Madden 2010 News Post

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

07:53 PM - February 9, 2009 by Ian_Cummings

Hey guys, we thought it would be a perfect time to share something that I am personally very excited about for Madden NFL 10. We took each and every rating in the game (over 50+ player ratings) and scaled them up/down in a way that is now using much more of the scale. I like to describe it around the office like this…”We basically stretched out the ratings.” We want to use more of the numbers so we get a bigger, more noticeable affect in the game.

Let me give you guys an example….in Madden NFL 09 all of the WR’s Route Running ratings ranged from 62-99. In the current Madden NFL 10 build, WR’s now check in from 35-99. To counter this on the defensive side, all CB’s in Madden NFL 09 had a Man Coverage rating which ranged from 64-99. Now in Madden NFL 10, CB’s Man Coverage range is currently 40-99.

Every position and every rating has been re-scaled to expand the range of numbers we are dealing with. The Overall Rating for your average NFL player has dropped. Your Joe Average linebacker who was 80 OVR is now dropped down to 70. The players who were before right on the cusp of 90 in a rating category are now down around 85-88…Meaning, there are fewer superstar players out there. Before, where you could maybe get by throwing to your slot WR who had 93 SPD, with 74 ROUTES, and 77 Catching…now in Madden NFL 10, that guy is going to have like 91 SPD, 60-65 ROUTES and anywhere from 65-70 Catching. Let me tell you, these rating drops make a big difference when that slot rookie WR with 90+ speed now drops every 3rd pass or so, or just simply cannot get open.
The superstars have not been affected however, this is intentional. Peyton is still 99 OVR, Patrick Willis a 99, Larry Fitz is 99, etc. The elite players at rating categories have not been affected either (JaMarcus Russell still has a 98 Throw Power and Chris Johnson still rated 99 Speed). [Side note: One of my personal goals is to have the actual NFL players in Madden NFL 10 look like their real-life counterparts and play to their strengths and weaknesses like never before in a football video game.]

Speaking of the Speed, which is always a hot topic, we made some major changes with the infamous SPD rating as well. To give you a great example, I will again go back to WR and CB. In Madden NFL 09, the WR SPD range was 85-100…CB was 87-99.

In Madden NFL 10, WR SPD range is currently 70-100…CB is currently 75-99. So as you may or may not tell, the SPD range has been pushed down, in our opinions, to better reflect the “sim-gameplay” style that Ian and Phil have been telling you about all winter long. This SPD change has been updated for each position, so it makes a huge game play affect.

Ian and I had a game the other day where Earnest Graham broke one up the middle for a 55 yard touchdown run… and he could not be caught!…E-Grahams’ Madden NFL 10 current SPD rating….80 SPD. That should give you a good sense of what is possible with the new ratings. It’s not all about having the 90+ SPD anymore. On this particular run, Ian’s CB’s got hung up against some blockers and all I had to do was beat one safety and Graham was gone! He had Brandon Jacobs and his 85 SPD breaking some long runs as well. On the flip side of bigger/slower backs, Chris Johnson is absolutely lethal right now. You can actually get him outside with sweeps now and he is a beast to stop. But again, we are constantly tuning the gameplay, we have an entire team dedicated to that and they are some of the best people we have in the building.

So there you have it, player ratings are in for a major overhaul this year and I am really excited already with the impact they are having on the early builds of the game. And rest assured, we are well aware of the outside impacts this will have….Rookies will now come into the league based on the new ranges, NCAA Import guys are being tuned as well…Progression has been accounted for as well to better reflect breakout stars and burned-out former stars. Meaning, we want to have bigger jumps in OVR this year, both positive and negative. That’s all for now, probably gave away too much already!

Would love to hear any feedback about this big new change in the way we do player ratings. I’d be happy to answer any questions regarding the new rating ranges….please no individual ratings questions, not answering those! Stay tuned for more Madden player rating related blogs in the future!

- Donny Moore – Madden NFL 10 Designer

Game: Madden NFL 10Reader Score: 7.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Wii / Xbox 360Votes for game: 76 - View All

Madden NFL 10 Videos

Member Comments

# 241 alliance4g63 @ 02/11/09 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donny_Moore


	Calvin Johnson should be fun at least. You are talking about an 0-16 team, first of it's kind. I believe the expectation (and rightfully so IMO) from most people who care to dabble in this kind of thing, I think that expectation for the Lions in Madden 10 the video game is for them to be the very worst of all 32 teams in the league. I'm talking clear-cut, 32 of 32. And on paper, aside from Megatron as mention above, the Lions will be pretty bad. Kevin Smith will get a nice bump, he shows signs which is OK, but then you have first round pick Gosder Cherilus....he had a Joe Average year, so he's not much to build around. Ernie Sims is the one nice thing on defense, not much else to get excited about. Name the Lions Corners. See what I mean... Your turn, now you tell me. If you had two average, evenly matched All-Pro Mode players playing against each other....And they went heads up Steelers vs Lions....each getting to be the Steelers 5 times...what would you EXPECT/WANT the Madden 10 results to be? Would you want a 50/50 (5-5) Detroit/Pittsburgh split? A 10-0 Steelers sweep? I have a very strong opinion on this one (as you may or may not tell from this post). Would love to hear where everyone stands on this!

I understand what you are saying here but you also have to take into account the real world vs the videogame world. The Lions in real life could be a player or coach away from being a better team. If I can use my few star players better than my opponent can use his whole team of star players, the win/loss gap should shorten.

Prime example, I used to use the Cowboys in Nfl2k5 while most were using the Pats, Ravens..etc.. Sure I would get those "free" giveaways just because I was playing against the Pats but guess what? I just focused on playing mistake free football and that is how I won the majority of those games. Testerverde couldn't throw more than 30 yards, so guess what? I didn't try to throw over 30 yards.

That is what I feel the previous guys are talking about. I'm already penalized for using a 0-16 team vs the Superbowl champs, we understand that. But if the Steeler user wants to always go for it on 4th down, throw off his back foot, throw into triple coverage, or come out in dime defense when I'm in a Jumbo package, we should win those games easily if we can capitalize on their continuous mistakes.

# 242 thudias @ 02/11/09 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BezO


	Absoulutely! Hide them, something, but I hated scrolling through unecessary ratings. And if they do include these irrelevent ratings in the overall formula, they should remove them. I think I'd prefer absolute ratings that stuck with a player from team to team so I could determine his value on a particular team and in different schemes. What exactly governs the ratings? Would that undersized LB have higher ratings on all Cover 2 teams? Will he hold his value if his current team changes their defensive philosophy? Does he maintain that higher value when I run man defenses with that Cover 2 team? Are all of his ratings boosted on teams that value him more? Does he cover better, have more speed, ect? I never played HC if you can't tell.

After an injury, lets say a QB. If you sign one off the street will his overall be at it's lowest point based on not knowing the offense?
----
Any player should not be signed off the street and be able to come in and start for a team. (unfamiliar with the playbook, conditioning etc. etc.)
-----------------------------------

Answer: Players off the street will struggle coming on to your team if they don't know the playbook. There is a chance they'll make mistakes during the game and they won't play as well as they would if they knew the play.

We have the same core player ratings. What we changed was how the overall rating was calculated. Several grades (like real NFL scouts use) now make up the overall rating. They are Athletic (physical skills like speed), Intangibles (mental skills like awareness), Durability (how healthy a player is), Learning (how quickly a player learns and retains information), Potential (how good the player can get if everything works out in his career) and Size (does the player fit the classic mold at the position). We also use a different system to determine a player's value to the team, which in conjunction with their overall grade, determines how valuable they are in free agency or trades. Value is determined by overall, upside (remaining potential), contract value (is he overpaid, paid just right or underpaid) and playbook knowledge (how much does he know of your playbook).

From HC developer's Q and A thread.

There is actually one that goes into more detail of player value but I couldn't find it.

# 243 youALREADYknow @ 02/11/09 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BezO


	And if they do include these irrelevent ratings in the overall formula, they should remove them.

They aren't in the OVR formula.

# 244 RogueHominid @ 02/11/09 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by swaldo


	I still like APF2K8 ratings better - so simple and makes it easy to scout your opponent or build a team to the style you want. Tuning gameplay would also be easier that way rather than constantly fiddling with tons of numerical ratings.

I agree completely, but it doesn't seem to go over in this neck of the woods. The team is all about differentiating players, but seems reticent to go the signature ability/signature animation package and continues to maintain a fundamental commitment to the numerical ratings system. It is what it is; the difference is not procedural, it's ideological.

# 245 Layoneil @ 02/11/09 03:18 PM

there are too many players in the NFL for an emphasis on signature ability/animation packages. it's too much work for too little benefit. what signatures will do is pigeonhole players into using only those teams that have signature players.

it's also difficult to apply to franchise mode when you start drafting players. how would they come about getting signature abilities and animations? do they start off with them out of the gate? do they progress into them? how would they progress into them? does every drafted player with a certain stat progress into them? would it be random?

# 246 RogueHominid @ 02/11/09 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layoneil


	there are too many players in the NFL for an emphasis on signature ability/animation packages. it's too much work for too little benefit. what signatures will do is pigeonhole players into using only those teams that have signature players. it's also difficult to apply to franchise mode when you start drafting players. how would they come about getting signature abilities and animations? do they start off with them out of the gate? do they progress into them? how would they progress into them? does every drafted player with a certain stat progress into them? would it be random?

Not sure I agree here. It's actually less work than giving every player 20 individual ratings, as individual players may be characterized by one or two abilities, some by five, and some by none at all (there are tons of nondescript guys in the NFL).

The issue of the yield/benefit being too little is questionable. The benefit is an emphasis on on-field capabilities, not a set of abstract numbers that have to be plugged into an equation, balanced, and then used to trigger a result that is often times boggling.

As for pigeon-holing players into using teams with the highest number of players with the highest number of abilities, from what I understand it, people online only run with one of 4 or 5 teams anyway, so it's not like that scenario would get worse. And in fact, if real signature styles were carried out, some of those teams might be less popular.

And to your last point about the draft, you would have to begin from the notion that the current system is somewhere close to functional. It's not. The rookies from NCAA have created all kinds of problems, and however they're generated, it's not like the importation of draft classes produces the kind of balance you're looking for. Signature abilities would have to be distributed in some way, sure, but the "problem" is the same for numerical ratings, and has yet to be solved using that system.

So while I think there are valid objections against this system, I don't see the logic to any of the ones you raise.

Honestly, I think it's a matter of taste--people have been so long accustomed to numerical ratings that they're loath to see them go, even if they don't work properly or don't make the most sense given what the team wants to do.

# 247 acts238shaun @ 02/11/09 03:51 PM

Ian, I was thinking about this exact thing the other day watching Larry Fitzgerald leave the entire Steeler secondary near the end of the Super Bowl. I was curious as to each players 40 time, namely because Fitz 'separated' from the Steelers pursuit like an alley cat fleeing a dog pound. Later on I played Madden 09 and timkered with a few of the players to see what the difference was in the ratings and how each rating affected the player. I gave Carnell Williams 99 speed and agility, but zero acceleration. I left Graham's speed alone and gave him 99 agility (to be equal) and acceleration. I went into practice mode (offense only at first) and ran a few sweeps and iso's with each one to see if there was any difference between the two backs, and there a slight difference. I inserted the defense and the difference between the two magnified. Graham was visibly slower than Williams, whether it was on a sweep or between the tackles. I left practice mode and changed Graham to 99 speed, thinking that his 99 speed and acceleration would be better than Williams's 99 and zero. Nope. They were exactly the same as far as in-game. Simming games for a season each as the starting back, Graham's ypc was great and Williams's wasn't (had a 2 yards avg.). I practiced with defensive players the same way. Some with limited speed and maxed acceleration and some at no acceleration and maxed speed. The defenders with max speed caught guys with higher acceleration just the same. Corners stayed with receivers, linebackers tracked down backs, and the line rushed exaclty the same. Excluding agility, the only movement based attribute variable that mattered during gameplay was the speed category. To sum it up, acceleration during gameplay means nothing, as the speed rating on Madden 09 seems to be both the initial speed and maximum speed at the same time. The player runs as fast at the start of a play as he does at the end, assuming he runs a straight line. The agility rating does significantly effect turning and cutting.

I think a rating category called "speed" is too generic. I think back to the old SNES Tecmo Bowl games and there were ratings for running speed, max. speed, agility, and acceleration (which meant in that game how fast they got from initial to max speed). I'm not saying that was the greatest way to do it, but it gave me an idea to break up the different applications of speed.

A guy may run a 4.2 40, but what is he in the 20 yard and 60 yard dash? If he is 2.5 seconds in the first 20, that means he ran the last 20 at 1.7 seconds, showing good acceleration. At that pace he would run it in around six seconds. The first twenty yards reflects take off and initail burst, the second twenty acceleration from initial burst to top speed and the third would be actual straight line speed. Of course how often do football players get to top speed or run 60 yards? But that is a completely different subject.

Basically, break up the speed rating itself into two diferent categories. Have one rating for beginning/initial speed and another for top speed. Let acceleration be the measure of how fast a player takes to get from beginning to top speed. I think by doing that you will see more of a difference between the Earnest Graham's and the Chris Johnson's. You will also see a difference in how a defender 'closes' on the ball carrier, how the pass rushers pick up speed and how someone like a Ray Lewis or Warren Sapp can catch a 'faster' ball carrier from behind or beat them to the sideline. In that instance acceleration would matter. Oh, and for what it's worth ditch the turbo button concept in Madden 10.

Anyway, I looked up the 40 times on the Steelers defensive backs and on Fitzgerald to see if the 40 time mattered on that play. Fitz ran around a 4.5-4.7 various times while much of the Steeler secondary ran 4.2-4.6 (Ike Taylor ran Deion-like sub 4.2 if I remember). I guess Larry Fitzgerald hit the turbo button on that play, lol.

# 248 rhombic21 @ 02/11/09 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	No matter what garbage they choose to show you in game menus, there will ALWAYS be numbers that define a player's performance in video games. These are computers we're talking about people. Will people please stop asking for numeric ratings to end. I've even seen people foolishly ask for a "star" rating system in place of the 1-100 scale. What makes someone think that a 5 point scale will be more accurate than a 100 point scale? Do you really think there are only 100 variations of speed between all football players, let alone 5? Just stop the rating system bashing.

I agree with this post completely.

Even with 2K's system, there's some sort of underlying numerical ratings that is happening, it's just not shown directly to the user.

The problem with both Madden and NCAA is essentially the fact that they have 20+ ratings, but that a lot of those ratings don't seem to actually do anything to effect play on the field. The numerical system is not the problem. The problem is that the ratings are unbalanced, in terms of which ones matter.

# 249 BezO @ 02/11/09 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thudias


	After an injury, lets say a QB. If you sign one off the street will his overall be at it's lowest point based on not knowing the offense? ---- Any player should not be signed off the street and be able to come in and start for a team. (unfamiliar with the playbook, conditioning etc. etc.) ----------------------------------- Answer: Players off the street will struggle coming on to your team if they don't know the playbook. There is a chance they'll make mistakes during the game and they won't play as well as they would if they knew the play. We have the same core player ratings. What we changed was how the overall rating was calculated. Several grades (like real NFL scouts use) now make up the overall rating. They are Athletic (physical skills like speed), Intangibles (mental skills like awareness), Durability (how healthy a player is), Learning (how quickly a player learns and retains information), Potential (how good the player can get if everything works out in his career) and Size (does the player fit the classic mold at the position). We also use a different system to determine a player's value to the team, which in conjunction with their overall grade, determines how valuable they are in free agency or trades. Value is determined by overall, upside (remaining potential), contract value (is he overpaid, paid just right or underpaid) and playbook knowledge (how much does he know of your playbook). From HC developer's Q and A thread. There is actually one that goes into more detail of player value but I couldn't find it.

Sweet! Yeah, Madden needs ALL of this.

Thanks

# 250 Layoneil @ 02/11/09 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Autumn Wind


	Not sure I agree here. It's actually less work than giving every player 20 individual ratings, as individual players may be characterized by one or two abilities, some by five, and some by none at all (there are tons of nondescript guys in the NFL).

it seems like you just don't get it. these are video games processed by computers, like the other guy said, there will always be numbers. what you're asking for won't remove the numbers, it will simply add a level of complexity on top of the numbers.

and they'll end up hiding the numbers from the players so that we won't be able to edit and analyze them. you can't make a video game without formulas that govern how one thing interacts with another. you can't have formulas without numbers.

what you're asking for is for the game to have "weapons" matter and nothing else. any player without a "weapon" is a clone that's completely interchangeable.

# 251 youALREADYknow @ 02/11/09 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Layoneil


	it seems like you just don't get it. these are video games processed by computers, like the other guy said, there will always be numbers. what you're asking for won't remove the numbers, it will simply add a level of complexity on top of the numbers. and they'll end up hiding the numbers from the players so that we won't be able to edit and analyze them. you can't make a video game without formulas that govern how one thing interacts with another. you can't have formulas without numbers. what you're asking for is for the game to have "weapons" matter and nothing else. any player without a "weapon" is a clone that's completely interchangeable.

Exactly... and a "weapon" is still a number. 1 for on, 0 for off. The way that number is converted into an "ability" in the game like speed or power would only allow for a small fraction of the options compared to the possibilities that exist in the 1-100 scale.

It's amazing that nearly everyone wants real world physics calculations in Madden but some of this same group wants kindergarten level mathematical probabilities in an area as important as ratings.

# 252 frankrizzo380 @ 02/11/09 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bgizle


	I definitely agree that Henderson's Route Running needs some work, but I don't think he has the worst hands in the league or anything. He is the Saints 'big play' receiver, because of the speed and agility. Devery Henderson -2008 Targeted: 57 Catches: 32 Drops: 2 The top of my head, when it comes to WR's, I think straight to Terrell Owens, who is usually the perennial leader on Dropped passes. But since he's such a physical specimen, he's a beast.

thank u for pointing this out sir, for obvious reasons!, i have seen dev henderson drop a few passes, not more than t.o., 1998 nfc div game against green bay he drop the first 4 out of his five passes, dev will catch the deep ball, now the short ones he will have trouble with, but henderson dose not get targeted as many times as t.o. thats y i believe hes rated as he is in madden

# 253 RogueHominid @ 02/11/09 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhombic21


	I agree with this post completely. Even with 2K's system, there's some sort of underlying numerical ratings that is happening, it's just not shown directly to the user. The problem with both Madden and NCAA is essentially the fact that they have 20+ ratings, but that a lot of those ratings don't seem to actually do anything to effect play on the field. The numerical system is not the problem. The problem is that the ratings are unbalanced, in terms of which ones matter.

Yes, there are hidden components in other engines. However, I don't think that the basic equivalency being drawn here means that both ways of doing things are equal. With signature abilities, there are animation packages unique to each that manifest themselves during gameplay. These animation packages individuate players.

If you just go on a 1-100 scale and ditch the animation packages that link to specific abilities, then you lose a degree of individuation.

I don't get why people get so uppity about a suggestion like this. It's not a 2K vs. Madden thing; it's a what's going to give you the best opportunity to make the distinguishing characteristics of each football player visible thing, and that's something the design team cares about.

I do "get it," and I'm not looking for "kindergarten" football. From the early information on Madden '10, it's clear that there's a commitment to continuing to work from the 1-100 scale, and that's fine by me. I do think that it would help, though, to augment the work on ratings with some work on signature animation packages that help players stand out, even if it's as simple as some animations for power backs that finesse backs don't get, some for possession receivers that deep threat guys don't get, etc.

# 254 rhombic21 @ 02/11/09 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Autumn Wind


	Yes, there are hidden components in other engines. However, I don't think that the basic equivalency being drawn here means that both ways of doing things are equal. With signature abilities, there are animation packages unique to each that manifest themselves during gameplay. These animation packages individuate players. If you just go on a 1-100 scale and ditch the animation packages that link to specific abilities, then you lose a degree of individuation. I don't get why people get so uppity about a suggestion like this. It's not a 2K vs. Madden thing; it's a what's going to give you the best opportunity to make the distinguishing characteristics of each football player visible thing, and that's something the design team cares about.

But they already do this. There are certain jukes/truck animations that are only accessible at certain ratings thresholds. The same thing goes for spectacular catches, pancake blocks, etc...

The problem, once again, is that there isn't balance between all of the ratings. Some ratings really matter (partly because they open up new animations), and other ratings really don't. A part of that is that they don't have enough special animations for certain situations. Like there's no special animations for speed rush or bull rush on the DL, no special animations for man coverage, etc...But again, you can accomplish the same thing by just setting ratings thresholds that players have to meet before those animations will be allowed to play out. You don't necessarily have to go in and create personalized animations.

The problem in the past, particularly with things like spectacular catch, is that way too many players existed above the threshold to be able to access the animation, which made those players that SHOULD have been able to access the animation less special than they otherwise would have been, and that seems to be part of what Donny is addressing here.

# 255 youALREADYknow @ 02/11/09 06:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Autumn Wind


	If you just go on a 1-100 scale and ditch the animation packages that link to specific abilities, then you lose a degree of individuation.

NOBODY suggested they ditch animation packages. Please read Rhombic's response.

# 256 krc1130 @ 02/11/09 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickywal


	I'm all for a new progression system. But the capped potential I don't like. It flies in the face of players like James Harrison, who was undrafted! He'd be capped at maybe 85 max I'd say with the new ratings in his rookie year. But after one season in a part time roll he came back in his second to be def MVP. I'd love to have this sort of improvement reflected in madden, where players burst onto the scene while others progress slowly. Another thing I'd like to see is situational players getting love. Some way that its easier to bring packages onto the field that utilize players that are good in one area (a blitzing LB who's zone and man coverage sucks, but his pass rush skills are good - or a reliable WR in 3rd down situations who will hold onto the pass to get you that 8 yards). It would be good for online too, and it will help give away your intentions at times to your opposition if they pay attention.

What they could do is have a potential rating but if you have a James Harrison season then your Potential goes up with your overall.

Potential is an iffy rating though. Like Peyton Manning was expected to be good. Not as good as he is now but good. Now a guy like Joe Montana would have a "meh" potential rating but as we can see he is arguably the greatest QB to ever live.

# 257 kcarr @ 02/11/09 08:59 PM

While I realize there is the need for numerical ratings to control the gameplay but I am in a sense with the guys saying that they would like to go away from the number system.

I think numbers should be there but hidden other than maybe during player creation. The icons or weapons or whatever would be shown for the player once they reach certain ratings levels. This would allow players to develop these abilities in a sensible manner. I also think it might be a good idea to make the numbers a range sorta like in the original head coach but that is another topic.

This could add a lot to franchise, especially trading, drafting, and free agent signing where you don't know exactly how good the player is.

# 258 edubbs @ 02/11/09 10:15 PM

It will be interesting to see how these ratings effect the QB's.

I want to see the lower accuracy QB's throw errant (non intercepted) passes ie; gutter balls, passes waaaay out of reach, passes behind receivers, over their head etc.

Bad passes that result in incompletions have NEVER been in Madden like they should.

Hopefully, this year you guys added a TON of new incomplete pass animations because, they are waaaaay overdue.

# 259 Asp86 @ 02/11/09 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IanCummingsFriend


	I love the thought of now being able to rip off a big run for a TD with a guy that isn't 90+ speed. Makes almost everyback lethal to a certain degree.

The only thing with that is. Someone with an 80 rating for speed should still be able to be caught down-field by fast corners, safety's or linebackers. Hopefully it's not unrealistic to the point where a every player fast or slow is impossible to catch down-field.

# 260 Asp86 @ 02/11/09 10:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickywal


	Maybe that is just part and parcel of progression. A player in one year can only increase by X but the next year it starts again. But depending on the overall rating is how much a player can go up max in a season. 0-70 ratings can go up max 15 based on a great season 70-75 max 10 80-90 max 5 90-95 max 2 95-99 max 1 Obviously throw together numbers, but you get the idea. The question is do you make the game reflect the year to year in madden with the fluctuating ratings with each release, or do you make it based on consistency and players will only achieve the high ratings if they produce season after season. Would James Harrison be able to fly up to a 90+ rating in one season or would he need several seasons of great performances to get there? I'd also like to see ratings drop. At the moment you can pretty much have a receiver get 1000+ yards in a season and go up, but the following season get 300 yards and stay the same. Maybe progression is based on overall and expectations. A 92 overall WR should get 700-1000 yards and 8 TDs say, if they under achieve this they drop depending how much they missed by, but will go up depending on how much they surpassed these numbers. If they stayed equal then no progression. Though any young player should gain a slight increase based on gaining experience. This is probably all pretty off topic though... but its tied very much to player ratings.

When players hit the age of 30ish, stamina ratings should start dropping of by 2's or 3's.

« Previous 1 2…9 10 11 121314 15 16 17 Next »

More Links

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