Madden NFL 11 News Post

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game

02:46 PM - January 24, 2011 by RaychelSnr

I recentely sat down for a talk with FBGRatings.com's Dan Berens to discuss his site's vision and what's going on over there today. The site is currently working on getting accurate ratings for every player using real hard data converted into the Madden ratings universe. Dan claims that when these numbers are plugged into the game, it plays much better and much closer to real life. Check out the interview below and also check out Dan's website to see what he's got going on!

Interview with Berens on the OS Radio Show on BlogTalkRadio

Game: Madden NFL 11Reader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 96 - View All

Madden NFL 11 Videos

Member Comments

# 441 garret2 @ 08/13/11 12:00 AM

will ability ratings like speed and strength change as scouting reports change or are those things locked in? for instance, tony romo is 17 points lower in speed than carson palmer because of 40 times, but i dont think that is the case in reality.

# 442 DCEBB2001 @ 08/13/11 12:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garret2


	will ability ratings like speed and strength change as scouting reports change or are those things locked in? for instance, tony romo is 17 points lower in speed than carson palmer because of 40 times, but i dont think that is the case in reality.

Raw attributes are typically locked in. You will simply have to disagree with my assessment of Palmer and Romo.

# 443 carnalnirvana @ 08/13/11 02:26 PM

i would love to use these ratings in madden but as spot on as i believe they may be to represent the players talent they contribute to the exploits in programming that EA uses

the main rating i look at is agility

a guy like trent cole with an 82, the cpu will use him like urlacher/willis in terms of range...

i dont know if you tested these on a madden game, IMO the AGILITY rating has few animation speeds so there is little to no difference between cole at 82 and revis at 92

i think you capture technique and talent but the broken movement of the defense will still remain....

# 444 DCEBB2001 @ 08/13/11 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by carnalnirvana


	i would love to use these ratings in madden but as spot on as i believe they may be to represent the players talent they contribute to the exploits in programming that EA uses the main rating i look at is agility a guy like trent cole with an 82, the cpu will use him like urlacher/willis in terms of range... i dont know if you tested these on a madden game, IMO the AGILITY rating has few animation speeds so there is little to no difference between cole at 82 and revis at 92 i think you capture technique and talent but the broken movement of the defense will still remain....

If that is true, then that is on EA. You will notice that this system is simply to offer a more realistic approach to rating players on a scale based on data. The ultimate goal is not to fix what is wrong with EA's game engine. What you will notice, however, is that the difference between great and good player attributes has been widened. That is to say that not every player has an AGI over 90. In fact, look at Adrian Peterson. His AGI is only 79. Or Desean Jackson, who has an AGI of 87. That is where you will find the primary difference. Elite has a whole new meaning.

# 445 garret2 @ 08/14/11 12:15 PM

quick question dan, are all player speeds calculated the same way (counting frames over on field 10 yard sprint x 3 + the first 10 seconds of the 40 yard dash)? and are the "on field 40's" updated every year for most players so that we know player speeds are current? thanks!

# 446 DCEBB2001 @ 08/14/11 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garret2


	quick question dan, are all player speeds calculated the same way (counting frames over on field 10 yard sprint x 3 + the first 10 seconds of the 40 yard dash)? and are the "on field 40's" updated every year for most players so that we know player speeds are current? thanks!

The on-field 40s are updated weekly. However, the SPD ratings you see right now are for the most part determined by combine and pro day data. The issue with the on-field 40s is that they can be miss-represented for some players. For example, Trindon Holliday officially has the fastest 40 recorded at a combine or pro day since 1998 at 4.21. However, his on-field is only a 4.35. Brett Swain's official 40 is around 4.58 but on-field he is at a 4.37. Some of those numbers are a bit too inconsistent for me. Here are some others. Which do you think are more accurate?

M. Vick 93 or 87
L. Tomlinson 87 or 78
C. Ochocinco 81 or 86
R. Moss 90 or 88
R. Grant 88 or 84
M. Barber 86 or 81
T. Holliday 99 or 93
T. Romo 61 or 72
C. Palmer 78 or 62
W. McGahee 87 or 81
D. Driver 87 or 82
N. Asomugha 87 or 85

Let me know which ones you think are the most accurate.

# 447 King Gro23 @ 08/14/11 01:35 PM

Vick a 93. If you are truly trying to capture the players and their true skills, Vick is electric and his elite speed is too. 93 IMO will give vick that level of danger just like irl. IMO

# 448 DCEBB2001 @ 08/14/11 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Gro23


	Vick a 93. If you are truly trying to capture the players and their true skills, Vick is electric and his elite speed is too. 93 IMO will give vick that level of danger just like irl. IMO

See, and I had him at 93 but I received a bunch of PMs from people saying that he was too fast at 93 because that 4.33 he put up was estimated in 2001. He looked just as fast to me as he did before, but I guess a bunch of people disagreed.

# 449 garret2 @ 08/14/11 02:01 PM

personally, i have always thought on field times are more accurate even though they may seem off for guys like tomlinson and mcgahee who we think of as "fast", but those on field times are updated weekly and give us a snapshot of how fast that player is right now, not 10 years ago at the combine. and like you said, brett swain players faster than his 40 and holliday plays a little slower than his 40 and to me its all about how fast they are on the field with their pads on, getting chased and not how good their 40 yard dash technique is. so if you can use those on field 40 times for madden i believe it would equate more with what we see every sunday on the field, plus, they get updated so its hard to argue with. but either way you choose, great work! let me know if i can help you with any of this because i love roster making as well.

# 450 garret2 @ 08/14/11 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Gro23


	Vick a 93. If you are truly trying to capture the players and their true skills, Vick is electric and his elite speed is too. 93 IMO will give vick that level of danger just like irl. IMO

but vicks "true" speed would be 87 like dan has him. that is still really fast and it is backed up by his on field 40, which is objective and quantitative data and is far superior to someones opinion who says "vick is really fast when i watch him so if i had to choose between 87 and 93, then i say 93."

# 451 King Gro23 @ 08/14/11 02:22 PM

Thats true^ I also forgot that the entire field has their speed tweaked so 87 is still premier for him.

# 452 garret2 @ 08/14/11 02:58 PM

i really do think if on field 40 speeds were universal in the game we could end the talk about "well he is faster/slower than his 40 time so bump him up/down" because every player will play to his true field speed that you see on sundays. those on field speed ratings, along with all the others that dan has tirelessly worked on, wil give madden amazing realism. we will just have to get past things like "tomlinson is known for being fast and he ran a 4.45" because the on field speed ratings dont lie, he has slowed down a lot with age and injuries. dan if you can make this happen, myself and many others would be thrilled!!

# 453 garret2 @ 08/14/11 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	The on-field 40s are updated weekly. However, the SPD ratings you see right now are for the most part determined by combine and pro day data. The issue with the on-field 40s is that they can be miss-represented for some players. For example, Trindon Holliday officially has the fastest 40 recorded at a combine or pro day since 1998 at 4.21. However, his on-field is only a 4.35. Brett Swain's official 40 is around 4.58 but on-field he is at a 4.37. Some of those numbers are a bit too inconsistent for me. Here are some others. Which do you think are more accurate? M. Vick 93 or 87 L. Tomlinson 87 or 78 C. Ochocinco 81 or 86 R. Moss 90 or 88 R. Grant 88 or 84 M. Barber 86 or 81 T. Holliday 99 or 93 T. Romo 61 or 72 C. Palmer 78 or 62 W. McGahee 87 or 81 D. Driver 87 or 82 N. Asomugha 87 or 85 Let me know which ones you think are the most accurate.

i tend to think all of the on field speeds are most accurate because that is what they really run in games. and if that is what we are trying to measure than i honestly dont even see why we need the 40 yard dash times because they aren't nearly as applicable to football as the real on field times, in my mind.

# 454 jcc309 @ 08/14/11 05:25 PM

I very much appreciate what you do. Now let me just say two thoughts of mine.

1. You said that the overall ratings would not be available until mid-season in the best case scenario. If we were to use your attributes right now, would it make for an unrealistic gameplay? Or would it just have a skewed overall for trade value and such. So basically could we use your attributes to get a realistic gameplay without the overall being adjusted correctly when the game comes out?

2. I am an avid franchise player. You stated that the raw attributes for draft classes would be skewed and possibly make for not great gameplay. Do you have a template for changing the raw attribute rankings for the rookies or just a way to make them not have inflated raw attributes?

Thank you again I really like what I see from your website it looks great.

# 455 DCEBB2001 @ 08/14/11 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcc309


	I very much appreciate what you do. Now let me just say two thoughts of mine. 1. You said that the overall ratings would not be available until mid-season in the best case scenario. If we were to use your attributes right now, would it make for an unrealistic gameplay? Or would it just have a skewed overall for trade value and such. So basically could we use your attributes to get a realistic gameplay without the overall being adjusted correctly when the game comes out? 2. I am an avid franchise player. You stated that the raw attributes for draft classes would be skewed and possibly make for not great gameplay. Do you have a template for changing the raw attribute rankings for the rookies or just a way to make them not have inflated raw attributes? Thank you again I really like what I see from your website it looks great.

1. Yes, the OVR ratings is imperative. If you go off of the raw attributes only, the gameplay will be skewed horribly.

2. The gameplay would be great, but the problem arises when you draft rookies. If a 4.40 is a 90 in my system and a 93 in EAs, then you will have issues. The problem is that EA's ratings dramatically over-inflate ratings IMO.

# 456 DCEBB2001 @ 08/14/11 10:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garret2


	i tend to think all of the on field speeds are most accurate because that is what they really run in games. and if that is what we are trying to measure than i honestly dont even see why we need the 40 yard dash times because they aren't nearly as applicable to football as the real on field times, in my mind.

I really want to know what more people think of this. In game 40s or measurable combine data? What does everyone prefer?

# 457 TheSportzGuru @ 08/14/11 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I really want to know what more people think of this. In game 40s or measurable combine data? What does everyone prefer?

in game 40s

# 458 jcc309 @ 08/14/11 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	1. Yes, the OVR ratings is imperative. If you go off of the raw attributes only, the gameplay will be skewed horribly. 2. The gameplay would be great, but the problem arises when you draft rookies. If a 4.40 is a 90 in my system and a 93 in EAs, then you will have issues. The problem is that EA's ratings dramatically over-inflate ratings IMO.

I see. Thanks for the reply. So I guess I will just have to wait for you to finish (stupid EA for messing with it!) as I can't stand their ratings as it puts way too much emphasis on speed. As for #2, do you have a way to tone down the ratings that we can use, or should we just go with what they give us?

As for speed, having played the game, I believe on-field 40 times, if easily obtained, are better. Plenty of people may be slow but play fast with pads on and vice versa.

# 459 garret2 @ 08/15/11 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I really want to know what more people think of this. In game 40s or measurable combine data? What does everyone prefer?

ok guys this is your chance to have a say in one of the most disputed elements of madden, so lets here your opinions!

# 460 DCEBB2001 @ 08/15/11 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by garret2


	ok guys this is your chance to have a say in one of the most disputed elements of madden, so lets here your opinions!

I asked this in a new thread to find out.

« Previous 1 2…20 21 222324 25 26…76 77 Next »

More Links

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game