07:32 PM - July 18, 2011 by Steve_OS
Donny Moore recently announced four players in Madden NFL 12 rated at 99. Are they overrated? Who do you feel should be rated this high?
|
|||||||||
|
Madden 12 News Post
07:32 PM - July 18, 2011 by Steve_OSDonny Moore recently announced four players in Madden NFL 12 rated at 99. Are they overrated? Who do you feel should be rated this high?
Madden NFL 12 Videos
Member Comments
# 21
scfootballfan @ 07/18/11 08:38 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 22
HeavyHitter55 @ 07/18/11 08:51 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
1st rounders - 70-79 (absolute elite rookies in college above 77: Von Miller, A.J. Green, Prince Amukamara, Marcell Dareus)
2nd & 3rd rounders - 60-69 (a pretty even distribution here)
Rounds 4 through 7 - 46-59
rookie free agent - 30-45
I know that no rookie ever proves that he belongs in the NFL, but that doesn't mean that you can't neglect what he's done at a level lower. Anyway, there's a lot that goes into the NFL draft, why should it not be reflected?
# 24
scfootballfan @ 07/18/11 08:58 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
Throw out the nagging injuries and Ed Reed is one of the greatest safeties ever. 8 picks in 10 games to Polamalus 7 in 14.
# 26
HeavyHitter55 @ 07/18/11 09:29 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
I didn't bash your scale so sarcastically, so don't bash mine with the same huh?
Roster share would be so fantastic. I like so many want stretched ratings but don't have the time, patience or energy to re-rate the entire league. I would prefer that the game shipped with stretched out ratings with 1-5 95+ players in the league, but I personally don't care if TJ Houshmazzilly is upset with a 68 OVR.
To expand upon that thought, ratings should be done by a group so they get done correctly. As it is now, players know who to complain to when their ratings are low, and sometimes influence a change.
To expand upon that thought, ratings should be done by a group so they get done correctly. As it is now, players know who to complain to when their ratings are low, and sometimes influence a change.
I can buy Brady at 99 ONLY if Manning is 99.
Revis is about as much of a consensus 99 as you are going to get. And as I saw "media hype" mentioned, there is no getting around it as he plays in New York on one of the most media friendly teams in the league right now, but he still deserves the rating.
However, Nnamdi should also get a 99. He has had something like 98 passes even thrown at him since like 08 or 07. He is ridiculous.
Polomalu is the joke of this list. You are going to sit here and tell me that the best safety in the league is going to be so burnt and massively out of position in the SUPER BOWL that, if it weren't for the rest of the teams glaring mistakes, he would almost single handily be taking the blame for the Steelers losing that game? No way.
You are going to sit there and tell me Polomalu is better than Ed Reed? Excuse me, but absolutely not. Hell, I don't even think he is better than Adrian Wilson or Brian Dawkins. Certainly not a healthy Bob Sanders.
My GLARING omissions are Patrick Willis, who has been as consistent as any player on an elite level over a 4 year period, pretty much ever.
Haloti Ngata who is just absolutely unstoppable.
The a fore mentioned Reed.
However, I am guessing my ommisions are going to come in as 97s or 98s which isn't that bad.
Revis is about as much of a consensus 99 as you are going to get. And as I saw "media hype" mentioned, there is no getting around it as he plays in New York on one of the most media friendly teams in the league right now, but he still deserves the rating.
However, Nnamdi should also get a 99. He has had something like 98 passes even thrown at him since like 08 or 07. He is ridiculous.
Polomalu is the joke of this list. You are going to sit here and tell me that the best safety in the league is going to be so burnt and massively out of position in the SUPER BOWL that, if it weren't for the rest of the teams glaring mistakes, he would almost single handily be taking the blame for the Steelers losing that game? No way.
You are going to sit there and tell me Polomalu is better than Ed Reed? Excuse me, but absolutely not. Hell, I don't even think he is better than Adrian Wilson or Brian Dawkins. Certainly not a healthy Bob Sanders.
My GLARING omissions are Patrick Willis, who has been as consistent as any player on an elite level over a 4 year period, pretty much ever.
Haloti Ngata who is just absolutely unstoppable.
The a fore mentioned Reed.
However, I am guessing my ommisions are going to come in as 97s or 98s which isn't that bad.
# 29
steinhauser34 @ 07/18/11 09:42 PM
antonio gates is not a 99. tom brady 97 or 98 you choose. I got no opinion on Revis. polomalu is DEFINETLY a 99. go back and watch steelers defense without him and it's a night and day difference. he may have had a bad game in the superbowl but he is definetly the most influential defensive player in the NFL and usually comes out and plays top notch. I'm a Bears fan so i'm not playing favorites but if you can't see that polomalu is a 99 then you didn't watch enough football last year.
# 30
Millennium @ 07/18/11 09:42 PM
They are talking about this on the OS Radio show now. They say Gates and Revis don't deserve the overall 99.
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/operati...edition?ie8c=0
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/operati...edition?ie8c=0
Unless the QB runs like VIck and passes like Manning, I don't see him being 99.
Let me go ahead and throw my two cents in on the rating system, as that seems to be where this thread is going.
It needs to be a sliding scale.
By that I mean you have someone, WR A, at 99 OVR. His speed is 99. His catching is in the 90s, accel in the high 80s and the other traits that make him a 99 are all high.
Now you have a rookie come in, WR B, that is faster at 4.21. Now that 40 time is now the fasted making his speed 99 and dropping WR A's speed to 98 because his 40 was only a 4.24, however, his OVR isn't affected, yet.
Two years later and WR A in his 5th year has gotten better. Stats are all in the 90's now. However, WR B in his 3rd year, is still faster, and in his three years has developed better hands and route running than WR A, so his OVR is now 99 because he is the best in the game and WR B drops to a 98 or 97 because he is no longer the best, yet he is 5 OVR points ahead of #3, 4 and 5.
Even though WR A has gotten better, his rating drops because it represents the overall package in comparison to the other players in the game at the position.
Now I noticed that someone said 99s should be 'reserved' for guys like Rice. But when Rice was playing, he was certainly not the fastest, nor did he have the best hands (Chris Carter did, and Rice will tell you that himself), but his OVR would have made him the only 99 in the game.
If you dropped him into the mix with hypothetical WR A and B, they would then drop down to 97, 96 or whatever the scale dictated to adjust for the high ratings Rice would have across the board. He gets hurt and retires, then they would go back up to 99 and 98 respectively.
This would be the ideal system, however, with the way the game works, I don't think anyone would tolerate the load times it would take for the game to readjust every player if you decided to adjust just one player. It would probably be horrendous.
So we have what we have now.
I would like to have adjustment abilities in season and in franchise though. I swore it was there one year.
It needs to be a sliding scale.
By that I mean you have someone, WR A, at 99 OVR. His speed is 99. His catching is in the 90s, accel in the high 80s and the other traits that make him a 99 are all high.
Now you have a rookie come in, WR B, that is faster at 4.21. Now that 40 time is now the fasted making his speed 99 and dropping WR A's speed to 98 because his 40 was only a 4.24, however, his OVR isn't affected, yet.
Two years later and WR A in his 5th year has gotten better. Stats are all in the 90's now. However, WR B in his 3rd year, is still faster, and in his three years has developed better hands and route running than WR A, so his OVR is now 99 because he is the best in the game and WR B drops to a 98 or 97 because he is no longer the best, yet he is 5 OVR points ahead of #3, 4 and 5.
Even though WR A has gotten better, his rating drops because it represents the overall package in comparison to the other players in the game at the position.
Now I noticed that someone said 99s should be 'reserved' for guys like Rice. But when Rice was playing, he was certainly not the fastest, nor did he have the best hands (Chris Carter did, and Rice will tell you that himself), but his OVR would have made him the only 99 in the game.
If you dropped him into the mix with hypothetical WR A and B, they would then drop down to 97, 96 or whatever the scale dictated to adjust for the high ratings Rice would have across the board. He gets hurt and retires, then they would go back up to 99 and 98 respectively.
This would be the ideal system, however, with the way the game works, I don't think anyone would tolerate the load times it would take for the game to readjust every player if you decided to adjust just one player. It would probably be horrendous.
So we have what we have now.
I would like to have adjustment abilities in season and in franchise though. I swore it was there one year.
While I agree all but Revis are the best at their respective positions, none of the them should be 99 overall.
# 34
blklightning @ 07/18/11 10:46 PM
since everyone seems to think that ratings don't matter, i don't see how there could be an issue with any player being a 99.
# 35
blklightning @ 07/18/11 10:50 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 36
phillysouljah @ 07/18/11 11:06 PM
I'm amused by the Antonio Gates vs. Witten debate here. I wish this debate happened in Week 12, before Gates finally stopped playing (after having suffered a severe foot injury since the start of the season!)... at that point, Gates was playing the best football from the TE position I have ever seen. I think hindsight is blinding people here. Gates was scary dominant those 10 games, even with the foot injury.
In 10 games, Gates had 10 TDs. (Witten had 9 in 16 games)
In 10 games, Gates had 3 100+ yard performances. (Witten had 1 in 16 games)
Gates had a career high 78.2 yards per game (Witten: 62.6)
More yards per game, more 100+ yard games where he simply took over games, and more TD's... and Gates did it in 6 LESS games! Are you kidding me?
And who were defenses worrying about against San Diego? No Vincent Jackson and all the receivers were injured half the time... Gates got all the defensive attention but it didn't matter.
Compare that to Witten who was practically given all the underneath stuff on a platter from defenses worrying about Miles Austin, Dez Bryant, and even Roy Williams.
In 10 games, Gates had 10 TDs. (Witten had 9 in 16 games)
In 10 games, Gates had 3 100+ yard performances. (Witten had 1 in 16 games)
Gates had a career high 78.2 yards per game (Witten: 62.6)
More yards per game, more 100+ yard games where he simply took over games, and more TD's... and Gates did it in 6 LESS games! Are you kidding me?
And who were defenses worrying about against San Diego? No Vincent Jackson and all the receivers were injured half the time... Gates got all the defensive attention but it didn't matter.
Compare that to Witten who was practically given all the underneath stuff on a platter from defenses worrying about Miles Austin, Dez Bryant, and even Roy Williams.
# 37
14straight @ 07/18/11 11:33 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 38
14straight @ 07/18/11 11:35 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Only real problem I have is with the draft picks. You never know how 3rd and 4th rounders will turn out, so I think it's jumping the gun to set their ratings like that.
# 39
14straight @ 07/18/11 11:37 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
# 40
robbiedizzle @ 07/18/11 11:43 PM
|
|||||||||||||
|
Post A Comment
Working...