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

# 281 Cryolemon @ 02/15/09 06:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	I think using a 5'4 150 lb player and 6'6 350 lb runner sort of shoots any idea concerning realism in the foot.

A small corner vs a large FB? Bettis was nearly 300 when he retired.

# 282 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cryolemon


	A small corner vs a large FB? Bettis was nearly 300 when he retired.

There's quite a difference between 270 and 350. 5'4 150 is laughable. I'm not saying that there's not problems, certainly there are. What I am saying is I don't know how anyone can hope to be taken seriously when they use player dimensions that just won't happen, unless a OL picks up a fumble and then starts running towards a junior high scholl kid.

# 283 Cryolemon @ 02/15/09 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	There's quite a difference between 270 and 350. 5'4 150 is laughable. I'm not saying that there's not problems, certainly there are. What I am saying is I don't know how anyone can hope to be taken seriously when they use player dimensions that just won't happen, unless a OL picks up a fumble and then starts running towards a junior high scholl kid.

Well, yeah I think it was an exaggeration. You wouldn't get exactly what he said, but you could get a guy like Bettis coming up against a corner my size (5'10", 185).

# 284 LBzrule @ 02/15/09 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	There's quite a difference between 270 and 350. 5'4 150 is laughable. I'm not saying that there's not problems, certainly there are. What I am saying is I don't know how anyone can hope to be taken seriously when they use player dimensions that just won't happen, unless a OL picks up a fumble and then starts running towards a junior high scholl kid.

Well that's the point though. To show the ABSURDITY of what happens by using player dimensions that will never be a part of the NFL. He displayed absurd, but it wouldn't matter. He could have thrown accurate dimensions in and would have gotten the same result.

# 285 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LBzrule


	Well that's the point though. To show the ABSURDITY of what happens by using player dimensions that will never be a part of the NFL. He displayed absurd, but it wouldn't matter. He could have thrown accurate dimensions in and would have gotten the same result.

Yeah, I guess. It's just that even seeing those dimensions automatically turns me off. Why, if you wanted to be taken seriously, would you choose those player dimensions?

# 286 youALREADYknow @ 02/15/09 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	Yeah, I guess. It's just that even seeing those dimensions automatically turns me off. Why, if you wanted to be taken seriously, would you choose those player dimensions?

If Madden is to be taken seriously, it needs to display the difference between absurd player dimensions.

# 287 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 01:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	If Madden is to be taken seriously, it needs to display the difference between absurd player dimensions.

You shouldn't even be able to make players of those sizes.

# 288 glitchditcher @ 02/15/09 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	You are wrong. The DEEP MIDDLE is covered by an underneath defender in Tampa 2. The hole or "intermediate middle" is essentially uncovered as there is no "middle player," instead there are 2 hook/curl defenders that play aim closere to half way between the hash and the numbers (of course pattern reading could bring them inside farther) in Tampa 2. COVER 2 is a 5 under/2 deep zone coverage. Tampa 2 is actually a 4 under, 3 deep. You mentioned the speed rating, you said that LB's shouldn't be able to cover fast RB's and WR's. Yes, the 40 yard dash in exercise science is a measure of acceleration, yes top speed is rarely reached in football, I was only making it clear that your idea didn't make sense. Now, you're contradicting yourself by admitting that LB's DO cover receivers and your showing your lack of knowledge by not knowing the difference between Tampa 2 and true cover 2. There SHOULD NOT be anymore separation in madden, there should be far far far less.

If you could read in the first place, I am in no way contradicting myself. I never said LBs DONT cover WRs. I said they dont coverr them AS WELL as they do in the game in real life. And I do know the difference between tampa 2 and a cover 2. A cover 2 isnt even a scheme, its a play. The Tampa 2 is the scheme.

# 289 Cryolemon @ 02/15/09 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	You shouldn't even be able to make players of those sizes.

What limits would you have?

# 290 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cryolemon


	What limits would you have?

I have no problem with the 6'6 350 lb player, if he is a lineman, but not a ball carrier. I do, however, have a problem with any 5'4 150 lb player, that is well beyond realism.

As for the linemen type, size alone does not determine force. Offensive linemen, even though they are much bigger, would make terrible ball carriers (not just because of their lack of change of direction skills) because they are not nearly fast enough to get enough momentum to really run over players. This is not Varsity Blues, this is (should be) the real world. If you have ever seen a OL pick up a fumble or catch a batted ball, you'll agree that they almost always end up getting "trucked" because they move too slow and are huge targets.

Again, I am not arguing that the hit and momentum logic is screwed up in Madden. I agree with the points that were made, but I would rather have seen a video with a big back (Brandon Jacobs, perhaps) vs a smaller db type. But you still have to remember, even a big ball carrier can be put on his back by a smaller player if the bigger player isn't up to speed and the little guy gets a running start.

# 291 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	Linebacker Coverage One thing that drastically needs some changing is the coverage ratings of Linebackers. You have some linebackers with 70+ Man Coverage and 85+ Zone Coverage. That is absolutely ridiculous. Did you know that in Madden 09, if you put Brian Urlacher at CB his overall rating is an 86 ? Eighty effing Six. Brian Urlacher. That's higher than most #2 CBs in the game. It's absurd, man. I know guys like Brian Urlacher, Gary Brackett, and Kirk Morrison are some of the best coverage Linebackers in the game, there is no doubt about that, but you simply cannot have Linebackers with higher coverage ratings than some corners. The fact of the matter is, no LB in the game today is better at coverage than any CB in the game today. I don't care if you're talking about Jason David.. he still should have higher coverage ratings than any Linebacker. In Madden 09 you have most Linebackers running 30 yards downfield with WRs and HBs. Jumping 10 feet off the ground to blindly super swat a pass. That is asinine. There is no way in hell that would happen in real life. That's why coaches uses motion and try to get HBs one on one with a LB in real life. It's caleld match-ups. Because no LB is able to have good coverage more than 10-15 yards downfield. It just doesn't happen. The highest MAN COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 60. The highest ZONE COVERAGE rating any LB should have is 75. No if, ands, or buts about it.

Re-read your 2nd paragraph.

# 292 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	If you could read in the first place, I am in no way contradicting myself. I never said LBs DONT cover WRs. I said they dont coverr them AS WELL as they do in the game in real life. And I do know the difference between tampa 2 and a cover 2. A cover 2 isnt even a scheme, its a play. The Tampa 2 is the scheme.

Tampa 2 and Cover 2 are completely different things. Cover 2 SCHEMES cover the deep part of the field with 2 defenders (each has half the field) and the underneath zones are covered by 5 defenders, 2 in the flats, 2 in the hook/curl areas and 1 in the hole. There are different ways to play cover 2: the underneath defenders could drop to a spot (like in madden, which by the way has gone the way of the dinosaur in much of modern football), they could wall off receivers(attempt to keep them from running crossing routes, thus running with them when they run vertical) or they could pattern read (adjust their responsiblities based on the stem of certain receivers, which is the now the most common form of any zone coverage, especially in college, think of pattern reading like a match-up zone concept used in basketball).

The only thing that makes Tampa 2 resemble Cover 2 is the split (middle of the field open) alignment of the safeties. In this coverage, the deep part of the field is covered in thirds by the two safeties and an inside lb (this is different than normal cover 3 versions in that neither one of the corners has a deep zone). The 3 deep defenders leave 4 to cover the underneath zones (corners and olb's).

There is a distinct philosophical difference between the two. One (cover 2) smothers the underneath areas and forces the qb to make strong, deep throws, the other (tampa) is used by defenses who want to take away the deep part of the field and force short throws and then (hopefully) tackle the receiver, limiting yards after catch.

I hope that maybe now you understand that the two are different and anyway, the original point was that LB's not only are capable of running more than 15 yds and effectively covering both WR's and RB's, but that they are asked (albeit more from some teams than from others) to do it relatively often.

# 293 HitDoctor @ 02/15/09 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cusefan


	I love it. Ian I have a feeling the Best madden players( the best Cheesers) are going to hate Madden 10 ! Thank you for re-introducing strategy.

This would be a good indication that madden is on point! (if the cheesers hate it, that is).

# 294 glitchditcher @ 02/15/09 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shttymcgee


	Tampa 2 and Cover 2 are completely different things. Cover 2 SCHEMES cover the deep part of the field with 2 defenders (each has half the field) and the underneath zones are covered by 5 defenders, 2 in the flats, 2 in the hook/curl areas and 1 in the hole. There are different ways to play cover 2: the underneath defenders could drop to a spot (like in madden, which by the way has gone the way of the dinosaur in much of modern football), they could wall off receivers(attempt to keep them from running crossing routes, thus running with them when they run vertical) or they could pattern read (adjust their responsiblities based on the stem of certain receivers, which is the now the most common form of any zone coverage, especially in college, think of pattern reading like a match-up zone concept used in basketball). The only thing that makes Tampa 2 resemble Cover 2 is the split (middle of the field open) alignment of the safeties. In this coverage, the deep part of the field is covered in thirds by the two safeties and an inside lb (this is different than normal cover 3 versions in that neither one of the corners has a deep zone). The 3 deep defenders leave 4 to cover the underneath zones (corners and olb's). There is a distinct philosophical difference between the two. One (cover 2) smothers the underneath areas and forces the qb to make strong, deep throws, the other (tampa) is used by defenses who want to take away the deep part of the field and force short throws and then (hopefully) tackle the receiver, limiting yards after catch. I hope that maybe now you understand that the two are different and anyway, the original point was that LB's not only are capable of running more than 15 yds and effectively covering both WR's and RB's, but that they are asked (albeit more from some teams than from others) to do it relatively often.

You're not telling me anything I don't know. You continue to say how LBs are capable of covering WRs and HBs. I know that.... but NOT AS WELL as they do it in the game. You would swear the LBS are all Champ Bailey out there in Madden. Why do you think there are so many turnovers and gamers rarely throw for over 200 yards in a game ? Because the coverage is absolutely ridiculous in Madden.

# 295 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	You're not telling me anything I don't know. You continue to say how LBs are capable of covering WRs and HBs. I know that.... but NOT AS WELL as they do it in the game. You would swear the LBS are all Champ Bailey out there in Madden. Why do you think there are so many turnovers and gamers rarely throw for over 200 yards in a game ? Because the coverage is absolutely ridiculous in Madden.

Maybe I have a different game than you. I see the game as an up and down the field track meet. Hell, one stop a lot of times will win you the game. If coverage was so good, why would people complain abou "robo qb?" Turnovers happen when people don't understand what they're doing.

I don't think I am the only one that thinks there is too much separation in the game and that passing is too easy, because it is unrealistically easy to get open and that every qb has sniper-like accuracy. I just don't share the same view as you and I hope that the developers don't either, because if passing gets easier, I'll probably have to give the game up.

# 296 rhombic21 @ 02/15/09 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	You're not telling me anything I don't know. You continue to say how LBs are capable of covering WRs and HBs. I know that.... but NOT AS WELL as they do it in the game. You would swear the LBS are all Champ Bailey out there in Madden. Why do you think there are so many turnovers and gamers rarely throw for over 200 yards in a game ? Because the coverage is absolutely ridiculous in Madden.

Are you serious? Coverage is terrible on this game. Man coverage in particular. There's an entire thread illustrating why man coverage is fundamentally broken on the game. Zone coverage is decent, but is offset by the lack of pressure from the front 4, the super accuracy of QBs, extremely poor reaction to screen passes, and ******ness like the rocket catch.

# 297 splff3000 @ 02/15/09 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	You're not telling me anything I don't know. You continue to say how LBs are capable of covering WRs and HBs. I know that.... but NOT AS WELL as they do it in the game. You would swear the LBS are all Champ Bailey out there in Madden. Why do you think there are so many turnovers and gamers rarely throw for over 200 yards in a game ? Because the coverage is absolutely ridiculous in Madden.

I have to agree with the other guys here man. Man coverage is pretty much useless in this game as far as LB's go. If I know a LB is gonna be covering my HB, I can just pretty much hot route him and I know he's gonna be open. Zone is a little better but, other than the superman int's, that's pretty bad too.

# 298 glitchditcher @ 02/15/09 09:34 PM

I'm not talking about man coverage. No one even uses that because of how terrible it is. I'm talking about Zone.

# 299 shttymcgee @ 02/15/09 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glitchditcher


	I'm not talking about man coverage. No one even uses that because of how terrible it is. I'm talking about Zone.

They both stink.

# 300 Glorious Arc @ 02/16/09 01:33 AM

are you telling me that LBs like derrick brooks are worse in coverage then jason david!?!

i wouldnt even give jason david a 70 in man coverage n id maybe give him 70ish in zone. he was made better in the colts cz of their front four and because he wasnt in man often.

there are plenty of linebackers and safties that can out cover corners but the real issue is the animations. i agree that a 230-260 pound player should not be able to run at full speed and out jump a WR who has 99 jump on a jump ball. hell itd be hard for champ bailey to cover fitz on a jump ball if he had to run to make a play on the ball.

human bodies can not run at full speed and reach their max jump at the same time. thats why we see players in real life getting burnt when they turn to try and jump and tip the ball.

« Previous 1 2…9 10 11 12 13 141516 17 Next »

More Links

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