Potential Rating. Keep it or Get rid of it? How about a compromise?

[D0NTSH0OTME]

I have been viewing alot of threads regarding the potential rating lately, and they have gotten me thinking. There seem to be two sides to this issue, those that are in favor of a performance-based-progression (PBP) system, and those in favor of the current hard cap system implemented in Madden.

The arguement for a PBP is that if a player has a great statistical season, their ratings should improve in accordance to their performance and not be limited by a "hard cap". An example being if a QB throws for 4000 yards, 35 TDs, and 10 INTs with a 65% completion percentage, he should not be stuck at a 75 ovr just because that is what his potential limits him to.

The arguement for the hard cap system is that:
1.) If players don't perform well statistically during a season due to being a product of the system, their ratings will drop in a PBP format even though they shouldn't. This goes hand in hand with players that overproduce statistically due to being a product of the system, their ratings may improve to a level they should not.
2.) If players had no limit to their overall ratings, the league could become unrealistically skilled.

My idea is that the potential rating should still be implemented in the game, but it should be used in a sense that applies to what the word actually means. The definition of potential is "1. The inherent ability or capacity for growth, development, or coming into being." No where in this definition are the words ceiling or limit used. Potential should be used not as an impediment of progression, but as a modifier to it. What I mean is that potential should determine "how much" a player progresses, not "to what extent". An example being if a QB with an A potential and a 75 overall throws for 4000 yards, 35 TDs, and 10 INTs with a 65% completion percentage, he would recieve a large ratings boost (10+?) overall. Now take the same season but apply that to a player with a C potential. He would still progress, but he would not recieve as large of a boost (5-10?) to his ratings as the player with an A potential saw. This format allows players to improve based upon their performance, but takes into account players who may perform at a statistically high level due to being a product of the system.

[Glorious Arc]

The literal definition of potential doesnt do it justice to what we use it in football. When we say a player "Flashes" potential that means he shows he has the ability to be amazing. When using potential in sports we tend to mean how good a player can become not how well said person can grow.

Really your definition provided could be used against your argument of what potential means. The word inherent can mean "in the nature of something though not readily apparent. An underlying meaning" That would be the exact definition of potential in sports. We know that a player could have hidden talent that he has yet to obtain.

The term to how well a player can develop is "Work Ethic"(capacity of growth, development, coming into being). You can have all the potential in the world but if you dont have work ethic then you wont ever reach your max potential. This is why players with good work ethics are valued over people who may have great potential.(The raiders are the outliner in this because of Russel lol)

What happens often enough though, players with good work ethic can only become so good until they reach their max potential. At that point they are as good as they will ever be. They lack the god given talent to become true HOF rated players. To be a HOF rated player you need an amazing work ethic and potential.

[JohnnyNutman]

just because a player has a great statistical year doesnt mean he has greater "potential".

look at matt cassel: great numbers last year with the pats, but has struggled so far with the chiefs.

people overlook the fact that these low rated players play well cos of other factors (not including difficulty level). it might be cos of the talent around them on the field and/or the coaching schemes that have made an impact over said numbers. essentially they are just "system players".

also, the system u proposed is essentially what it is in the game. players with high potential improve (ratings wise) higher at the end of the year than lower ones. if a player has an 85 rating, then their ratings will improve significantly more if they are an A potential player as a opposed to a "D" potential player. there isnt really a hard cap at all. ive had low potential players improve - just at a much lower rate.

that been said, this system is flawed when applied to real life players cos no one can tell what their potential is. no one expected tom brady to win super bowls before he was drafted. it works fine for created players cos they dont have to represent a real player.

[Richieh]

The comprimise you describe is how the game works now, albeit that it does not over react to statistically stupendous seasons.

[pilonv1]

I would hide it completely, or make it only visible after the player has played a certain number of games/downs/snaps whatever. If I draft an 86 QB how should I know he hasn an A potential in the NFL before he's taken a snap?

Just give the option for hiding potential. I'd also like everyones ratings hidden until you scout/play them too, but that's another thread.

[D0NTSH0OTME]

Quote: Originally Posted by Richieh

The comprimise you describe is how the game works now, albeit that it does not over react to statistically stupendous seasons.

No it is not the same. The system in the game puts a limit on how high a player can progress. Players in Madden 2010 cannot progress past a certain rating that is determined by their potential. For example, a player with a mid B level potential cannot progress past an 85 overall. I am suggesting that the potential rating should be used to modify the amount a player progresses, not to put a limit on it.

[Richieh]

Quote: Originally Posted by D0NTSH0OTME

No it is not the same. The system in the game puts a limit on how high a player can progress. Players in Madden 2010 cannot progress past a certain rating that is determined by their potential. For example, a player with a mid B level potential cannot progress past an 85 overall. I am suggesting that the potential rating should be used to modify the amount a player progresses, not to put a limit on it.

Where have you heard confirmation of a "hard cap" ?

Potential certainly has a kind of multiplier affect on progression.
Players with high potential can get some progression without performance and lots of progression with stats.
Players with low potential can still get progression if they put up big numbers.

[teambayern]

What about a PES style progression of giving each player a curve for their lifetime, and you can go above or below it based on performance, but only so far? Also, there is an option to make those curves inaccessible to the user.

This system is nice in that it offers much more variability. Instead of just A's and B's, you ahve alte bloomers, early stars, ect.