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

# 821 DCEBB2001 @ 09/18/12 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMP


	Darth Hoodie! I love it. What stands out here is that the ratings aren't universal at all, but contextual; they're based on data gathered mostly in the context of blocking defensive backs or the occasional chip. I'd think that'd make a difference, since no statistics and no data are produced in a vacuum. In any case, I'm proud of Wes, who has proven to be objectively valuable at multiple positions. There's no good reason for him to be rotting on the bench as he is now.

Welker does play in the slot against OLBs and Ss/Nickel/Dime backs though right?

The scheme should be disregarded, IMO, simply because the grades are based on the ability IF everything was equal and set in a vacuum.

# 822 Mavmoses07 @ 09/18/12 03:56 PM

DCEBB2001, would you mind explaining how these blocking grades are calculated, or providing a link? I didn't see any explanation on the FBG ratings website. If I understood and agreed with how this grades were calculated, then I'd be fine with Welker having a higher Gronk since Welker grades out better than Gronk. I'm just skeptical on how this grade is calculated. Do these grades take into account who a blocker is blocking? I have no doubt that Welker is one of the better blocking WR's, just don't feel he's better than Gronk.

The profootballfocus website calculates similar blocking ratings for each player at each position. I've spoken with them about their ratings. Their ratings do not factor in the position of a blocking assignment (e.g., if a WR is blocking a DB vs. a TE blocking a LB). I disagree with this approach as I feel one should be given for more credit for successfully blocking a LB as opposed to a DB. Does the FBG grading system take this into account?

# 823 DCEBB2001 @ 09/18/12 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavmoses07


	DCEBB2001, would you mind explaining how these blocking grades are calculated, or providing a link? I didn't see any explanation on the FBG ratings website. If I understood and agreed with how this grades were calculated, then I'd be fine with Welker having a higher Gronk since Welker grades out better than Gronk. I'm just skeptical on how this grade is calculated. Do these grades take into account who a blocker is blocking? I have no doubt that Welker is one of the better blocking WR's, just don't feel he's better than Gronk. The profootballfocus website calculates similar blocking ratings for each player at each position. I've spoken with them about their ratings. Their ratings do not factor in the position of a blocking assignment (e.g., if a WR is blocking a DB vs. a TE blocking a LB). I disagree with this approach as I feel one should be given for more credit for successfully blocking a LB as opposed to a DB. Does the FBG grading system take this into account?

All data on the FBG site is derrived from real NFL scouting information. It uses only VERIFIED information for both raw attributes (STR, AGI, SPD, ACC, JMP) and dynamic attributes (THP for a QB, PBS for an OT, PMV for a DE, etc). The scouting information utilizes a 0.0 to 5.0 scale in .1 incriments. Each position is grouped into a positional group. QBs are their own positional group. The other pairings are RB/FB, WR/TE, OL, DL, LB, DB, and K/P. Each group has their own data sets and criteria for analysis. QBs, for example, are not graded on CTH ability as DBs are not graded on THP ability.

To derrive at the ratings, the scale has a max (5.0), min (0.0), and average (between 5.0 and 0.0). Likewise, all ratings have a max, min, and average. These are matched, graphed, and interpolated to Madden ratings. So, the average QB has a THP grade of 2.5. That number is set to an "average" Madden rating for THP. The max and minimum numbers are also determined based upon the FBG philosophy for ratings. There are several posts in here that include those philosophies so please search the thread.

Now in this case with Welker/Gronk, both players are in the WR/TE group. Therefore, they are graded the SAME WAY for the SAME ATTRIBUTES and assigned grades. Welker graded out higher as a blocker in both PBK and RBK than Gronk, who graded out near the average for all other TEs, but higher than that of just about most WRs. Welker is an outlier. His ability to block is far higher than that of most TEs and WRs. The grades are determined based upon ability only. Scheme, stats, speculation, and guesswork is NOT included to derrive to a grade. It comes down to ability based on the scouting consensus.

# 824 SloeyEZ @ 09/18/12 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMP


	Darth Hoodie! I love it. What stands out here is that the ratings aren't universal at all, but contextual; they're based on data gathered mostly in the context of blocking defensive backs or the occasional chip. I'd think that'd make a difference, since no statistics and no data are produced in a vacuum. In any case, I'm proud of Wes, who has proven to be objectively valuable at multiple positions. There's no good reason for him to be rotting on the bench as he is now.

Quote:


	Welker does play in the slot against OLBs and Ss/Nickel/Dime backs though right? The scheme should be disregarded, IMO, simply because the grades are based on the ability IF everything was equal and set in a vacuum.

Okay, so now I'm really confused. I thought the purpose of this new rating systems was for universal stats regardless of position because people were disgruntled that a player's ratings change just because you move positions. If that isn't what this discussion is about then, excuse me. However, attributes are contextual as said above and football players are not playing in a vacuum so now I really think this rating system is not usable, again, if the purpose is to have some sort of universal attribute that does not change regardless of the position the player is playing.

# 825 DCEBB2001 @ 09/18/12 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	This stuff for me mainly is different because of Welker's size and strength. For example the Redskins moved Niles Paul from WR to TE due to his size being conducive to handle that change. However, I doubt that would have been possible for Santana Moss, lol. Same thing with this Welker at TE scenario, I would think his skill at blocking in the TE position would have to be effected by his size and strength. Another thing is that from the WR position, those blocks are from an upright starting position off the LOS, where as with a TE he would likely be coming off the LOS from a three point stance. So in a nutshell a position change like that would need to consider the difference in technique effecting the skill set of the player. Again though, I think this likely fall more inline with Madden not having enough animation variation but I guess the ratings change when putting players in different positions is meant to account for that. So in a universal ratings system where ratings do NOT adjust when changing positions, I would think that Wes Welker would have to rated lower at blocking than the average TE. Reason being that scale should rating every player, in every rating, based on the best and worst at that rating. So Welker would be on a scale for the best run blockers, not just the best WR/TE run blockers, if that makes sense. I have no idea how to calculate thought since again the scouting data is likely not accounting for technique/blocking stance.

The scouting info does not also account for scheme. Just how well the player blocks when engaged to a variety of defenders. If Welker has inferior size/STR and outblocks a LB on a crack, that will undoubtably inflate his grade. If Gronk on the other hand struggles with edge rusher who may be a bit undersized, that would have the reverse affect. I can't give exact plays for the grading, but I do trust the primary source material and the grading methodology.

Speaking of the methodoloy...I got a few emails about P. Manning's 75 THP for this season. Had some people who couldn't believe it was that low. If you watched that game last night it was very clear that he could not get the ball out fast enough to the seam to avoid those INTs. Lot's of fluttering. I think the guys doing the scouting end are pretty solid.

# 826 DCEBB2001 @ 09/18/12 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SloeyEZ


	Okay, so now I'm really confused. I thought the purpose of this new rating systems was for universal stats regardless of position because people were disgruntled that a player's ratings change just because you move positions. If that isn't what this discussion is about then, excuse me. However, attributes are contextual as said above and football players are not playing in a vacuum so now I really think this rating system is not usable, again, if the purpose is to have some sort of universal attribute that does not change regardless of the position the player is playing.

The system rates all of the RAW ATTRIBUTES (STR, SPD, ACC, AGI, JMP) that are VERIFIABLE universally. All other attributes are related to the position unless that position changes. For a guy like Greg Jennins who has been nothing but a WR his entire career, he is scouted as a WR. For a guy like Brad Smith, he has ratings as both a WR and QB and is scouted that way.

Football players do not play in a vacuum, but they can be evaluated based on individual skill. If Wes Welker and Gronk are given the same amount of chances to block the same player and perform differently while blocking that defender, they will NOT have equal ratings. This, however is not due to one being a WR and one being a TE, but is due to their performance at achieving the block.

# 827 freddies33es22 @ 09/21/12 03:17 AM

Hey how is everyone? Great work on all of this, it's really well thought-out. I just got the game today and was starting to edit the ratings to equal the FBG site. I did Ochocinco and Tony Romo, and neither overall rating was equal to the site after I input all the new ratings. Do you know why this could be or am I doing something wrong? Thanks.

# 828 Jack477 @ 09/21/12 03:47 AM

Sorry guys im confused what does this website do?

# 829 freddies33es22 @ 09/22/12 07:10 PM

I have now done Larry Fitzgerald, Mackenzy Bernadeau, Derrick Dockery and DeMarcus Ware on Madden 13 with updated ratings from the site.

Fitz is 94 as opposed to 98.
Bernadeau is 70 as opposed to 74.
Dockery is 84 as opposed to 77.
Ware is 94 as opposed to 97.

Why aren't they calibrating correctly? I use a 360. Will they be fixed on the next update? Maybe with the last update, they changed a calculation.

# 830 DCEBB2001 @ 09/24/12 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddies33es22


	Hey how is everyone? Great work on all of this, it's really well thought-out. I just got the game today and was starting to edit the ratings to equal the FBG site. I did Ochocinco and Tony Romo, and neither overall rating was equal to the site after I input all the new ratings. Do you know why this could be or am I doing something wrong? Thanks.

The OVR rating is based on a calculation of the attributes. It is different for each position. In between Madden 12 and Madden 13, EA changed the formula for calculating the OVR rating. They seem to do this year in and year out without warning/explanation. Calculating the OVR is a long and drawn out process that takes some time to get right as you need to do it manually in-game to be accurate since we do not really know what changes EA has made.

Now, I would have typically done this already, but the lack of editing for CCM has made me decide not to dedicate the time to going through the calculations this year.

However, if editing is patched into the game, I will do the OVR calculations and update them on the site so the attributes correctly add up to the OVR ratings.

# 831 DCEBB2001 @ 09/24/12 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack477


	Sorry guys im confused what does this website do?

The site utilizes real NFL scouting data to create Madden ratings. Physical attributes like STR, AGI, SPD, ACC, and JMP are determined by measurable and verifiable data. Position-specific attributes are determined by a collection of real NFL scouting information provided to me by prominent sources. All data is only interpolated into Madden ratings if it is verifiable. Conjecture and speculation is kept to a minimum.

All ratings are also normalized for all players, regardless of position. That means that players do not receive attribute increases or decreases based on position. All players are rated on an equal scale. This combats EA's illogical approach to rating players based off of measurable data.

This thread contains a wealth of info so I suggest reading through for more details. I also encourage you to listen to the two following podcasts where I was interviewed on the ratings process:

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/operati...-fbgratingscom

http://www.vgrevolution.com/2012/08/...-1-dan-berens/

# 832 DCEBB2001 @ 09/24/12 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freddies33es22


	I have now done Larry Fitzgerald, Mackenzy Bernadeau, Derrick Dockery and DeMarcus Ware on Madden 13 with updated ratings from the site. Fitz is 94 as opposed to 98. Bernadeau is 70 as opposed to 74. Dockery is 84 as opposed to 77. Ware is 94 as opposed to 97. Why aren't they calibrating correctly? I use a 360. Will they be fixed on the next update? Maybe with the last update, they changed a calculation.

Please see post #869.

# 833 at23steelers @ 09/25/12 02:57 PM

What's your opinion of this DCEBB?

"MJD wants his catch rating increased and he needs your help!

LIKE if you think MJD's catch rating should go up from a 77 to an 80! If 10K or more of you agree, we'll make the change in the next roster update!"

# 834 DCEBB2001 @ 09/25/12 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by at23steelers


	What's your opinion of this DCEBB? "MJD wants his catch rating increased and he needs your help! LIKE if you think MJD's catch rating should go up from a 77 to an 80! If 10K or more of you agree, we'll make the change in the next roster update!"

Wow. Just another excuse to get rid of those clowns doing the ratings at EA. They use fan polls and now PROTESTS to create ratings instead of empirical data? Unreal.

# 835 SloeyEZ @ 09/25/12 03:09 PM

Explain to me the reason for wanting realistic, up-to-the-minute ratings for NFL players? I only play franchise/career modes so after a year of that, my ratings are based on my events, and not the real world, so what type of gamer/game are updated ratings good for?

# 836 DCEBB2001 @ 09/25/12 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SloeyEZ


	Explain to me the reason for wanting realistic, up-to-the-minute ratings for NFL players? I only play franchise/career modes so after a year of that, my ratings are based on my events, and not the real world, so what type of gamer/game are updated ratings good for?

What about people who want multiple CCMs or who start them later. How about those who want to use them in tournaments or play-now modes? The ratings are updated often because the NFL is constantly changing. Player movement is constant and players are evaluated on a weekly basis by their own teams and opposing scouting departments. To not keep the site updated and update the ratings regularly would not make sense because of those factors.

So perhaps they are important to other people who don't just use them in franchise/CCM as you do.

# 837 MarcDub @ 09/25/12 04:55 PM

Can we download these rosters to a flash drive or do we have to manually input them???

# 838 SloeyEZ @ 09/25/12 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	What about people who want multiple CCMs or who start them later. How about those who want to use them in tournaments or play-now modes? The ratings are updated often because the NFL is constantly changing. Player movement is constant and players are evaluated on a weekly basis by their own teams and opposing scouting departments. To not keep the site updated and update the ratings regularly would not make sense because of those factors. So perhaps they are important to other people who don't just use them in franchise/CCM as you do.

Okay, like I said, I was just asking a question because I really didn't know. Didn't mean to insult in any way, sorry. It makes sense for the tournaments and play now modes like you said. Thanks for answering the question.

# 839 DCEBB2001 @ 09/25/12 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MarcDub


	Can we download these rosters to a flash drive or do we have to manually input them???

At this point it is all manual.

# 840 at23steelers @ 09/25/12 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	At this point it is all manual.

Just curious, how come ratesports can create a roster for APF 2k8 that we can download onto a flash drive? Is the same thing possible on Madden?

« Previous 1 2…39 40 414243 44 45…76 77 Next »

More Links

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game