Madden NFL 16 News Post

Donny Moore, the 'Madden Ratings Czar', Leaving EA

11:28 AM - July 2, 2015 by RaychelSnr

Donny Moore, aka the ‘Madden Ratings Czar’, is leaving Electronic Arts as he will be “pursuing other interests.”

In an official statement on Twitter, Moore said, “After much thought & consideration, I have chosen to step away from @EASports & announce my retirement as the Madden Ratings Czar as I have opted to pursue other interests. I am especially grateful of the opportunity to rate players for some of the greatest fans in video games today. After 16 years, it is finally time to hang up the czar's mouse pad! #Czartirement"

For Moore, this ends a long tenure as the guy running the ratings and updates for Madden. Moore’s tenure spanned 16 years at EA Tiburon, which means he was easily one of the most tenured at that studio. There is no word yet on who will be replacing Moore, but we do expect an announcement soon.

The ratings position occupied by Moore has been a staple of Madden’s internet presence for years. Moore’s ratings oftentimes drew criticism, but the weekly ratings updates were always hugely anticipated by fans, despite what ire they may have drawn.

The ratings this year will likely still come in the same pacing as previous years, and it will be interesting to see if any differences in how much players move up and down the scale happens without Moore at the helm. We’ll certainly be watching it going forward!

Game: Madden NFL 16Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / PS4 / Xbox 360 / Xbox OneVotes for game: 24 - View All

Madden NFL 16 Videos

Member Comments

# 281 vannwolfhawk @ 07/07/15 02:37 AM

Dan,

1st off they should try the rosters with your ratings. I saw no issues that broke gameplay. It only spread ratings out and separated superstars from average joe's. It made game 1000x more realistic and better. To hear they are skeptical I say they need to try them and see for themselves the difference.

Knowing your ratings produce low overalls (we all know that doesn't mean anything) and that people, fans, players will freak why not a simple solution of recalculating and coming up with a new formula for overalls? So we use lower spread out real data for ratings for areas such as speed, strength, acceleration, agility, etc. then with recalculated formulas that even with a 82 speed and 81 accel added with other specific positional ratings could still produce higher overalls? Couldn't this be a simple recalculation of formulas to produce this so everyone wins. It's probably harder than that but could this not be feasible? Then we have tom Brady with 98 overall but he has real ratings with the data backed up in the areas I mentioned above. Maybe even make speed, strength, accel, agility not even factor in for overall ratings? It's just spread out to separate players appropriately in key areas that in itself is a game changer. Idk just thinking outside of box...

# 282 DeuceDouglas @ 07/07/15 05:08 AM

I don't really understand how they think the ratings could potentially break the gameplay. Outside of speed, there isn't much difference when playing and the only thing that could really "break the game" when it comes to them is if they don't account for the toned down speed in CFM in terms of progression or draft classes.

It sucks that something like this is based on such a "wow" factor when it comes to the casual audience. "Aaron Rodgers is a 90?!?!?!?!? What do you mean a 90?" It wouldn't matter if 90 was the best QB in the game, he still wouldn't be seen as rated highly enough and I think that's something they need to try and get out of peoples minds. There has come this stigma with 99 and breakout players that I wish they could break but I just don't see it happening.

I think getting rid of the overall would definitely be a positive move. Especially considering there's now a playercard that gives you most of the important attributes. It would force people to know or at least focus more on the player rather than some arbitrary number that really doesn't mean a whole lot. Whether you get rid of it altogether or change it to something like a bar from MVP Baseball, something needs to be done and it seems like they're at least somewhat aware of it but don't really have a plan as of yet.

# 283 Mr.Papercut @ 07/07/15 05:12 AM

You have to remember Madden still has UT. Applying these ratings to that is considerably more of a waste of time, because Madden truly loves to produce those 99ovr legend cards for no reason at all. Of course, games there are more "competitive".

# 284 Sheba2011 @ 07/07/15 05:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Papercut


	You have to remember Madden still has UT. Applying these ratings to that is considerably more of a waste of time, because Madden truly loves to produce those 99ovr legend cards for no reason at all. Of course, games there are more "competitive".

There are millions of reasons why they produce those cards all of them start with $. Ratings are marketing for EA, especially in a mode like UT. People will spend hundreds of dollars on packs of virtual cards in hopes of getting that 99 OVR "Legend" (i use "" because many of the players were never actual legends and are just older players) card.

# 285 sir psycho @ 07/07/15 06:57 AM

Just read through all of these posts since Dan reported back on his conversation with Rex, and most of what I want to say has already been said.

Bottom line, I can't say how disappointed I am that after all of this talk from Rex about how he wants to make everything more sim, we hear that "competitive balance" is more important than accuracy. That flat out sucks. I was honestly expecting it to finally be going in the other direction. I know, it might not end up being as bad as it sounds, but it definitely is disappointing.

The scariest thing is that they're actually considering using the Madden community for crowd sourcing with ratings.

It's too bad that there is no chance of them completely buying into Dan's system.

# 286 jeremym480 @ 07/07/15 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vannwolfhawk


	Dan, 1st off they should try the rosters with your ratings. I saw no issues that broke gameplay. It only spread ratings out and separated superstars from average joe's. It made game 1000x more realistic and better. To hear they are skeptical I say they need to try them and see for themselves the difference. Knowing your ratings produce low overalls (we all know that doesn't mean anything) and that people, fans, players will freak why not a simple solution of recalculating and coming up with a new formula for overalls? So we use lower spread out real data for ratings for areas such as speed, strength, acceleration, agility, etc. then with recalculated formulas that even with a 82 speed and 81 accel added with other specific positional ratings could still produce higher overalls? Couldn't this be a simple recalculation of formulas to produce this so everyone wins. It's probably harder than that but could this not be feasible? Then we have tom Brady with 98 overall but he has real ratings with the data backed up in the areas I mentioned above. Maybe even make speed, strength, accel, agility not even factor in for overall ratings? It's just spread out to separate players appropriately in key areas that in itself is a game changer. Idk just thinking outside of box...

This was pretty much what I was thinking as well. Although my other thought would be the simplest of simple solutions which is to have both ratings (Madden Classic Ratings and FBG Ratings/"Stretched Ratings") in the game; and when you load up a roster/CFM you get to choose which ratings system that you want to go with.

That would appease each side... The side that wants to play with the over inflated ratings and the stretched ratings side.

# 287 poster @ 07/07/15 09:44 AM

Being able to edit ratings during cfm is probably the one thing keeping me from purchasing the game. They have made improvements, but so much more could be done with community rosters with ratings from Dan's database or suggestions over the years from community guys like Gotmadskillsson, khaliib, Playmakers and others that have improved the way the players play and animate during the game.

I'd love to get immersed in a franchise mode again and don't want to spend my time editing ratings all of the time, but it is better then being forced to use their system.

# 288 RexDEAFootball @ 07/07/15 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir psycho


	Just read through all of these posts since Dan reported back on his conversation with Rex, and most of what I want to say has already been said. Bottom line, I can't say how disappointed I am that after all of this talk from Rex about how he wants to make everything more sim, we hear that "competitive balance" is more important than accuracy. That flat out sucks. I was honestly expecting it to finally be going in the other direction. I know, it might not end up being as bad as it sounds, but it definitely is disappointing. The scariest thing is that they're actually considering using the Madden community for crowd sourcing with ratings. It's too bad that there is no chance of them completely buying into Dan's system.

Hold on guys.

When I said 'competitive balance' I am referring to overall game balance. User vs. User and User vs. CPU. When we have tried these types of ratings changes in the past, it would negatively impact that balance to the degree that I was not comfortable moving forward with it for the good of the game.

Competitive balance (overall game balance and playability) is inseparable from generating authentic outcomes. The two go hand in hand.

When I referred to 'community sourced' ratings, that could mean anything. It started out with us reaching out to the most respected and well known ratings sites out there. Don't automatically assume this will turn into a PR driven 'cover vote' style thing, that is not our intent. We want to figure out the best way to involve and utilize the community moving forward in generating a ratings system that represents the best thing for the game.

Finally I want to mention that Donny Moore shared this vision of fewer elites and greater ratings spread. It is a shared goal we are actively working towards.

# 289 Sausage @ 07/07/15 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RexDEAFootball


	Hold on guys. When I said 'competitive balance' I am referring to overall game balance. User vs. User and User vs. CPU. When we have tried these types of ratings changes in the past, it would negatively impact that balance to the degree that I was not comfortable moving forward with it for the good of the game. Competitive balance (overall game balance and playability) is inseparable from generating authentic outcomes. The two go hand in hand. When I referred to 'community sourced' ratings, that could mean anything. It started out with us reaching out to the most respected and well known ratings sites out there. Don't automatically assume this will turn into a PR driven 'cover vote' style thing, that is not our intent. We want to figure out the best way to involve and utilize the community moving forward in generating a ratings system that represents the best thing for the game. Finally I want to mention that Donny Moore shared this vision of fewer elites and greater ratings spread. It is a shared goal we are actively working towards.

Thanks for some clarification; hopefully you eventually move towards a more ratings spread roster updates.

# 290 DCEBB2001 @ 07/07/15 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khaliib


	This gives us an insight into the mess the current system is in with using hidden "weights". This is for OVR's but gives a glimps into weights impacting against each other. They have to clean this up and find a rational that will work better.

That article was complete Horse Hockey! I took every one of their "weights" and threw them into a formula and compared them to mine and they are WAY OFF. As in, off by like 5 points in some instances. See for yourself!

# 291 DCEBB2001 @ 07/07/15 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vannwolfhawk


	Dan, 1st off they should try the rosters with your ratings. I saw no issues that broke gameplay. It only spread ratings out and separated superstars from average joe's. It made game 1000x more realistic and better. To hear they are skeptical I say they need to try them and see for themselves the difference. Knowing your ratings produce low overalls (we all know that doesn't mean anything) and that people, fans, players will freak why not a simple solution of recalculating and coming up with a new formula for overalls? So we use lower spread out real data for ratings for areas such as speed, strength, acceleration, agility, etc. then with recalculated formulas that even with a 82 speed and 81 accel added with other specific positional ratings could still produce higher overalls? Couldn't this be a simple recalculation of formulas to produce this so everyone wins. It's probably harder than that but could this not be feasible? Then we have tom Brady with 98 overall but he has real ratings with the data backed up in the areas I mentioned above. Maybe even make speed, strength, accel, agility not even factor in for overall ratings? It's just spread out to separate players appropriately in key areas that in itself is a game changer. Idk just thinking outside of box...

I agree 100% and I already have that formula for the new OVRs....just need to put it in the game. The funny thing is that a guy like Aaron Rodgers will have the same grades but his overall grade is like 9.42, which is basically a 94 in Madden. The only difference is that the darn OVR calculator in Madden is wrong and doesn't match the data source. If I could use my data with my data's OVR grade calculation, things would be fine. We can still use the 0-100 overall, but I still believe that going from 0.0 to 5.0 for all attributes and 0-10.0 for all overall scores is the best way to go because that is how the scouts in this department do it. Why deviate from a REAL system???

# 292 charter04 @ 07/07/15 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RexDEAFootball


	Hold on guys. When I said 'competitive balance' I am referring to overall game balance. User vs. User and User vs. CPU. When we have tried these types of ratings changes in the past, it would negatively impact that balance to the degree that I was not comfortable moving forward with it for the good of the game. Competitive balance (overall game balance and playability) is inseparable from generating authentic outcomes. The two go hand in hand. When I referred to 'community sourced' ratings, that could mean anything. It started out with us reaching out to the most respected and well known ratings sites out there. Don't automatically assume this will turn into a PR driven 'cover vote' style thing, that is not our intent. We want to figure out the best way to involve and utilize the community moving forward in generating a ratings system that represents the best thing for the game. Finally I want to mention that Donny Moore shared this vision of fewer elites and greater ratings spread. It is a shared goal we are actively working towards.

Thanks for the clarification. I would love to see ratings based on real data. I would love to have the stretched out ratings that are being mentioned.

I personally have used the FBG rosters in Madden 15 a lot and IMO it makes the game play more realistic. The animations and overall look of the game is better. It's still just as challenging though because all players are toned down.

It makes the game engine shine and actually adds to the work you guys have put into the game as far as game play.

I know there are probably some hurtles to overcome with the lower overall ratings and how people might respond but, there has to be a way to make it work.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

# 293 Danimal @ 07/07/15 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RexDEAFootball


	Hold on guys. When I said 'competitive balance' I am referring to overall game balance. User vs. User and User vs. CPU. When we have tried these types of ratings changes in the past, it would negatively impact that balance to the degree that I was not comfortable moving forward with it for the good of the game. Competitive balance (overall game balance and playability) is inseparable from generating authentic outcomes. The two go hand in hand. When I referred to 'community sourced' ratings, that could mean anything. It started out with us reaching out to the most respected and well known ratings sites out there. Don't automatically assume this will turn into a PR driven 'cover vote' style thing, that is not our intent. We want to figure out the best way to involve and utilize the community moving forward in generating a ratings system that represents the best thing for the game. Finally I want to mention that Donny Moore shared this vision of fewer elites and greater ratings spread. It is a shared goal we are actively working towards.

Thanks for the information and this is a great example of listening to all the information before jumping to conclusions.

# 294 DCEBB2001 @ 07/07/15 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	That article was complete Horse Hockey! I took every one of their "weights" and threw them into a formula and compared them to mine and they are WAY OFF. As in, off by like 5 points in some instances. See for yourself!

To illustrate this I will throw in an example. These are the ratings directly from the M15 ratings spreadsheet from last summer using those OVR rating multipliers from that article:

QB Dennis Dixon is an example.

According to the ratings sheet, he is a 68 OVR. Here are his attributes and their multipliers (according to the article) that are added together to get to his OVR. All of the multipliers add up to 100%.

AWR: 60 (.20) = 12
THP: 84 (.20) = 16.8
SAC: 68 (.15) = 10.2
MAC: 72 (.15) = 10.8
DAC: 69 (.10) = 6.9
PAC: 62 (.08) = 4.96
RUN: 80 (.03) = 2.4
SPD: 84 (.05) = 4.2
AGI: 86 (.03) = 2.58
ACC: 85 (.01) = .85

When you add those up you get a total of 71.69. OK, that's fine. We know that if we subtract exactly 2.70, you get 68.99 which would mean he is still a 68 overall because the 68 point threshold hasn't yet been broken. So 2.70 is our minimal subtracting value while 3.69 is the most we can subtract to get a 68 overall.

So let's do another player and use the same multipliers.

Aaron Rodgers is a 98 OVR. Here are his attribute values:

AWR: 93 (.20) = 18.6
THP: 94 (.20) = 18.8
SAC: 92 (.15) = 13.8
MAC: 88 (.15) = 13.2
DAC: 90 (.10) = 9.0
PAC: 87 (.08) = 6.96
RUN: 88 (.03) = 2.64
SPD: 80 (.05) = 4.0
AGI: 83 (.03) = 2.49
ACC: 85 (.01) = .85

Add these all up and you get 90.34. Throw in the subtracting values and you get an overall between 87 and 86, even though he is listed as a 98 in the game.

Fortunately for me, I broke the OVR code and found the real values for each attribute and the real subtracting value for each position, which allows me to be a lot closer to the real overall compared to what that article suggests.

Without giving this away, I can tell you that the real subtracting value for QBs is more like 48.28 points and the real multiples for AWR and THP are closer to 0.33 than they are to 0.20. When I throw Rodgers' values into my equation, I get an OVR of 98.64 (rounded down to a 98 of course). Doing the same for Dixon gets me an OVR of 68.19 (rounded down to a 68).

So you tell me...who is more accurate here?

# 295 khaliib @ 07/07/15 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RexDEAFootball


	Hold on guys. When I said 'competitive balance' I am referring to overall game balance. User vs. User and User vs. CPU. When we have tried these types of ratings changes in the past, it would negatively impact that balance to the degree that I was not comfortable moving forward with it for the good of the game. Competitive balance (overall game balance and playability) is inseparable from generating authentic outcomes. The two go hand in hand. When I referred to 'community sourced' ratings, that could mean anything. It started out with us reaching out to the most respected and well known ratings sites out there. Don't automatically assume this will turn into a PR driven 'cover vote' style thing, that is not our intent. We want to figure out the best way to involve and utilize the community moving forward in generating a ratings system that represents the best thing for the game. Finally I want to mention that Donny Moore shared this vision of fewer elites and greater ratings spread. It is a shared goal we are actively working towards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I agree 100% and I already have that formula for the new OVRs....just need to put it in the game. The funny thing is that a guy like Aaron Rodgers will have the same grades but his overall grade is like 9.42, which is basically a 94 in Madden. The only difference is that the darn OVR calculator in Madden is wrong and doesn't match the data source. If I could use my data with my data's OVR grade calculation, things would be fine. We can still use the 0-100 overall, but I still believe that going from 0.0 to 5.0 for all attributes and 0-10.0 for all overall scores is the best way to go because that is how the scouts in this department do it. Why deviate from a REAL system???

The current structure of the game is set to allow the best of both worlds.

Having a "Think Tank" moment, I started this thread How to make players differ within current Ratings System to brainstorm a thought to do just this.

Instead of the current Rookie/Pro/All-Pro/All-Madden difficulty levels, the competiveness of the game would combine both concepts/thoughts in this manner...

Using the 2nd picture, the foundation of what you guys want Rex would be done so that the "Sphere of Influence" per player is done (rings expanded/exaggerated) so that the "pick-up-and-play" idea/concept is there.

As the gamer wants to wants to move into a more difficult style of play, the Sphere's are reduced closer to "Sim Style" in a manner DC uses.

The core of this idea/concept is already being used in the game.
It's just expanding it to all ratings utilized for a particular position.

Making the game "competitive" while having players "animate/maneuver/react" during gameplay can be accomplished utilizing this idea I believe.

Especially with QB play, where the beginning of gameplay issues start because the gamer negates AWR/Accuracy ratings and the ratings system, in its current structure, has been unable to address with global weight tweeting.

So the gamer in this instance, can continue to utilize the current QB Accuracy method where the ball is thrown directly to the receiver, then transition to throwing to "sphere's/zones" where accuracy is dictated/broken down to a level that DC's methodology utilizes.

This can be done for all positional ratings and help bring forth player differentiation during gameplay.

Just thinking out loud, but take a look.

# 296 playajay98 @ 07/07/15 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpdavis82


	I was told by one of the GC's that when Rex mentions competitive gameplay being the priority, he's referring to user vs CPU.

One of the first things I do when I start playing a new Madden is tweak the sliders so that the CPU should beat me (without cheese) when I have a bad team. This is still NFL football, not college so each team should be able to win any given Sunday but I am looking for that challenge... to have to play mistake free football as the Jags and play to my teams strengths to have a chance to beat a playoff team. Tuning things to be competitive against the CPU to me shouldn't be a different goal than realism because most real NFL games come down to a few plays..talent usually prevails but playing smart and having a solid game plan will get anyone a win. THAT is realism and NFL level competition to me.

# 297 playajay98 @ 07/07/15 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpdavis82


	Yeah this is my concern too, I can see it now "QB Tom Brady is a 84 in Madden 16, 2nd highest rated QB" and then Pats fans go ballistic because they think he should be a 98 or 99. That's my biggest fear with the way they may react to your ratings, but that is the reality of it, they've been trained to see ratings a certain way and using your ratings may "break the game" to them.

I'll be totally honest, FBG ratings sounds great and I didn't know about them until yesterday so I went to his site and saw Broncos CB Chris Harris Jr., #1 CB rated by Pro Football Focus rated by Dan a 74...I too was outraged! Here I am, a SIM football gamer, calling for at least a B grade for the best corner last year. It requires trust though and I am willing to try them out. Good Luck, Dan. I think when people have a chance to play using your ratings and see the difference, we will all be better for it.

# 298 DCEBB2001 @ 07/07/15 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by playajay98


	I'll be totally honest, FBG ratings sounds great and I didn't know about them until yesterday so I went to his site and saw Broncos CB Chris Harris Jr., #1 CB rated by Pro Football Focus rated by Dan a 74...I too was outraged! Here I am, a SIM football gamer, calling for at least a B grade for the best corner last year. It requires trust though and I am willing to try them out. Good Luck, Dan. I think when people have a chance to play using your ratings and see the difference, we will all be better for it.

Personally, I hate PFF. They only look at the outcome of each play. They even say it in their FAQ on how they grade players. They won't tell you the specific traits that comprise a player. PFF is good for looking at tendencies, but not for rating football players. PFF also had Brad Jones as an up and coming star in 2013 and look what happened there. GB threw a big contract at him and he was awful. We had him at a 5.6, nowhere near budding-star material.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...ar-brad-jones/

According to my data, Harris is the 15th best CB in the league. That's pretty darn good. So whereas a 74 OVR would make him the 15th best CB according to my data, the 15th best CB according to EA would be rated an 87. A 74 OVR CB in Madden would mean he is the 94th best CB. That should speak to the blatant over-inflation in this game now.

# 299 wpgjets23 @ 07/07/15 01:03 PM

I'm curious how the FBG rated roster is affected by the draft classes?

# 300 bloobloouk @ 07/07/15 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wpgjets23


	I'm curious how the FBG rated roster is affected by the draft classes?

I gather that CFM is unplayable at present with the current FBG rosters as the draft classes are overpowered. Of course this would no longer be an issue if they were the default and the draft class generation system was updated to reflect that.

This is only reason I haven't played with FBG's rosters - I'm a CFM player and they currently don't fit.

« Previous 1 2…12 13 141516 17 18…26 27 Next »

More Links

Donny Moore, the 'Madden Ratings Czar', Leaving EA