Madden NFL 15: Top Rookies

[urlacher51]

Franchise play interview with Donnie Moore.

[KLima878]

Blake Bortles is slower than the Offensive Linemen?

[RogueHominid]

One conceptual category it would be nice to learn more about, relative to the stuff DCEBB is bringing up about ratings in general, and in the context of rookie ratings specifically, since that's the topic of the thread, is the idea of "league average" talent.

So that phrase, at least for me, is more associated with baseball than football, but what it does in baseball anyway is provide the notion that you should be content with a player in your starting lineup who is league average or better at several things, though perhaps not everything.

With this idea in mind, you don't necessarily want or need a roster full of 90+ guys; you can, in fact, have a VERY productive roster with several guys in the 70s and some in the 60s, depending on their skill sets and how you use them.

The league average system, if we can call it that, tends to level out ratings and lower them on the whole because it doesn't fetishize the notion that players have to be elite to be fun to use or to be realistic.

One way this could play out with regard to rookie ratings is we could try to generate a "league average" rating for footwork in zone--i.e. what level of technical skill in getting to a zone and policing its inhabitants do we expect of NFL starters? NFL backups? And then what percentage of rookies should possess that league-average ability in year one? How quickly should they progress toward and surpass the league average rating in their early careers?

That's just one example, and it's limited, but you get the point. I think having more of a baseball attitude toward ratings would be good, and defining ideas like league average could be useful starting points for discussions about ratings, rookie and otherwise.

I want Mack to be a stud, but how polished should his pass rush move arsenal be at this stage? Hand use and secondary move use typically come with some NFL coaching, not right out of the gate, so I'd love to see him at or below the league average rating for power and fines moves with some raw physical skills that suggest the ability to improve with good coaching and dedication.

[Robrain]

Quote: Originally Posted by urlacher51

Franchise play interview with Donnie Moore.

How nice of Donnie to confirm that height and weight are meaningless in Madden.

(Donnie talking about DT Aaron Donald) "So coming into Madden, he's gonna have 81 SPD as a DT, which is the fastest in the league..."

(Donnie goes on about how he's got 81 SPD, and tied with Suh with 82 AGI, and 93 STR)

"...The only knock on him, right, was that he's only 6 foot, 280 lbs, BUT IN MADDEN, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS HE'S GOT THE RATINGS AND THE MEASURABLES, THAT DOESN'T MATTER, HIS HEIGHT DOESN'T MATTER WHATSOEVER."

"the guy can rush the passer, and he's good against the run"

Appalling.

[Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Robrain

How nice of Donnie to confirm that height and weight are meaningless in Madden.

I thought this was already pretty well known, that the ratings drive everything and that height / weight are purely cosmetic. I suppose not...?

Which to me makes some sense. Why should a 300-lb player with 99 STR be stronger than a 200-lb player with 99 STR? They both have 99 STR, that should mean the same thing across all players. If the 300-lb player should be stronger, how much stronger? It just strikes me as a unwieldy game balancing can of worms best left closed.

[BFem09]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mos1ted

This is why I wish they would eliminate ratings in sports games -- or at least hide the ratings and have them play out under the hood. We live in the age of daily and weekly roster updates. Any ratings that any sports games put out prior to release are going to change once the regular season starts anyway. It just seems like a waste of time to me. I mean, I understand the motive and the hype machine being built here, but still...

for people (like myself) that play the game solely for online franchise, the ratings are a huge deal.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

I thought this was already pretty well known, that the ratings drive everything and that height / weight are purely cosmetic. I suppose not...? Which to me makes some sense. Why should a 300-lb player with 99 STR be stronger than a 200-lb player with 99 STR? They both have 99 STR, that should mean the same thing across all players. If the 300-lb player should be stronger, how much stronger? It just strikes me as a unwieldy game balancing can of worms best left closed.

Stronger no, even if they bench press the same it still would be much easier for the guard to move the 200lb CB than it would be to move the 300lb DT. Weight does mean something (in real life).

[NDAlum]

So disheartening that HT/WT don't matter.


Sent from my iPhone 5