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

# 1021 DCEBB2001 @ 08/29/13 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	@DCEBB why couldn't you just have told EA what they wanted to hear in that phone interview "yeah sir, I'll tow the company line" then got in the door and did all the good you could? lol I'm sorta joking and I definitely respect you standing by your principles, it's just disappointing feeling like there is no voice of reason at Tiburon concerning ratings. I apparently just realized it's the year 2013 today and remembered you can rent M25 through Redbox, so I will be interested to hear when anyone(s) actually accomplish creating a FBG Ratings roster. Maybe we could even get which over Mod is running the OS Online Community to use it there for OS online games.

It seemed very obvious in my hour-and-a-half phone interview that they wanted to move Donny up to another position. This took place in the midst of their Madden Exodus, so they had some positions to open. They did want someone to come in and tow the company line though, and lying to get the job, then revealing my "true" intentions would have yielded the same result...aside from my moving costs and lack of employment.

I got the overwhelming impression via the questions they asked me and the answers they gave me to mine, that the suits run the show and that the devs want to make the game better. I think there is more internal conflict going on than what we are privy to knowing at this time (or at least there was).

The advantages that I have in rating players is the source material, understanding of kinematics, and logic. The cool thing is that my results are repeatable, like any scientific experiment and if EA used the most logical methodology, they would get results similar to mine...so long as the sources are congruent.

# 1022 Pezell04x @ 08/31/13 09:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	Hey DCEBB and anyone else that wants to chime in, I wanted to get your opinion on something I have been advocating for awhile. What's your thoughts on using the INJ rating to represent the more naturally frail positions and players? What I mean is that I feel like in general QBs, Kickers and Punters should have lower INJ ratings, as well as players of smaller stature, to denote the need to protect them in game. I think the QB/K/P reasoning speaks for itself and for the smaller stature players I oft use the example that Marvin Harrison explained that the way he was able to play so long and avoid major injury was by getting down to avoid the big hits. Of course there would be some exceptions to this, players like Rothlisberger and Janakwoski come to mind but for the most part I think this would encourage protecting the more vulnerable players/positions. Right now in the game, there is little to no reason to fear injury having a User controlled QB knocked down, sending a string bean receiver over the middle or having 180 pound DB hit stick a FB. What are some thoughts and opinions on using the INJ rating in a way to change this?

I think that's very realistic. Go for it. Holding off on starting my CFM until these are done.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

# 1023 DCEBB2001 @ 08/31/13 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big FN Deal


	Hey DCEBB and anyone else that wants to chime in, I wanted to get your opinion on something I have been advocating for awhile. What's your thoughts on using the INJ rating to represent the more naturally frail positions and players? What I mean is that I feel like in general QBs, Kickers and Punters should have lower INJ ratings, as well as players of smaller stature, to denote the need to protect them in game. I think the QB/K/P reasoning speaks for itself and for the smaller stature players I oft use the example that Marvin Harrison explained that the way he was able to play so long and avoid major injury was by getting down to avoid the big hits. Of course there would be some exceptions to this, players like Rothlisberger and Janakwoski come to mind but for the most part I think this would encourage protecting the more vulnerable players/positions. Right now in the game, there is little to no reason to fear injury having a User controlled QB knocked down, sending a string bean receiver over the middle or having 180 pound DB hit stick a FB. What are some thoughts and opinions on using the INJ rating in a way to change this?

The INJ and TGH ratings on the FBG site are also the result of the scouting data. Basically, if the data says that a players INJ or TGH rating needs to be a 95, then we have to rate them as an 85. These measures, like all other FBG rating attributes, are relative to all players regardless of position. It is what it is, without having to account for the position a player plays.

I can provide you with a breakdown of the average ratings by position, however, to illustrate the numbers if you like:

INJ by position:
K: 81
P: 79
C: 71
QB: 70
WR: 70
DE: 70
CB: 70
OT: 69
OG: 69
DT: 67
FB: 67
S: 67
RB: 66
TE: 66
OLB: 64
ILB: 64
LS: 62

TGH by position:
QB: 74
TE: 69
LS: 69
DT: 68
RB: 67
FB: 67
C: 67
ILB: 67
S: 67
OT: 66
OG: 66
DE: 66
OLB: 66
CB: 65
P: 63
K: 62
WR: 61

When you compare both lists you can make a few assumptions:

1. Ks and Ps are by far the least likely to be injured. This likely has to do with the number of plays they play on the field and their proximity to the ball and the battle in the trenches.

2. Positions that utilize a lot of contact at speed are more susceptible to injury. It is the combination of SPD and contact that results in this correlation. The LBs, TEs, and RBs are the most vulnerable to this combination. LSs appear to be the lowest because of their vulnerability while snapping and sprinting down to cover punts.

3. WRs and CBs, because of their proximity to the trenches also are less likely to be injured. The fact that most WRs are facing defenders of comparable size (CBs and Ss) most of the time helps this.

4. QBs are less likely to be injured than all other offensive backs. Perhaps the new rules on the QBs has something to do with this.

5. QBs are TOUGH. They are above and beyond the toughest players on the field. They always have the ball in their hands on offensive plays (aside from the Wildcat and direct snaps) so the amount of contact they are susceptible to is high. However, they show more resiliency to injury than any other position group. QBs are a different breed. They are expected to stand tall, step up into a pocket bravely, deliver a pass, get hit, and get back up. Enough said.

6. All interior offensive backs (TEs, RBs, FBs,) are comparably tough to their interior defensive counterparts (DEs, DTs, ILBs, OLBs).

7. Ks, Ps, and WRs are the least tough of all positions, despite being less susceptible to injury. This is likely due to their proximity to the ball and tendency to shy away from contact on the outside. CBs also fit this group, but are required to engage in contact rather than avoid it.

# 1024 Blazelore @ 09/01/13 12:00 AM

With the rate of injuries in the game this year and FBG's ratings you are really going to have to focus on adding depth to your squad. This makes it even better.

# 1025 rudyjuly2 @ 09/01/13 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Keep in mind that blocking is part of the OVR calculation for a RB...

Not in Madden though. They don't use blocking for RBs in their overall formula.

# 1026 DCEBB2001 @ 09/01/13 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	Not in Madden though. They don't use blocking for RBs in their overall formula.

When you go to edit a player in Madden, you are only able to edit (in the game, without the use of an external editor) the traits that EA considers to be position-specific. For RBs, this includes STR, AGI, SPD, ACC, AWR, CTH, CAR, PBK, RBK, JMP, RET, TRK, ELU, BCV, SFA, SPM, JKM, IBL, RBS, RBF, PBS, PBF, SPC, CIT, RTE, REL, INJ, STA, TGH.

However, PBK, RBK, JMP, RET, IBL, RBS, RBF, PBS, PBF, SPC, CIT, REL, INJ, STA, and TGH do not affect the OVR rating in Madden.

This, to me, is a major flaw. The scouting data I have insists that ratings like the ones left out in Madden are included in evaluating the OVR rating of a RB. Therefore, according to my source material, those attributes SHOULD affect the OVR rating of a player. Guys like Adrian Peterson will be capped out at their OVR rating for this reason, and those attributes that may not affect the OVR rating in Madden will be equally adjusted as if they did affect the OVR rating.

EA needs to adjust how they realistically qualify a position. Leaving things related at pass blocking, catching, return skills, leaping, and overall health/shape is asinine and purely unacceptable for someone wanting a realistic video game. Look to the NFL for real-world examples. Green Bay just cut Alex Green in favor of the oft-injured James Starks yesterday because of his ability to perform well in pass protection. If they were really confident in Lacy and Franklin as blockers in the backfield, I doubt they would have kept Starks, especially since there were trying to trade him earlier this offseason. If you don't think that blocking skills can affect a RBs player grade, you haven't seen enough of the NFL.

# 1027 rudyjuly2 @ 09/01/13 01:02 PM

I completely agree. I was just pointing out how Madden is broken in the ratings. I've broken them down myself in SPSS.

What drives me nuts most of all is how weight is meaningless in Madden. We've seen those videos of 150 pound OTs stone walling JJ Watt. I HATE seeing that my 240 pound OLB is a better DE than my starter. He'd never last there. Without a weight affect there is no difference from an undersized OLB playing DE, a light 4-3 pass rusher or a big 3-4 DE. It's not realistic or accurate.

# 1028 DCEBB2001 @ 09/01/13 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rudyjuly2


	I completely agree. I was just pointing out how Madden is broken in the ratings. I've broken them down myself in SPSS. What drives me nuts most of all is how weight is meaningless in Madden. We've seen those videos of 150 pound OTs stone walling JJ Watt. I HATE seeing that my 240 pound OLB is a better DE than my starter. He'd never last there. Without a weight affect there is no difference from an undersized OLB playing DE, a light 4-3 pass rusher or a big 3-4 DE. It's not realistic or accurate.

Be careful when using "weight" as a measure for success, though. Success at the point of attack is more about technique, strength, and leverage. When MJD stone-walled Merriman, he was at a weight disadvantage of 51 pounds. That is almost 25% more weight than Jones-Drew. I can see where the LIKELINESS of a 150lb OT stone walling a 280lb DE is a bit faulty, but to simply chalk it up to "weight" is a bit of a fallacy.

Success at the NFL level, especially at the point of attack, is the result of a COMBINATION of factors. For example, if you have an OT that is 6-6, 300lbs and a DE that is 6-6, 300lbs you may think that it is a stalemate if you simply factor in size. However, what you may not see is that that OT can only bench 250lbs and squat 400lbs while the DE can bench 450 and squat 600. Who do you think would win that battle? I would say the LIKELIHOOD of the DE winning that battle at the point of attack increases drastically when strength is applied.

Now, take that example and add another physical attribute like footwork. In a pass-block scenario, let's say that the same OT has graded out at a HOF-level (think Anthony Munoz) as a pass-blocker, while the same DE grades out as a raw, technically-undeveloped, pass rusher who has the pass rush skills of a middle school girls volleyball player. Who do you think wins this battle now? The sizes are the same, one player is much stronger, but the other is better technically.

I use this far-fetched example (although not THAT far fetched if you understand that there are OL-men in the NFL who can't bench their own bodyweight) to illustrate that there are several factors that must be COMBINED to reach an outcome. Sure you can compare size to size or strength to strength, but when you combine multiple factors, the range of results reaches toward a wider variance. That correlation (between increasing factors and increasing variance) is a positive correlation. The bottom line is, we have to attempt to keep from over-simplifying.

# 1029 lendog691 @ 09/02/13 07:10 PM

I wanted to say thanks for the guys that are working on the rosters and to the op for giving us the info on everything he has. I play sports video games for the realism and sim factors and the rosters make it sound as though we might finally have some realism in the game, THANK YOU ALL!

# 1030 DCEBB2001 @ 09/02/13 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lendog691


	I wanted to say thanks for the guys that are working on the rosters and to the op for giving us the info on everything he has. I play sports video games for the realism and sim factors and the rosters make it sound as though we might finally have some realism in the game, THANK YOU ALL!

You are most welcome. I have finally cracked all of the OVR calculations for all positions, so I will be updating the attributes in the coming weeks for all players.

Perhaps we need to start a petition to protest my replacement with Donny Moore at EA.

# 1031 xian11 @ 09/02/13 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	You are most welcome. I have finally cracked all of the OVR calculations for all positions, so I will be updating the attributes in the coming weeks for all players. Perhaps we need to start a petition to protest my replacement with Donny Moore at EA.

Hear, hear!

# 1032 caballero @ 09/03/13 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	When you go to edit a player in Madden, you are only able to edit (in the game, without the use of an external editor) the traits that EA considers to be position-specific. For RBs, this includes STR, AGI, SPD, ACC, AWR, CTH, CAR, PBK, RBK, JMP, RET, TRK, ELU, BCV, SFA, SPM, JKM, IBL, RBS, RBF, PBS, PBF, SPC, CIT, RTE, REL, INJ, STA, TGH. However, PBK, RBK, JMP, RET, IBL, RBS, RBF, PBS, PBF, SPC, CIT, REL, INJ, STA, and TGH do not affect the OVR rating in Madden. This, to me, is a major flaw. The scouting data I have insists that ratings like the ones left out in Madden are included in evaluating the OVR rating of a RB. Therefore, according to my source material, those attributes SHOULD affect the OVR rating of a player. Guys like Adrian Peterson will be capped out at their OVR rating for this reason, and those attributes that may not affect the OVR rating in Madden will be equally adjusted as if they did affect the OVR rating. EA needs to adjust how they realistically qualify a position. Leaving things related at pass blocking, catching, return skills, leaping, and overall health/shape is asinine and purely unacceptable for someone wanting a realistic video game. Look to the NFL for real-world examples. Green Bay just cut Alex Green in favor of the oft-injured James Starks yesterday because of his ability to perform well in pass protection. If they were really confident in Lacy and Franklin as blockers in the backfield, I doubt they would have kept Starks, especially since there were trying to trade him earlier this offseason. If you don't think that blocking skills can affect a RBs player grade, you haven't seen enough of the NFL.

-you could temporarily switch the player to another position and edit the necessary attributes. Been doing this for years for special teamers, sometimes WRs or TEs with very low TKL ratings when in fact they could be real good IRL

-block ratings should definitely factor in the RB's OVR!
they factor a bit in 3rd Down back formula (in Depth Chart, wish I could figure this one out!)

-I think they kept Starks cos as as a 6th rounder he never really disappointed, while Green a 3rd rounder the following season did

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	You are most welcome. I have finally cracked all of the OVR calculations for all positions, so I will be updating the attributes in the coming weeks for all players. Perhaps we need to start a petition to protest my replacement with Donny Moore at EA.

Would you be so kind to post them, PM them to me or at least give me directions on how to figure these out?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	there are OL-men in the NFL who can't bench their own bodyweight

lies lol! names?

# 1033 DCEBB2001 @ 09/03/13 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caballero


	lies lol! names?

Wish I could say it's false but...it's true. In the database there are currently 1015 OL and DL that weigh more than they can bench. Here are some notable players who are on NFL rosters or were in NFL camps this summer. Below are their names, weights, and 1RM in the bench press. How many of these guys does EA have rated in the "90s" for STR I wonder? Just more evidence that EAs ratings are a joke and even further evidence that they use NO empirical data when rating players.

Michael Jasper 394 376
T.J. Barnes 369 365
Terrell Brown 388 342
Terrence Cody 349 342
James Nelson 323 320
Cory Brandon 325 315
Stefan Charles 328 315
Dewayne Cherrington 345 315
Dennis Godfrey 340 315
Nick Jean-Baptiste 330 315
Byron Jerideau 334 315
Terren Jones 341 315
David Mims 331 315
Lucas Nix 317 315
Andre Smith 332 315
Justin Wells 318 315
Anthony Rashad White 335 315
Brennan Williams 318 315
Lee Ziemba 317 315
A.J. Hawkins 311 308
Oday Aboushi 308 306
Jamaal Johnson-Webb 313 306
Oscar Johnson 331 304
Marcel Jones 320 304
Antoine McClain 329 304
J.B. Shugarts 308 304
Donald Stephenson 312 304

# 1034 Robo COP @ 09/04/13 02:50 AM

bench press is an incredibly overrated way to determine the strength of a man

# 1035 caballero @ 09/04/13 05:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robo COP


	bench press is an incredibly overrated way to determine the strength of a man

who's this dedicated to?

If DCEBB, he'll tell you, like he has in this thread already, that he does not ONLY use the Bench Press Reps.

If to me, I know BP doesn't tell the whole story either.
FYI guys with longer arms are at a disadvantage when coming to Reps, doesn't mean they're not football stronger.

If to EA, their strength ratings are incredibly flawed, and you can tell they don't use Reps at all: 300lb+ pound Guard Bernadeau's at 98 STR with 19 reps... Bethea, a 200lbs safety also had 19... STR rating? 67!

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Wish I could say it's false but...it's true. In the database there are currently 1015 OL and DL that weigh more than they can bench. Here are some notable players who are on NFL rosters or were in NFL camps this summer. Below are their names, weights, and 1RM in the bench press. How many of these guys does EA have rated in the "90s" for STR I wonder? Just more evidence that EAs ratings are a joke and even further evidence that they use NO empirical data when rating players

Jasper 94
Cody 97 (

)
Cory Brandon 83
Jean-Baptiste 81
Mims 93
Lucas Nix 82
Andre Smith 96
Brennan Williams 88
Ziemba 89
Aboushi 78 (

a lineman they didn't put too high, probably cos he's on the Jets)
Marcel Jones 88
Antoine McClain 81
Donald Stephenson 85

(T.J. Barnes, Terrell Brown, James Nelson, Stefan Charles, Dewayne Cherrington, Dennis Godfrey, Byron Jerideau, Terren Jones, Justin Wells, Anthony Rashad White, Jamaal Johnson-Webb, J.B. Shugarts, A.J. Hawkins & Oscar Johnson aren't in the game)

4 out of 13, my friend. That is EA gets 4 guys totally wrong, 8 wrong and (maybe) one right. Haha they fail!

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I have finally cracked all of the OVR calculations for all positions, so I will be updating the attributes in the coming weeks for all players. Perhaps we need to start a petition to protest my replacement with Donny Moore at EA.

Would you be so kind to give me directions on how to figure these out (or even better, post or PM them?)

# 1036 DCEBB2001 @ 09/04/13 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robo COP


	bench press is an incredibly overrated way to determine the strength of a man

We also use the 1RM in the squat to determine the STR rating.

# 1037 DCEBB2001 @ 09/04/13 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by caballero


	who's this dedicated to? If DCEBB, he'll tell you, like he has in this thread already, that he does not ONLY use the Bench Press Reps. If to me, I know BP doesn't tell the whole story either. FYI guys with longer arms are at a disadvantage when coming to Reps, doesn't mean they're not football stronger. If to EA, their strength ratings are incredibly flawed, and you can tell they don't use Reps at all: 300lb+ pound Guard Bernadeau's at 98 STR with 19 reps... Bethea, a 200lbs safety also had 19... STR rating? 67! Jasper 94 Cody 97 () Cory Brandon 83 Jean-Baptiste 81 Mims 93 Lucas Nix 82 Andre Smith 96 Brennan Williams 88 Ziemba 89 Aboushi 78 (a lineman they didn't put too high, probably cos he's on the Jets) Marcel Jones 88 Antoine McClain 81 Donald Stephenson 85 (T.J. Barnes, Terrell Brown, James Nelson, Stefan Charles, Dewayne Cherrington, Dennis Godfrey, Byron Jerideau, Terren Jones, Justin Wells, Anthony Rashad White, Jamaal Johnson-Webb, J.B. Shugarts, A.J. Hawkins & Oscar Johnson aren't in the game) 4 out of 13, my friend. That is EA gets 4 guys totally wrong, 8 wrong and (maybe) one right. Haha they fail!

It seems to me that EA is using the WEIGHT of a player and assuming they are stronger. The correlation between weight and STR in the game is very strong, albeit, false. Heavier doesn't always mean stronger. I'm 6-2, 205 and I can out bench, squat, and clean several of my friends with 60-100lbs on me.

# 1038 youALREADYknow @ 09/04/13 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	It seems to me that EA is using the WEIGHT of a player and assuming they are stronger.

I'd go the other way and say that it seems that the Madden team has been covering up their inability to use mass/weight in their animation outcomes by using the STR rating as a "weight" modifier in the trenches for things such as blocking/trucking/etc.

They have been doing this for years and going the other route (accurately reflecting player strength without weight as a factor) will only serve to expose the game engine's flaws as it pertains to weight/mass and leverage.

Your approach is more accurate and objective so I'm not criticizing it at all. I'm simply stating that there are some things that handcuff you from using real world data since the "environment" that you're using isn't close to the real world environment the data is coming from.

I'd imagine that some time next-gen, you'll be able to see a huge benefit to your STR ratings in-game.

# 1039 wordtobigbird @ 09/04/13 03:46 PM

Everyone check out these rosters on 360.

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...hed-360-a.html

# 1040 Tomba @ 09/04/13 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by youALREADYknow


	I'd go the other way and say that it seems that the Madden team has been covering up their inability to use mass/weight in their animation outcomes by using the STR rating as a "weight" modifier in the trenches for things such as blocking/trucking/etc. They have been doing this for years and going the other route (accurately reflecting player strength without weight as a factor) will only serve to expose the game engine's flaws as it pertains to weight/mass and leverage. Your approach is more accurate and objective so I'm not criticizing it at all. I'm simply stating that there are some things that handcuff you from using real world data since the "environment" that you're using isn't close to the real world environment the data is coming from. I'd imagine that some time next-gen, you'll be able to see a huge benefit to your STR ratings in-game.

HIT the nail on the head with what i have bolded...

I feel a value of 100 though for ALL players no matter what makes the bumping animation play out much better than at zero

BUT again too much work

I HAVE played with these edits on ps3 madden 25 and along with sliders make it play like my madden 12 edit which im loving!

« Previous 1 2…49 50 515253 54 55…76 77 Next »

More Links

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game