FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game

[DeuceDouglas]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Every player who runs at the combine has the option to run at a pro day. If you choose not to run at a pro day after you run at the combine it is most likely because you feel that your time is close to what you can run. Otherwise, why would you pass up that opportunity? Many players choose to stand on their combine times only because they don't want to hurt their stock by running slower at their pro day (see DeSean Jackson). Others feel they are faster than how they time at the combine and want another chance to show it (see Devin Hester). To me, if you pass up the option to run again after a few more weeks of training, then you must be accepting of your combine time. Your statement of seems to allude to the assumption that players are always running faster at their pro day than at the combine. This does not always hold true. Guys like Brian Cushing, Will Blackmon, and David Anderson all ran slower at their pro days than at the combine. To me, the more data we have, the better the idea we have on someone's true speed compared to other players. Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, and three times is a trend. Give me more trials to see what the trend is.

I wasn't alluding to anything but how drastically things can change between the two. It just goes to show the somewhat randomness of forty times.

At the combine, everything is more or less the same conditions wise. At pro days, conditions are going to be different pretty much across the board. A guy who played at Miami might be running his 40 time outside, in 90 degree weather, on grass. While another guy at Texas is running inside an air conditioned facility on turf and the guy from Washington is running outside on turf with heavy wind.

There's also plenty of guys who ran track in college which may be a better interpretation of speed, but I don't how viable comparing something like 60m times to 40 yard dash times would be.

A guy could run 5 forty times and have one that is a 4.4 while the rest are all high 4.5's. I'd think that averaging out those five times would give a more accurate representation rather than taking the high end or low end and basing it off that.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by DeuceDouglas

I wasn't alluding to anything but how drastically things can change between the two. It just goes to show the somewhat randomness of forty times. At the combine, everything is more or less the same conditions wise. At pro days, conditions are going to be different pretty much across the board. A guy who played at Miami might be running his 40 time outside, in 90 degree weather, on grass. While another guy at Texas is running inside an air conditioned facility on turf and the guy from Washington is running outside on turf with heavy wind. There's also plenty of guys who ran track in college which may be a better interpretation of speed, but I don't how viable comparing something like 60m times to 40 yard dash times would be. A guy could run 5 forty times and have one that is a 4.4 while the rest are all high 4.5's. I'd think that averaging out those five times would give a more accurate representation rather than taking the high end or low end and basing it off that.

Well the conditions will always change, but for the sake of having something universal (the goal of FBG Ratings) what else would you prefer? Something that anyone with basic math skills can interpret or going off of the Ratings Czar's "eye test"? I would prefer the first option, so that is what I have done. I have at least 3 times for every player who ran and a maximum of 9 for some. Instead of keeping the average, I like to use the best VERIFIABLE time. This tends to get rid of the arguments of people claiming that players ran a "low time" or an unofficial time. This way, there is little wiggle-room. So long as all players are rated the same across the board, it works out. The SPD ratings and all other attributes are relative and viable if the same scale is used for everyone. This process has done that.

[caballero]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Alright all, another update is up. All players are rated as of yesterday evening. For this update, all players have NEW OVR ratings for the start of training camps. That includes rookies, who are all now rated. All attributes match the OVR ratings as well. Please keep the following in mind: 1. Injuries affect the OVR rating. See Suggs here: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=1790 You will note that his OVR is 45 because of his severe Achilles injury. If he gets back on the field this year, his rating will progress upward as his recovery progresses. He was a 40 in May but he is up to a 45 after word of him being off of crutches after surgery on June 12th. 2. Note that Suggs (like all players) does not have a profile pic. This is because I will be revamping all of the profile pictures this year to get them up to date. Many pics were from college for most of these players so I would like them all updated. This will be done later this summer before the start of the regular season. 3. Players who have special roster designations will appear with that designation next to their name on the roster list. Note Jerome Harrison at the bottom of the Lions roster here: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/vi...php?team=Lions Due to his injury, he is only a 40 OVR. If his injury progresses, his OVR will go up again. Keep in mind that both Suggs (from above) and Harrison have their OVR ratings affected by the injury status, albeit one is on the NFI and the other is not. Should you find some players with unusually low ratings, it is likely that they are injured or are recovering from an injury. 4. Rookies who are slotted as starters may not yet be rated higher than other players at their position. We all know that coaching staffs sometimes overlook sound, technical athletes with experience in lieu of younger, more athletic players. Look at the sorted Packer roster here: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/vi...=pos&order=ASC You will see that Nick Perry is a starter at ROLB, but his 71 OVR is lower than that of both Eric Walden and Frank Zombo at this position. This is one of the cases where the more athletic, but less polished, Perry is rated lower than players he is starting over. This is because his ability in the NFL is still unknown like other first-year players. Once he shows he can perform well, his OVR rating and subsequent attributes will go up. This process occurs during training camps, preseason games, and regular season games thereafter. The ratings change quite a bit, so I do not expect any players in these situations to stay rated where they are for long. Getting reps in camp with the starters and in preseason games will allow rookies to improve over their veteran counterparts. 5. Individual attributes for rookies will change. I had to work with some rookie data that was incomplete or questionable. As a result, I tended to rate on the side of caution for many rookies. THP and SAC/MAC/DAC/RUN/PAC attributes for some rookies may seem a bit low for rookie QBs. These are by far the most difficult attributes to maintain at high levels in the NFL (see Leaf, Banks, Carr, Russell). Once these rookies get some experience and can CONSISTENTLY show they are capable of completing passes at different levels with velocity at the NFL level, their attributes will increase. Once again, this can happen as early as training camp depending on the reports of how the individual is performing. The physical attributes for scrambling/ATH QBs may seem high as they may be relying too heavily on their raw ability coming out of college. This will be more properly adjusted as the season continues. See Robert Griffin for an example of this: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=82836 I trust his THP and all accuracy ratings will go up quickly while his ball carrying skills may drop. It's a process so please bear with me. 6. INJ/TGH ratings may appear low for some rookies. As they progress, these ratings will increase once they can consistently show they can stay healthy/get over injuries at the NFL level. 7. Consistency is very important. Players are rated high because they consistently grade out high over a prolonged period of time. 8. Ratings are NOT a function of statistics. See Jordy Nelson: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=12364 Last season Nelson acquired 68 catches for 1263 yards and 15 TDs, yet he is only an 82 OVR. This is because Nelson is limited in his some of his raw attributes as well as attributes that govern his run after the catch. Unlike EA, I will not simply increase a players attributes because he is performing well statistically. If I do not see it on film or in the scouting reports provided, I will not increase a player. Nelson had a great year running 3 routes; the back-shoulder fade, the post, and the go. His troubles with drops have been documented. As a result, he is rated according to what the scouting data tells me aside from the typical NFL statistics. Nelson can still be a very reliable player in game and can achieve good stats so long as you use him like he is used in real life. Expect good ability to run a route and get open, but little as for running after the catch for long gains if he is in tight coverage. These need to be demonstrated consistently in order for them to be adjusted. 9. Players may have some attributes increased because they can play multiple positions and have in the NFL. See Brad Smith: http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=8407 Smith is both a QB and KR/WR for the Bills. His AWR is 99 because of his ability to play all 3 positions effectively. Ask any former QB turned WR or vice-versus if playing one of these positions in the past helps you gain an edge at the other (see Woodson, Tannehill, Webb). If Smith gets into the depth chart as ONLY a QB at some point, expect his AWR to drop but his THP and accuracy ratings to rise. As of right now, that 99 AWR won't do much good with Smith as a QB, however, due to his SAC of 70, MAC of 64, DAC of 74, RUN of 68, and PAC of 56. If he and like players make a permanent position switch, they will be rated accordingly at that time. 10. I will take on any questions regarding the ratings. Should you find something anomalous or erroneous, please feel free to PM or write me an email as listed on the website. I have over 18000 players online currently and some things can be missed at times. Feel free to open up the discussion. I will NOT, however, answer any posts/messages/emails that are an attempt to flame those who develop or use the FBG ratings. I understand that this is not a system for everyone, but it works for me and some others around here so please be respectful for the amount of work by several individuals involved in this project. The next round of updates will come in early August and will be on a monthly basis from here on out throughout the season. Enjoy the pre-training-camp ratings and have a nice 4th of July.

1. like every good cook, I'm sure you won't reveal your secrets (if you're willing to, my PM box is open lol), but what would be Suggs rating if he was 100% ?

Justin Smith's ?

2. Do you need help with this?

3. would you need consulting/updating with this? I pay a lot of attention to the NFL and have a good memory... example: Dontay Moch, Bengals LB, is suspended 4g (doesn't show on FBG), Brody Eldrige, Rams TE as well.

4. (& 8.) are big reasons why I've been frequenting your site for years, even being a Packers fan, no homerism! Donny falls in love with a guy/was impressed with player/team's MNF showing? he'll boost all relevant position attributes to 90 or more smh

5. they'll go down lol

10.
-K Gano (Redskins) is way too high, there's a reason they signed Rackers, who you have rated identically (82)... Gano missed 10 field goals in 2011, 74.4 career FG%, Rackers 79.8.
You had him at 78, no idea why you raised him...

-For http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=68110
& http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=58089
Kick power is off, these guys regularly hit touchbacks, Masthay's a 96 KP on the other side?
McAfee 44.5 career gross, Masthay 44.6, Morstead 45.8. You went all Donny on us

-I like his http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=1074
overall, but 89KP (for a guy with 50+ gross average???) and 98 KA (for a guy who never was a directional punter) is mixed up, isn't it? A guy with a high KA wouldn't have that big of a gap between gross and net IRL.

-Rocca (87) as good as Lechler??? Sav's career gross 42.9, Lechler 47.6

-He http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=8482
is a very good punter, but 99 KA? that's Feagles/Robopunter territory there! and what Mr Moore has him rated lol

-http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=20188 made a 60 yard FG, that's deserving of more than 91 KP

-http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=403 is the king of touchbacks, yet only 92 KP?

- http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=85408
started 13 games in 2011: http://www.nfl.com/player/davidcaldwell/2507959/profile
can you "fix" his 45 rating?

[at23steelers]

Glad I checked the forums again to see this!! Good job Dcebb, after all the countless hours you spent on this in the past few years, you've finally caught up. Have to commend you bro, for sticking strong to your passion and not giving up, even when the tides seemed rough with the EA interview and Donny inexplicably changing the ratings format!!

With that said, now onto my analysis of my team:

- After countless debates with you, you put Ike at an 87 overall!! Thought last season might change your mind about him.

- I agree with most of the ratings, going to delve deeper later, but on the surface looks pretty good. Mendenhall at a 75 overall shows you don't think the injury is too serious, which is good to see.

- Maybe to me a few guys need a few overall points docked higher or lower, but I trust what you researched. Only guy that really made me pause was Cortez Allen being a 58 overall. He didn't show too much last year with his injury and all, but showed he can play well when called upon. I guess I'll just have to wait til he plays well for the whole season and see his overall increase dramatically like I witnessed with Ike Taylor.

Bravo Man!!

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by caballero

1. like every good cook, I'm sure you won't reveal your secrets (if you're willing to, my PM box is open lol), but what would be Suggs rating if he was 100% ? Justin Smith's ? 2. Do you need help with this? 3. would you need consulting/updating with this? I pay a lot of attention to the NFL and have a good memory... example: Dontay Moch, Bengals LB, is suspended 4g (doesn't show on FBG), Brody Eldrige, Rams TE as well. 4. (& 8.) are big reasons why I've been frequenting your site for years, even being a Packers fan, no homerism! Donny falls in love with a guy/was impressed with player/team's MNF showing? he'll boost all relevant position attributes to 90 or more smh 5. they'll go down lol 10. -K Gano (Redskins) is way too high, there's a reason they signed Rackers, who you have rated identically (82)... Gano missed 10 field goals in 2011, 74.4 career FG%, Rackers 79.8. You had him at 78, no idea why you raised him... -For http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=68110 & http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=58089 Kick power is off, these guys regularly hit touchbacks, Masthay's a 96 KP on the other side? McAfee 44.5 career gross, Masthay 44.6, Morstead 45.8. You went all Donny on us -I like his http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=1074 overall, but 89KP (for a guy with 50+ gross average???) and 98 KA (for a guy who never was a directional punter) is mixed up, isn't it? A guy with a high KA wouldn't have that big of a gap between gross and net IRL. -Rocca (87) as good as Lechler??? Sav's career gross 42.9, Lechler 47.6 -He http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=8482 is a very good punter, but 99 KA? that's Feagles/Robopunter territory there! and what Mr Moore has him rated lol -http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=20188 made a 60 yard FG, that's deserving of more than 91 KP -http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=403 is the king of touchbacks, yet only 92 KP? - http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=85408 started 13 games in 2011: http://www.nfl.com/player/davidcaldwell/2507959/profile can you "fix" his 45 rating?

1. For Suggs and Smith, you will have to wait until the next update.

2. No help needed. It is just a matter of time until I get the correct program to update everything. My webmaster is working on this presently.

3. Suspensions will appear when the players are scheduled to miss games. As of right now those players can still partake in training camps so they are not on the suspended lists. All the info I get is updated daily and automatically to each profile so no help is needed.

10. Since statistics do not determine the ratings, Gano can still have a high accuracy. However, his lower AWR rating will affect the effectiveness of the KAC rating.

The attributes measure the "perfect potential" for a skill. The same follows for the other kickers you listed. The scouting data I rely on disagrees with your assesment. Merely looking at one stat like Touchbacks vs. field goal length potential can mislead. Many kickers can kick a ball 60+ yards but how many can make it through the uprights. Just an example of the "FG made from 60+ yards" theory being a bit misleading.

As for Caldwell, games started also does not mean he was worthy of a higher rating. Despite starting 13 games last year he is still 3rd on the Colts depth chart at SS. You would think if he was better than a 45 he would be higher than 3rd at SS after a season of starting 13 games without an INT and only 4 passes deflected. Just saying.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by at23steelers

Glad I checked the forums again to see this!! Good job Dcebb, after all the countless hours you spent on this in the past few years, you've finally caught up. Have to commend you bro, for sticking strong to your passion and not giving up, even when the tides seemed rough with the EA interview and Donny inexplicably changing the ratings format!! With that said, now onto my analysis of my team: - After countless debates with you, you put Ike at an 87 overall!! Thought last season might change your mind about him. - I agree with most of the ratings, going to delve deeper later, but on the surface looks pretty good. Mendenhall at a 75 overall shows you don't think the injury is too serious, which is good to see. - Maybe to me a few guys need a few overall points docked higher or lower, but I trust what you researched. Only guy that really made me pause was Cortez Allen being a 58 overall. He didn't show too much last year with his injury and all, but showed he can play well when called upon. I guess I'll just have to wait til he plays well for the whole season and see his overall increase dramatically like I witnessed with Ike Taylor. Bravo Man!!

Taylor had a solid season and is worthy of his rating at this point in his career. Allen will have to show some consistency and Mendenhall will be back to full strength soon. I'll keep you updated with anything else that changes with the next update before preseason games start in August. By that time more injuries should be clear, while other players will accrue more of them. That's the fun thing about the NFL...it never stops changing.

[NicVirtue]

I have 1 question and 1 question only. What slider settings do these rating work best on?

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by NicVirtue

I have 1 question and 1 question only. What slider settings do these rating work best on?

That is up to the individual. I always use the custom skill sets to determine my sliders. So to say there is only one slider set for these would not be accurate.