Madden NFL 13 Player Ratings - Top 10 Running Backs

[splff3000]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I guess because the small point differential according to the voting results won't effect the OVR enough to matter or they are just basing it off of the current prevote ratings. My question is what does this OVR mean because in CC the OVR is team specific. So are the OVR being revealed based on each players current team's value or something else entirely? Meaning the Raiders wuld have a higher OVR for McFadden due to his speed than for Steven Jackson or some other slower back, that would put McFadden into the top 10, as far as the Raiders are concerned. These are the kind of "inkblot" tactics EA/Tiburon does with Madden that can be frustrating because it becomes about "what do you think it should mean" without ever revealing what they intend for it to be.

McFadden will always be top 10 to me lol.

[Dirk504]

Quit hating on Frank Gore's rating. He carried an offense last year that relied on running the ball first to a 13-3 record. His rating is deserving... unless you don't follow the Niners.

[kevin23]

I can't wait until my boy CJ2K makes everyone who doesn't have him top 10 look like a fool. He is good for 1300+ yards this year.

[Joobieo]

Quote: Originally Posted by shavane

This list is fundamentally flawed because there appears to be no rhyme or reason for the 0-100 scale. A 97+ rating should be reserved for a player thats had a hall of fame type carreer or is for a once in a generation type player. This is that special player that comes along every 5 to 10 years and if you go position by position you'll see this holds true. Take wide receiver for example..there have been some very good ones only a select few who's freakish athletism and playmaking abilities make them once in a decade type players. Think Fitzgerald, Moss, T.O. and now Calvin Johnson. When your talking RBs, Peterson is about the only back thats come along in the last few years that fits this freakish mode. He has the blend of size, speed, and agility to warrant 97+ rtgs in all the major categories. The problem is he is coming off a major injury so if you want tru to life ratings he should be a 90-92 at most. If your using a 97+ rating for elite players or freakish physical atttributes than looking at this list most of these running backs should rate in the lower 90 higher 80 rating. There are a few on this list who are working on HOF type careers Rice, MJD, hopefully Mccoy. If I had to sit down and actually do a rating it would go like this it takes into account how they rate against the best ever, last years season, and athletic ability. Sure CJ has 99 spd but he really had a down year overall. #1 Maurice Jones-Drew - 96 monster back, highly productive, consistent, done it for years pay that man!!! #2 Ray Rice - 95 overachiever, highly productive, good vision, power, best hands out of this group #3 Arian Foster - 95 great vision, power, benifits from great line we will see this year lost some good OL. #4 LeSean Mccoy - 94 shiftiest back since Sanders, great speed and vision home run threat #5 Adrian Peterson - 92 physical freak, speed, power, vision, Jim Brown clone only faster #6 Matt Forte - 91 good vision, productive receiver and rusher consistent #7 Frank Gore - 91 tough,tough, back runner blocker receiver, can carry a offense #8 Steven Jackson - 90 bruising animal of a back, great runner underated receiver, a load to bring down #9 Fred Jackson - 90 overlooked sneaky good player, great vision, good lean falls forward he is the truth #10 Chris Johnson - 89 freakish speed good vision. Charles needs to return from injury and will easily crack the top ten. Michael Turner still productive but he is on the downslide and I see him hitting the proverbial running back wall fast. Big backs drop off fast and he is on the decline. Mcfadden??? I'm laughing at anyone thats putting him close to the top 10. He is very physically gifted but has done nothing. He's had 4 good games and is a injury waiting to happen..he is better than Felix Jones though.

Best post on here .

Your rating are almost exactly what I was going to say . Big backs do fall off fast , they can only take a beating so long before they become ineffective . You need a mix of both to be an elite RB.

[jaynral]

First off, those ratings are WAAAAYYY too high. i dont see no RB in the nfl over a 95. Thats just my opinion especially when u put legends in the game.. BUT most important about this video is the animations!!!,, 1) those animations to me didnt look new engine, 2) based off that video, they made 430 WR animation but only like 10 for RB and 3) no RB ran like he do in real life and actually all had the same running styles....what yall think?

[balcobomber25]

The problem with these ratings debates is most people are comparing apples to oranges. Everyone keeps bringing up the same tired argument along the lines of a 95 or higher is reserved to once in a lifetime players that belong in the hall of fame. If they were compiling a list ranking the all time greats that argument might apply but they are not they are simply ranking the BEST IN THE GAME TODAY on a scale of 0-100 with 0 being the absolute worst and 100 being the best at his position. Everyone is trying to make this into something that it is not.

[Willt_16]

So Madden sayn that cj2k is not a top ten running back lol what a joke

[cardinals57]

I wish Madden did ratings like Fifa does, have the best players in the game around low 90's( I think Messi is a 94) and then good to great players in the 80's. IMO the only people who should be getting 96-99 are the greatest players the game has ever seen. You'd have your Sanders, Rice, Unitas type players as high 90's because they are some of the best players to ever play the game.