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

# 1081 Playmakers @ 03/26/14 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I understand, but the big thing that people were "commenting" (ok, complaining) about was the fact that the OVR ratings were so far off in the system that I just changed. It basically made the game's franchise mode useless.

I guess this is where I differ from some others when it comes to the ratings.

I don't think the overall rating should be the #1 factor in rosters/ratings.

They basically don't mean much IMO on the field during actual gameplay.

What the goal should be is capturing true player tendencies and playing style on the field not his overall rating.

The problem with Madden in it's current state is too many players are very similar to each other because of the need to numerically organize players based on the overall rating.

No disrespect to those who complain about the overall ratings but I can assure you if they actually took the time out to rate players based only on strengths & weaknesses while ignoring the overall rating assigned to the players they would be flawed with the way this game plays on the field.

There's nothing more satisfying when playing Madden than watching a RB with average speed Emmitt Smith for example gash your defense because he utilizes his "Awareness Rating" and "Vision Rating" to IMPACT the game.

He's not just beating defenses because he was rated 94 speed and 98 acceleration (EA's way of doing things).

Your old ratings system brings out the best Momentum based animations on the field that are by the great to see.

Players with lower agility ratings can be seen taking true steps on the field when reacting to a play.

Agility plays such a huge role in Foot Planting or Change of Direction in Madden and it reduces a great amount of Sliding you see on the field even before they went to the Infinity Engine.

I love your passing ratings Short, Medium and Deep because years ago I would have to assign Different In game Slider settings for every QB using EA's rating players.

Now, I can actually pick up and play games with Default settings for All QB's and see a wide variety of throws in the game that leads to all kinds of realistic incompletions depending the actual Individual QB ratings.

# 1082 DCEBB2001 @ 03/27/14 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Playmakers


	I guess this is where I differ from some others when it comes to the ratings. I don't think the overall rating should be the #1 factor in rosters/ratings. They basically don't mean much IMO on the field during actual gameplay. What the goal should be is capturing true player tendencies and playing style on the field not his overall rating. The problem with Madden in it's current state is too many players are very similar to each other because of the need to numerically organize players based on the overall rating. No disrespect to those who complain about the overall ratings but I can assure you if they actually took the time out to rate players based only on strengths & weaknesses while ignoring the overall rating assigned to the players they would be flawed with the way this game plays on the field. There's nothing more satisfying when playing Madden than watching a RB with average speed Emmitt Smith for example gash your defense because he utilizes his "Awareness Rating" and "Vision Rating" to IMPACT the game. He's not just beating defenses because he was rated 94 speed and 98 acceleration (EA's way of doing things). Your old ratings system brings out the best Momentum based animations on the field that are by the great to see. Players with lower agility ratings can be seen taking true steps on the field when reacting to a play. Agility plays such a huge role in Foot Planting or Change of Direction in Madden and it reduces a great amount of Sliding you see on the field even before they went to the Infinity Engine. I love your passing ratings Short, Medium and Deep because years ago I would have to assign Different In game Slider settings for every QB using EA's rating players. Now, I can actually pick up and play games with Default settings for All QB's and see a wide variety of throws in the game that leads to all kinds of realistic incompletions depending the actual Individual QB ratings.

I can't disagree with a word you say. I just have to be able to use the ratings in-game for those who need it (roster producers who use the rating in franchise modes). Trust me, I really prefer the "true" method as well, but it does us no good if we cannot edit the draft classes. I sure hope EA changes this since NCAA is cancelled. If that happens, then I have no problem going back to the ratings I had that are more true to the scouting data.

# 1083 DCEBB2001 @ 05/03/14 01:40 PM

The last update before the draft has been uploaded to the site guys. All of the depth charts are also updated, so you can see where your favorite team is lacking or may have a need before the draft.

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/de...team=Cardinals

You can select each team's depth chart from the drop down menu where it says "Depth Charts".

Also, check out the team in-depth analysis before the draft to see what direction your team may be going and what their primary needs are. One thing our visitors overlook is our great team analysis throughout the year.

http://www.fbgratings.com/members/team.php?TeamID=1

This includes the "Inside Slant", Notes and Quotes, and Strategy and Personnel. Check it all out!

# 1084 Fdiez @ 05/13/14 06:05 PM

Hello Dan, when do you think 2014 rookie's draft class will be available on the FBG website?

Thanks for your work.

# 1085 DCEBB2001 @ 05/13/14 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fdiez


	Hello Dan, when do you think 2014 rookie's draft class will be available on the FBG website? Thanks for your work.

The profiles will be up later this week hopefully.

As for them having ratings...just imagine rating 2500 rookies. Think how long that will take you, and you may be able to imagine how long it will take me.

# 1086 DCEBB2001 @ 05/26/14 10:39 AM

The rookies have all been given attributes in my database, but have not yet been uploaded to the website. Once I ensure that all of the OVR values match the sum of the attributes, I will post them to the website. I will also be updating the rosters before the next release. It should be completed this week.

DB

# 1087 charter04 @ 05/28/14 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	You either have to enter them all in each player at a time on your own or wait until we create an official FBG Ratings roster this upcoming season for DL.

Are you guys ever going to make downloadable rosters? I saw this mentioned a few times but, haven't seen any available.

# 1088 Hooe @ 05/28/14 04:50 PM

Hi DCEBB, a bit of a question / request if I may -

I know your ratings take into account injury, is there any way you could denote what effects to the ratings are specifically due to the presence of the injury? For example (and I think I've used this one before) - I see Eli Manning as an OVR 40 on your site and his throw accuracy short/mid/deep ratings are all dramatically lower than I'd expect (in the low 40s). I'd assume this is on account of injury, as he concluded last season on IR if I recall correctly. Is there any way that his pre-injury ratings could also be displayed, for purposes of creating a fresh injury-unaffected roster file for potential use in Connected Franchise mode?

Thanks for your consideration.

# 1089 charter04 @ 05/28/14 05:28 PM

Never mind on my question. I see why you don't now after reading some of the thread

# 1090 DCEBB2001 @ 05/28/14 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charter04


	Are you guys ever going to make downloadable rosters? I saw this mentioned a few times but, haven't seen any available.

As of now there are no concrete plans to do so. I have limited time and resources being stuck with all of the site stuff alone. I thought about outsourcing it, but have no funds to disperse and don't trust anyone to do "quality" work.

# 1091 DCEBB2001 @ 05/28/14 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CM Hooe


	Hi DCEBB, a bit of a question / request if I may - I know your ratings take into account injury, is there any way you could denote what effects to the ratings are specifically due to the presence of the injury? For example (and I think I've used this one before) - I see Eli Manning as an OVR 40 on your site and his throw accuracy short/mid/deep ratings are all dramatically lower than I'd expect (in the low 40s). I'd assume this is on account of injury, as he concluded last season on IR if I recall correctly. Is there any way that his pre-injury ratings could also be displayed, for purposes of creating a fresh injury-unaffected roster file for potential use in Connected Franchise mode? Thanks for your consideration.

Read the FAQ section of the website - it explains all of this. Ratings are real-time. We do not keep a record of the changes. What you see now is what it is for every player.

# 1092 mestevo @ 05/28/14 10:20 PM

Probably as close as you'll get:

http://web.archive.org/web/201007080....php?pyid=1146

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

# 1093 Hooe @ 05/28/14 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	Read the FAQ section of the website - it explains all of this. Ratings are real-time. We do not keep a record of the changes. What you see now is what it is for every player.

Yeah, sorry; a few hours after I posted that I remembered that 1 - I had already asked this question before, and 2 - that you mentioned this in the FAQ. My bad

# 1094 DCEBB2001 @ 05/31/14 04:39 PM

A quick update:

All players, including Rookies, have updated OVR ratings now. However, the attributes do not add up to them yet. The program I wrote to do all of the calculations takes over 2 days to run, so it will be a few more days before I get the correct attribute values uploaded.

If any of you are making rosters, I suggest holding off until the next update.

Otherwise, all of the OVRs are now correct as is the player movement as of this morning.

# 1095 HC0023 @ 06/01/14 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	A quick update: All players, including Rookies, have updated OVR ratings now. However, the attributes do not add up to them yet. The program I wrote to do all of the calculations takes over 2 days to run, so it will be a few more days before I get the correct attribute values uploaded. If any of you are making rosters, I suggest holding off until the next update. Otherwise, all of the OVRs are now correct as is the player movement as of this morning.

I wish this somehow can get to PS4 LOL

# 1096 HC0023 @ 06/01/14 01:33 PM

I actually made a thread on this subject on 8-27-2012. Hopefully 2014 is our year guys

# 1097 DCEBB2001 @ 06/03/14 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jovanitoliver415


	why they aint got they ratings numbers yet nobody have them....????

Because they are not done yet. When everyone has attributes, they will be done. It's a simple test to look for.

# 1098 DCEBB2001 @ 06/04/14 10:32 PM

All attributes have been updated for all players. Check them out and let me know what you think. If you spot an error, please send me a PM.

Keep in mind that this data set is in "traditional" FBG format (ca. 2004). The average physical attribute is 70, while the max and min are 99 and 1. All attributes have a set "average" point, which skews the max and min to this value. For instance, the average point for THP is 84 for QBs.

This is one of the ways we can rate players. The other ways are equal interval, M10, and M25, and a hybrid. The equal interval direction sets the minimum to 1, maximum to 99, but does not have an average point. Therefore, the distance between all points are the same (99-98=1, and 90-89=1). M10 rates all players like they are rated in Madden 10. M25 rates all players as they are rated in Madden 25. Both use the EA biases and average markers. A hybrid combines the FBG 1-99 ranges but uses either M10 or M25 to re-estimate the averages instead of using the traditional FBG averages. For instance, in M10, the average WR/TE CTH attribute is 79. In traditional FBG, the average is 66.

In traditional FBG, players will have lower average attributes but a wider scale. M10 and M25 have a smaller scale and a higher average. Equal interval only sets the scale without an average.

Let me know what method you may like best in your Madden experience.

DB

# 1099 charter04 @ 06/04/14 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	All attributes have been updated for all players. Check them out and let me know what you think. If you spot an error, please send me a PM. Keep in mind that this data set is in "traditional" FBG format (ca. 2004). The average physical attribute is 70, while the max and min are 99 and 1. All attributes have a set "average" point, which skews the max and min to this value. For instance, the average point for THP is 84 for QBs. This is one of the ways we can rate players. The other ways are equal interval, M10, and M25, and a hybrid. The equal interval direction sets the minimum to 1, maximum to 99, but does not have an average point. Therefore, the distance between all points are the same (99-98=1, and 90-89=1). M10 rates all players like they are rated in Madden 10. M25 rates all players as they are rated in Madden 25. Both use the EA biases and average markers. A hybrid combines the FBG 1-99 ranges but uses either M10 or M25 to re-estimate the averages instead of using the traditional FBG averages. For instance, in M10, the average WR/TE CTH attribute is 79. In traditional FBG, the average is 66. In traditional FBG, players will have lower average attributes but a wider scale. M10 and M25 have a smaller scale and a higher average. Equal interval only sets the scale without an average. Let me know what method you may like best in your Madden experience. DB

I'm more of a fan of equal interval. Either way can't really be used in CFM as is anyway. Until there is a draft class share on madden share. I know guys get all weird about overall ratings but, I just like the equal interval best.

# 1100 DCEBB2001 @ 06/04/14 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by charter04


	I'm more of a fan of equal interval. Either way can't really be used in CFM as is anyway. Until there is a draft class share on madden share. I know guys get all weird about overall ratings but, I just like the equal interval best.

Equal interval is by far the most ACCURATE method, especially for the interpolation of the scouting data. For instance, if the RET attribute scale is from 5.0 to 0.0 and the Madden range is 100 to 0, then you can determine that each 0.1 is equal to 2 points. Which makes sense, because if the scouting data says that Player A with a RET of 0.2 is twice as good at returning kicks and punts than Player B with a RET of 0.1, then that comes out to be a RET rating of 4 for Player A and 2 for Player B.

The problem is that people totally freak out when they see how low the OVR ratings are....starters in the 60s. The version currently on the website is more traditional-FBG, which is closer to current Madden, but utilizes old FBG metrics. I personally love the equal interval method, but once again, when I did it last year, people freaked out a bit too much.

« Previous 1 2…52 53 545556 57 58…76 77 Next »

More Links

FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game