Madden NFL 15 News Post

Madden NFL 15: Top Rookies

08:03 PM - July 21, 2014 by Hooe

EA Sports revealed the top rookies in Madden NFL 15 by rating today, including a quick video and new screenshots.

A more detailed look at the rookie ratings can be seen here.

Here's the list:

DE - Jadeveon Clowney - Houston (83 Overall)
OL - Greg Robinson - St. Louis (83 Overall)
OLB -Khalil Mack - Oakland (81 Overall)
OL - Jake Matthews - Atlanta (81 Overall)
WR - Sammy Watkins - Buffalo (80 Overall)
S - Calvyn Pryor - New York Jets (79 Overall)
DL - Aaron Donald - St. Louis (79 Overall)
S - Haha Clinton Dix - Green Bay (79 Overall)
OL - Taylor Lewan - Tennessee (79 Overall)
QB - Blake Bortles - Jacksonville (78 Overall)
CB - Darqueze Dennard - Cincinnati (78 Overall)
WR - Mike Evans - Tampa Bay (78 Overall)
OL - Zack Martin - Dallas (78 Overall)

What do you think of the ratings? Any glaring misses?

Here is a look at the release date schedule for more ratings.

Mon, July 21 � Top 10 Overall Rookies
Tues, July 22 � Top 5 Overall QBs
Wed, July 23 � Top 5 Overall RBs
Thurs, July 24 � Top 5 Overall WRs/Top 5 Overall TEs
Fri, July 25 � Top 5 Overall OL Players
Sat, July 26 � Top 5 Overall DEs
Sun, July 27 � Top 5 Overall DTs
Mon, July 28 � Top 5 Overall LBs
Tues, July 29 � Top 5 Overall CBs
Wed, July 30 � Top 5 Overall Safeties
Thurs, July 31 � Top 5 Overall Special Teams
Fri, Aug 1 � Top 10 Overall Players/Full AFC & NFC North Ratings
Sat, Aug 2 � Full AFC & NFC South Ratings
Sun, Aug 3 � Full AFC & NFC East Ratings
Mon, Aug 4 � Full AFC & NFC West Ratings
Tues, Aug 5 � Ratings Recap

Madden NFL 15 screenshot gallery - Click to view

Game: Madden NFL 15Reader Score: 6.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 42 - View All

Madden NFL 15 Videos

Member Comments

# 141 RogueHominid @ 07/22/14 02:26 PM

One question that I'm thinking about in the context of this thread and the Twitch stream is: how can Madden accurately represent the dilemma of playing or having to play rookies heavily in their first year, or even the first couple of years?

For example: teams don't generally want to start a rookie at LT. Why? My hunch is that their footwork and handwork need coaching up, as does their understanding of NFL blitz schemes and protection packages.

So how could Madden recreate that reality? And what would it mean/look like to think about the same issues at other positions?

# 142 Hooe @ 07/22/14 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robrain


	My answer is dead simple: it's not the job of the people in these forums to program the game for the developers.

No, it's not, you are correct. However, that doesn't mean we can't think critically about a problem and attempt to solve it on our own, rather than dismissing the question.

It's my strong opinion that if one's going to discuss why a video game is doing something wrong, one must have an alternate design in mind and be able to discuss it with some level of detail. Hand-waving at the problem and saying "this is bad, devs go fix it" isn't all that constructive, IMO. And no, Madden isn't absolved from this sort of discussion on account of drawing its game mechanics from reality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bucky60


	How about using the real world as an example? A little statistical analysis on players bench press and weight in the real world and do some analysis and quantify the effect from real NFL games to come up with an model equation. We have all kinds of NFL games go draw from.

Possibly. Communicating this correlation - strength to weight - to the user is going to be difficult, which is my main concern here. Just putting an equation behind it to govern the relation doesn't communicate to the player why his 90-STR running back isn't running effectively through 350-lb DTs with STR 75 or whatever. On its face, I would expect by 90 STR player to overpower a 75 STR more often than not because, well, 90 is greater than 75 (rocket science! :-P).

Granted, the default ratings in Madden are never set up like that; the OLs and DLs always have much higher STR ratings than any other position. Which in my opinion is a problem, different scales are being used for different position groups, but that's neither here nor there.

# 143 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/22/14 02:46 PM

I think, because size and weight is not a factor, strength should generally be higher between offensive and defensive linemen, and in relation to their group, and then LB's set with strength for their group and WR's and DB's strength set for their group....

So strength should be from strongest to weakest, by position, at least....

OC/OG
DT
OT
DE
ILB/OLB (tough call with all the tweeners and hybrid players, but this is general layout...
TE's (blocking TE's should be at the same level as a LB)
Safeties
WR's and DB's, though the tendency for larger WR's I would give a strength edge to the WR over a CB and some safties...but for consistency of flow between player positions and their roles in game, i would round strength as listed here....

I think we could see, for now, a quick change in game play, until an efficient way to implement the FBGaming ratings efficiently....

Similar player ratings manipulations were used to balance out and make the FBPro 98 game a long lasting playable game...by placing rating scales for players by position...Since all ratings were linear.

# 144 Robrain @ 07/22/14 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CM Hooe


	No, it's not, you are correct. However, that doesn't mean we can't think critically about a problem and attempt to solve it on our own, rather than dismissing the question. It's my strong opinion that if one's going to discuss why a video game is doing something wrong, one must have an alternate design in mind and be able to discuss it with some level of detail. Hand-waving at the problem and saying "this is bad, devs go fix it" isn't all that constructive, IMO. And no, Madden isn't absolved from this sort of discussion on account of drawing its game mechanics from reality.

I disagree. There are certain cases where it makes sense for a developer to go to it's users/community, and ask them questions on how to improve the game. Solicit advice, creative ideas, etc. These can range from simple things such as suggestions to new expansion team names, to more detailed things like game balance issues.

However, there are things (typically large-scale) that are solely in the developer's court, and implementing a realistic physics system is one of them. That's not even remotely the type of problem where the solution is asking your community how to do it.

If you have as much money as EA does, you attack the problem by hiring smart programmers to do it. That's it. That's the only real solution.

FPS games have bullets whizzing and grenades flying and 64 player simultaneous online matches with vehicles and airplanes and all kinds of hell breaking loose. It's inexcusable if the Madden devs can't find a way to pull off 11-on-11 at this point with realistic enough physics that the defensive back doesn't FATALITY me by jamming his hand through my receiver's back to swat away the ball that is being perfectly caught.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6XKxlRcgqM

Or fumble physics, or passing physics, or proper collision physics. None of these are things that the community should have much input regarding beforehand, besides "Yeah, we want that". Then they should implement it, come back to the community and show us what they made, and then solicit feedback on whether it's good enough / how to improve upon it from there.

# 145 StefJoeHalt @ 07/22/14 02:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I didn't have Watkins as a burner, but he has near-elite speed. More fast than quick, though. http://www.fbgratings.com/members/pr...hp?pyid=119364

I agree but like speed lower..easy to just put everyone high..my question..do u think ACC is to high for all players?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 146 Robrain @ 07/22/14 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CM Hooe


	Possibly. Communicating this correlation - strength to weight - to the user is going to be difficult, which is my main concern here. Just putting an equation behind it to govern the relation doesn't communicate to the player why his 90-STR running back isn't running effectively through 350-lb DTs with STR 75 or whatever. On its face, I would expect by 90 STR player to overpower a 75 STR more often than not because, well, 90 is greater than 75 (rocket science! :-P).

...

Regarding BOLD A:

You're really not giving people credit for understanding common sense real-world principles. The physics are based on real life. People understand how physics work in real life without knowing the math. I know I can't run through a wall. I also know I can't easily knock down a person that severely outweighs me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y19Wn2iZuGc

People understand that. Realistic concepts like this aren't hard to communicate because if it accurately models real life (like it should), then it's basically self-explanatory. You try to run into a fat guy with Dexter McCluster, and you get wrecked instead. Guess you won't try that again.

Regarding BOLD B:

I don't understand how you wouldn't understand that pretty much no RB in the NFL "runs effectively" through a 350 lbs DT. It just doesn't regularly happen, anyone who watches football on Sundays even once in awhile would never expect that to happen even once. For the record, I also can't plow a VW Beetle through a dump truck, just in case you were wondering.

# 147 DCEBB2001 @ 07/22/14 06:34 PM

Since this thread has gone in another direction in regards to STR, weight, etc, I would like to chime in on a few things.

1. To move a large player/object you need more power to do the work of moving it. Therefore, no matter your size, you still must be able to employ enough strength to do the work of moving the opposing body. In this case, it is entirely possible for a smaller player/body/object to affect a larger one should their strength and technique warrant it.

2. To me the strength of a player is just that - STRENGTH. It is the raw attribute of how strong a player is. Scouts often use the 1-rep maximum values in the 3 core lifts to quantify overall, maximum, exertion. There is a TON of academic research to support this. Madden should use said research to determine the actual STRENGTH of players.

3. Strength can be applied to its fullest extent via technique, or not be applied to its fullest extent by a lack of proper technique when attempting to use it during a football-move. In the case of run/drive blocking, the player must have the proper balance, footwork, leverage, velocity, etc behind him in order to move another body. Remember, these guys are not moving in static vacuums. They are pushing against grass/sod/dirt, exerting energy to move another guy resisting by using his power against the field surface. What I did with FBG ratings was find out what each player's true strength is, quantify it, then use the scouting data to determine how well they use it. I actually have grades for categories very similar to the PBS and RBS attributes. This allows us to see how well a player can utilize his STR attribute. Does he maximize it or does he need to develop better drive technique to allow him to use his full potential?

4. I think people too often confuse what they see on Sundays with what is actually going on. They see a player who looks fast, but don't fully realize that perhaps it was his agility combined with his vision that allowed a player to break a big run. Perhaps an older, slower CB with great instincts may be beaten in a 40 yard sprint down the sideline, but he uses his press technique to not allow the WR a free release and negate any disadvantage in acceleration. You see, we too often get hung up on individual attributes, almost like they stand alone, when in reality ALL attributes work TOGETHER, symbiotically, to create the athletic profile of a player. If EA would stick to the data, you will find that you can replicate how players actually move without having to give "speed bumps" to players who merely LOOK faster, but are in fact, actually employing better burst/vision/agility/special moves to make others "appear" slower.

# 148 4thQtrStre5S @ 07/22/14 06:49 PM

Strength is strength, but obviously size matters too, else we would have never gone so big on offensive and defensive linemen....Now a smaller player effecting a bigger player? I can see leverage being a part; I can also see momentum being an issue...If an OL is standing around and a Safety hits him as full speed, doesn't matter the size of either player really, the OL is going down.

As for all the minor details of experience, leverage ability, vision, anticipation, etc. that plays a roll in still allowing older, but slower or weaker players to still excel, just cannot be programmed into Madden, mainly because they do not want to spend the time and money to do it.

EA/Tiburon is the perfect example of a business doing the least amount to gain the greatest profit...

# 149 DCEBB2001 @ 07/22/14 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S


	Strength is strength, but obviously size matters too, else we would have never gone so big on offensive and defensive linemen

And that is why:

A. Teams still draft huge guys who maybe aren't as strong as some FBs and LBs.

AND

B. Strength doesn't always 100% correlate to size.

Size is size, strength is strength. Don't get them confused and mixed up like EA sports does. Do you know the rate of linear correlation between weight and strength in Madden 25?

R-Squared = 0.8161 or 81.61%

Do you know what it REALLY is when you actually measure STRENGTH vs. weight using NFL player data going back to 1997?

R-Squared = 0.4754 or 47.54%

That means that only 47.54% of the correlation is exhibited by the model of a rational correlation between weight and strength. So in essence, in reality, weight only accurately correlates to strength 47.54% of the time. That means that weight is actually a pretty crappy indicator of strength amongst football players. However, as you can see, EA has taken a different approach. They seem to posit that weight is almost TWICE as likely to indicate strength as the real world model.

Only one can be correct with that wide of a margin. Now the question is, who is?

# 150 WakeUp_YoureDreaming @ 07/22/14 07:23 PM

No way Khalil Mack should be an 81 while Jadeveon Clowney is an 83. If nothing else, they should have the same rating. It's highly debatable who the better player is amongst the two. Clowney may be the better athlete, but Mack is a better all around football player.

No worries though, initial rookie ratings are somewhat of a rough draft. Once the players get a few games under their belts, the ratings will be much more accurately represented.

# 151 ggsimmonds @ 07/22/14 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	And that is why: A. Teams still draft huge guys who maybe aren't as strong as some FBs and LBs. AND B. Strength doesn't always 100% correlate to size. Size is size, strength is strength. Don't get them confused and mixed up like EA sports does. Do you know the rate of linear correlation between weight and strength in Madden 25? R-Squared = 0.8161 or 81.61% Do you know what it REALLY is when you actually measure STRENGTH vs. weight using NFL player data going back to 1997? R-Squared = 0.4754 or 47.54% That means that only 47.54% of the correlation is exhibited by the model of a rational correlation between weight and strength. So in essence, in reality, weight only accurately correlates to strength 47.54% of the time. That means that weight is actually a pretty crappy indicator of strength amongst football players. However, as you can see, EA has taken a different approach. They seem to posit that weight is almost TWICE as likely to indicate strength as the real world model. Only one can be correct with that wide of a margin. Now the question is, who is?

Ugh, that is pretty drastic. Not something I enjoy seeing. But I don't think it is something a roster re-rate would remedy. The ratings are borked, but the game is built around this horrible system. Seems EA uses the rating as more of a size attribute with a little strength mixed in.

What I am wondering is how the game plays when you make significant adjustments. If we had a RG who may not be that strong, but has good technique and is a good blocker, what happens in game when he is matched up against someone with elite strength but not quite as technically skilled?

This also further illustrates the ambiguity in Madden's ratings. Something which appears clear cut like strength is actually not quite strength but something else.

# 152 DCEBB2001 @ 07/22/14 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ggsimmonds


	Ugh, that is pretty drastic. Not something I enjoy seeing. But I don't think it is something a roster re-rate would remedy. The ratings are borked, but the game is built around this horrible system. Seems EA uses the rating as more of a size attribute with a little strength mixed in. What I am wondering is how the game plays when you make significant adjustments. If we had a RG who may not be that strong, but has good technique and is a good blocker, what happens in game when he is matched up against someone with elite strength but not quite as technically skilled? This also further illustrates the ambiguity in Madden's ratings. Something which appears clear cut like strength is actually not quite strength but something else.

No doubt that the game is messed up, but those who have played with the FBG re-rates claim that they do help the gameplay. Charter04 and CM Hooe may be able to shed some light on this. They have some remarks regarding the gameplay in the FBG thread.

# 153 jdmsi7 @ 07/22/14 11:25 PM

Just saw an article on the NFL Facebook page that if Clowney is moved to DE from OLB he goes up to 92....

# 154 Hoops737 @ 07/23/14 12:13 AM

So if you switch Clowney to a D-End he becomes a 92.

...You stay classy Madden

# 155 Packers4U @ 07/23/14 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdmsi7


	Just saw an article on the NFL Facebook page that if Clowney is moved to DE from OLB he goes up to 92....

Shouldn't be a surprise. It's been this way in every Madden. Good OLB's usually translate to higher OVR rating at DE in the game.

# 156 Birdman85 @ 07/25/14 12:06 AM

Future is bright in STL.

# 157 Cavicchi @ 07/25/14 02:21 PM

Isn't rookie RT Lewan kind if light to be playing offensive tackle at 6'7" 215?

It's a misprint in the video clip, he should be 315.

# 158 Bull_Market @ 07/29/14 12:53 AM

They make it real easy not to buy this game. Thanks Donny Moore.

# 159 3fiddy @ 07/30/14 09:06 PM

92 press for Darqueze Denard !!!!!! !! We will have to see wht that's like in pre season. Idk him but for rookie I sure in the hell hope so. That be fun to watch plus wht a great building block.

# 160 mdibenedetto89 @ 08/04/14 11:32 PM

I think the rookie ratings are fair. I'm interested to see who the best rooks from the 1st round will be. I like the guys The Cheap Seats Sports picked to be the best from the 1st round.http://thecheapseatssports.com/nfl/top-rookies-how-they-look-in-training-camp/

« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 78Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 15: Top Rookies