneath defenders could drop to a spot (like in madden, which by the way has gone the way of the dinosaur in much of modern football), they could wall off receivers(attempt to keep them from running crossing routes, thus running with them when they run vertical) or they could pattern read (adjust their responsiblities based on the stem of certain receivers, which is the now the most common form of any zone coverage, especially in college, think of pattern reading like a match-up zone concept used in basketball). The only thing that makes Tampa 2 resemble Cover 2 is the split (middle of the field open) alignment of the safeties. In this coverage, the deep part of the field is covered in thirds by the two safeties and an inside lb (this is different than normal cover 3 versions in that neither one of the corners has a deep zone). The 3 deep defenders leave 4 to cover the underneath zones (corners and olb's). There is a distinct philosophical difference between the two. One (cover 2) smothers the underneath areas and forces the qb to make strong, deep throws, the other (tampa) is used by defenses who want to take away the deep part of the field and force short throws and then (hopefully) tackle the receiver, limiting yards after catch. I hope that maybe now you understand that the two are different and anyway, the original point was that LB's not only are capable of running more than 15 yds and effectively covering both WR's and RB's, but that they are asked (albeit more from some teams than from others) to do it relatively often.

You're not telling me anything I don't know. You continue to say how LBs are capable of covering WRs and HBs. I know that.... but NOT AS WELL as they do it in the game. You would swear the LBS are all Champ Bailey out there in Madden. Why do you think there are so many turnovers and gamers rarely throw for over 200 yards in a game ? Because the coverage is absolutely ridiculous in Madden.