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

# 701 DCEBB2001 @ 06/23/12 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Playmakers


	and this is why i believe both their football and basketball games suffer a lot with issues out of the box strictly tied to ratings on the field/court. I've always felt at times EA would love a SIM style game but they refuse to get away from some ratings that lead to arcade type of gameplay on the field or court. Take for example their NCAA Football series that has tons of LB's leaping as if they are Michael Jordan in his prime....or DT's who accelerate faster than half the RB's and WR's. Before their basketball game folded (NBA LIVE) recently they would have assign ratings which allowed guys to take off from anywhere on the floor and dunk the ball. Thse types of things are the main reasons why I belive having the ability to edit players in all of EA's games should always be an option to us because they EA hasn't shown in years they can get away from the super ratings of players that lead to those arcade type of outcomes on the field or court. Not everyone wants to see SUPER LEAPING LB's or DT's with agility like Barry Sanders. CCM or not i think removing the editing ability of players was just a terrible decision on EA part and no one can convince otherwise.

Wasn't all the SUPER LB and crazy rush DTs a thing of NFL blitz? Why not keep that unrealistic out of a game that is "supposedly" trying to attain realism? I am sick of the WRs getting 20 yards downfield in under 1.5s, which is humanly impossible. I wish EA would just make a game that emulates what we see on Sundays.

# 702 azdawgpound @ 06/23/12 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Wasn't all the SUPER LB and crazy rush DTs a thing of NFL blitz? Why not keep that unrealistic out of a game that is "supposedly" trying to attain realism? I am sick of the WRs getting 20 yards downfield in under 1.5s, which is humanly impossible. I wish EA would just make a game that emulates what we see on Sundays.

all ea had to do was lower the jumping of the lber's and there's nomore super jumping i did that in 12 and im in season 3 and i've yet see a lb jump up in air and int the ball. i lowered every lber jump by 20.

# 703 DCEBB2001 @ 06/23/12 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by azdawgpound


	all ea had to do was lower the jumping of the lber's and there's nomore super jumping i did that in 12 and im in season 3 and i've yet see a lb jump up in air and int the ball. i lowered every lber jump by 20.

I tend to believe it is more of a programming issue. There are several LBs who deserve very high JMP ratings. Derek Wake jumped 45.5in at the combine in 2005. In fact, since 2000 there have been 22 LB prospects who jumped over 40in at that event. At pro days, there were 5 this year alone that cleared 40 inches. So simply lowering every LBs JMP is not the most realistic thing to do. To me, EA needs to MORE ACCURATELY REPRESENT player skill in the game. You can still have LBs that have 90+ JMP in the game, but it should be no where near the majority. Ratings all players universally regardless of position with a true statistical mean would probably alleviate these issues.

# 704 DCEBB2001 @ 06/23/12 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	The crazy thing about this "phenomena" in Madden is, that they do it without actually hustling or running at top speed because when switching to User control, they can still "speed burst"/sprint. So seemingly due to the lack of foot planting representation and in-game players not somehow actually interacting with the in-game field, they glide/skate, covering unrealistic amounts of ground. I know this question likely won't get answered but in a "game of inches" how is somehow reasonably realistically representing how much ground players can cover and how the interact with the in-game football field in Madden, not a priority? Even if that means losing the graphical or visual realism of how the field is represented, meaning grass or other aesthetic details, so be it. Having a great looking field means jack if the in-game players are not actually or at least seem to be playing on it.

Once again BIG FN, I could not agree more. It seems to me like they continue to "promise" devotion to realism and for some reason or another (excuses in my book), EA continues to miss some of the most obvious solutions to some of the realism questions. Yeah, you created this awesome CC and attempted (failing in my opinion) to create "RTP", but this stuff still exists. It makes me wonder who is making some of these decisions. I wonder if we posted a poll in regards to if folks here at OS were happy with the job EA was doing with Madden the results would be worse than the American people's overwhelming negative approval rating of the US congress.

# 705 at23steelers @ 06/23/12 04:31 PM

I appreciate the "game of inches" in 2k8 because in my 5 min quarter games, every score counts, since most games are 20-30 pts total from both teams. Every INT is HUGE. I wish in Madden the big plays, actually felt like big plays. Since, you can easily score and actually expect to score every position, momentum and field position never matter in a madden game!!

# 706 DCEBB2001 @ 06/23/12 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by at23steelers


	I appreciate the "game of inches" in 2k8 because in my 5 min quarter games, every score counts, since most games are 20-30 pts total from both teams. Every INT is HUGE. I wish in Madden the big plays, actually felt like big plays. Since, you can easily score and actually expect to score every position, momentum and field position never matter in a madden game!!

^^^^

This right here is a GREAT post. Madden these days seems to lack passion and doesn't keep me on edge like it used to. I just LOVE how when a guy makes a break away for a score all you hear from the announcers is "Breaking away!" followed by 5 seconds of silence as the runner zig-zags to the end zone. Great job EA!

# 707 PVarck31 @ 06/23/12 05:23 PM

Keep this about Madden and on-topic.

# 708 Equinox831 @ 06/24/12 05:12 AM

Some of these ratings are a little odd. Brandon Lloyd is a 90?

# 709 DCEBB2001 @ 06/24/12 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox831


	Some of these ratings are a little odd. Brandon Lloyd is a 90?

What is odd about Lloyd coming off of a 2010 season where he had 77 grabs for over 1400 yards and 11 TDs? Does that not put him in the elite category as of June, 2011?

# 710 Equinox831 @ 06/24/12 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	What is odd about Lloyd coming off of a 2010 season where he had 77 grabs for over 1400 yards and 11 TDs? Does that not put him in the elite category as of June, 2011?

Alright... What about as of June 2012? He had one stand-out year and all the rest were average.

How old are these ratings?

# 711 DCEBB2001 @ 06/24/12 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Equinox831


	Alright... What about as of June 2012? He had one stand-out year and all the rest were average. How old are these ratings?

It is stated a few times in the thread that these ratings were current as of June, 2011. New ratings will be posted in July. The new OVR for Lloyd will be closer to 84 when they are posted.

# 712 Skyboxer @ 06/24/12 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I tend to believe it is more of a programming issue. There are several LBs who deserve very high JMP ratings. Derek Wake jumped 45.5in at the combine in 2005. In fact, since 2000 there have been 22 LB prospects who jumped over 40in at that event. At pro days, there were 5 this year alone that cleared 40 inches. So simply lowering every LBs JMP is not the most realistic thing to do. To me, EA needs to MORE ACCURATELY REPRESENT player skill in the game. You can still have LBs that have 90+ JMP in the game, but it should be no where near the majority. Ratings all players universally regardless of position with a true statistical mean would probably alleviate these issues.

Actually in NCAA i went though and lowered all LB's jump and it fixes the super lb. I basically (if I remember right) made 50 the bighest you could go. Then looked at the highest. Efore editing and made the conversion and started editing. While it would have been easier if we were given a global editor having ea make a certain number a limit LB's could get would have been better.
Hopefully future games wont have this problem.

# 713 DCEBB2001 @ 06/25/12 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skyboxer


	While it would have been easier if we were given a global editor having ea make a certain number a limit LB's could get would have been better.

I totally disagree with the premise that "limiting" a players ability because he plays a particular position would "fix" things. That is unrealistic. If a LB jumps 45in and a WR jumps 45in shouldn't they have the same JMP rating? Limiting LBs to only maxing out at say 75 for JMP would not do players justice. Rather, it is simply masking the real issue. To me, if a ILB jumps very well, you shouldn't be trying to throw directly over him in the first place. The issue I have found is that many players are not properly rated upon their true abilities and they are "limited" to unexplained and unwarranted ratings based on purely nothing but conjecture by one person at EA who as far as I know never played/coached/scouted at any level in the sport.

What can be fixed is if players are rated according to their true abilities. Infuse scouting data with hard data and you may have a different picture of how players are rated. That is what I am doing with FBG Ratings. It is not for everyone, but at least I get some comfort in knowing that the source material is unbiased and legitimate.

# 714 DCEBB2001 @ 07/03/12 02:59 PM

Alright all, another update is up. All players are rated as of yesterday evening. For this update, all players have NEW OVR ratings for the start of training camps. That includes rookies, who are all now rated. All attributes match the OVR ratings as well. Please keep the following in mind:

1. Injuries affect the OVR rating. See Suggs here:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=1790

You will note that his OVR is 45 because of his severe Achilles injury. If he gets back on the field this year, his rating will progress upward as his recovery progresses. He was a 40 in May but he is up to a 45 after word of him being off of crutches after surgery on June 12th.

2. Note that Suggs (like all players) does not have a profile pic. This is because I will be revamping all of the profile pictures this year to get them up to date. Many pics were from college for most of these players so I would like them all updated. This will be done later this summer before the start of the regular season.

3. Players who have special roster designations will appear with that designation next to their name on the roster list. Note Jerome Harrison at the bottom of the Lions roster here:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/vi...php?team=Lions

Due to his injury, he is only a 40 OVR. If his injury progresses, his OVR will go up again. Keep in mind that both Suggs (from above) and Harrison have their OVR ratings affected by the injury status, albeit one is on the NFI and the other is not. Should you find some players with unusually low ratings, it is likely that they are injured or are recovering from an injury.

4. Rookies who are slotted as starters may not yet be rated higher than other players at their position. We all know that coaching staffs sometimes overlook sound, technical athletes with experience in lieu of younger, more athletic players. Look at the sorted Packer roster here:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/vi...=pos&order=ASC

You will see that Nick Perry is a starter at ROLB, but his 71 OVR is lower than that of both Eric Walden and Frank Zombo at this position. This is one of the cases where the more athletic, but less polished, Perry is rated lower than players he is starting over. This is because his ability in the NFL is still unknown like other first-year players. Once he shows he can perform well, his OVR rating and subsequent attributes will go up. This process occurs during training camps, preseason games, and regular season games thereafter. The ratings change quite a bit, so I do not expect any players in these situations to stay rated where they are for long. Getting reps in camp with the starters and in preseason games will allow rookies to improve over their veteran counterparts.

5. Individual attributes for rookies will change. I had to work with some rookie data that was incomplete or questionable. As a result, I tended to rate on the side of caution for many rookies. THP and SAC/MAC/DAC/RUN/PAC attributes for some rookies may seem a bit low for rookie QBs. These are by far the most difficult attributes to maintain at high levels in the NFL (see Leaf, Banks, Carr, Russell). Once these rookies get some experience and can CONSISTENTLY show they are capable of completing passes at different levels with velocity at the NFL level, their attributes will increase. Once again, this can happen as early as training camp depending on the reports of how the individual is performing. The physical attributes for scrambling/ATH QBs may seem high as they may be relying too heavily on their raw ability coming out of college. This will be more properly adjusted as the season continues. See Robert Griffin for an example of this:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=82836

I trust his THP and all accuracy ratings will go up quickly while his ball carrying skills may drop. It's a process so please bear with me.

6. INJ/TGH ratings may appear low for some rookies. As they progress, these ratings will increase once they can consistently show they can stay healthy/get over injuries at the NFL level.

7. Consistency is very important. Players are rated high because they consistently grade out high over a prolonged period of time.

8. Ratings are NOT a function of statistics. See Jordy Nelson:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...php?pyid=12364

Last season Nelson acquired 68 catches for 1263 yards and 15 TDs, yet he is only an 82 OVR. This is because Nelson is limited in his some of his raw attributes as well as attributes that govern his run after the catch. Unlike EA, I will not simply increase a players attributes because he is performing well statistically. If I do not see it on film or in the scouting reports provided, I will not increase a player. Nelson had a great year running 3 routes; the back-shoulder fade, the post, and the go. His troubles with drops have been documented. As a result, he is rated according to what the scouting data tells me aside from the typical NFL statistics. Nelson can still be a very reliable player in game and can achieve good stats so long as you use him like he is used in real life. Expect good ability to run a route and get open, but little as for running after the catch for long gains if he is in tight coverage. These need to be demonstrated consistently in order for them to be adjusted.

9. Players may have some attributes increased because they can play multiple positions and have in the NFL. See Brad Smith:

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/profile.php?pyid=8407

Smith is both a QB and KR/WR for the Bills. His AWR is 99 because of his ability to play all 3 positions effectively. Ask any former QB turned WR or vice-versus if playing one of these positions in the past helps you gain an edge at the other (see Woodson, Tannehill, Webb). If Smith gets into the depth chart as ONLY a QB at some point, expect his AWR to drop but his THP and accuracy ratings to rise. As of right now, that 99 AWR won't do much good with Smith as a QB, however, due to his SAC of 70, MAC of 64, DAC of 74, RUN of 68, and PAC of 56. If he and like players make a permanent position switch, they will be rated accordingly at that time.

10. I will take on any questions regarding the ratings. Should you find something anomalous or erroneous, please feel free to PM or write me an email as listed on the website. I have over 18000 players online currently and some things can be missed at times. Feel free to open up the discussion. I will NOT, however, answer any posts/messages/emails that are an attempt to flame those who develop or use the FBG ratings. I understand that this is not a system for everyone, but it works for me and some others around here so please be respectful for the amount of work by several individuals involved in this project.

The next round of updates will come in early August and will be on a monthly basis from here on out throughout the season. Enjoy the pre-training-camp ratings and have a nice 4th of July.

# 715 MattUM2 @ 07/03/12 06:28 PM

With Connected Careers these will only be good for Play Now?

# 716 Sheen_O_Mack @ 07/03/12 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattUM2


	With Connected Careers these will only be good for Play Now?

Nope, as far as I know we have to depend on EA to give us updated rosters.

# 717 DCEBB2001 @ 07/03/12 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattUM2


	With Connected Careers these will only be good for Play Now?

For Madden 13, you will not be able to edit any rosters for CC.

# 718 Quack23 @ 07/03/12 09:56 PM

Are Justin Smith's ratings correct? He's probably the most disruptive 3-4 DE in the NFL. I'm not trying to attack or anything, just seeking an explanation on something that doesn't seem right.

# 719 DCEBB2001 @ 07/04/12 01:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quack23


	Are Justin Smith's ratings correct? He's probably the most disruptive 3-4 DE in the NFL. I'm not trying to attack or anything, just seeking an explanation on something that doesn't seem right.

Read the injury report on Justin Smith's page from January, 2012 and read #1 from post #743 of this thread. That should answer your question.

# 720 DCEBB2001 @ 07/04/12 01:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arrow218


	All of the rookies they made have speed ratings way too low, IMO.

Could you please provide an example? All player ratings are based on a normal distribution. This allows for a true mean of the data to be determined for every attribute, meaning that anything over 90 is elite. You will note that there are only about 90 players rated over 90. All other attributes are spread out as well. This is for all players, who are rated equally regardless of position. So in essence, if you have a player that has an attribute above 90, that would be considered "elite".

« Previous 1 2…33 34 353637 38 39…76 77 Next »

More Links

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game