Madden NFL 16 News Post

Madden NFL 16 Player Ratings - Top 5 Tight Ends

03:02 PM - July 24, 2015 by BreakingBad2013

EA Sports has released more Madden NFL 16 ratings. Below are the top 5 tight ends in Madden NFL 16, more ratings on these players can be seen here.

Rob Gronkowski (99 OVR)
Jimmy Graham (95 OVR)
Jason Witten (93 OVR)
Greg Olsen (92 OVR)
Travis Kelce (91 OVR)

Previously released Madden NFL 16 player ratings:

Madden NFL 16 screenshot gallery - Click to view

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

# 21 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guppya


	So based on the data you collected, Brandon Marshall should be rated better than Gronkowski. It has nothing to do with madden, I cant wrap my head around that as nobody would rate Marshall better than gronkowski. Theres no point in the ratings if you cant differentiate that gronk should be rated higher than marshall.

I just did differentiate it. I gave you the actual total grade for each. Take it or leave it.

# 22 Number999 @ 07/24/15 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guppya


	I understand his roster is not for casuals. Thats my entire point, do you honestly believe that EA would throw away all of their ratings and just take these numbers as the way to go where Brandon Marshall is an 87? That would be crazy.

"throw away" like they have some sort of in-depth formula in the first place. I'm pretty sure you could find 5 OS users who have enough free time and do basically exactly what they've done with ratings. You're merely picking one flaw in a highly regarded system of ratings by plucking out Brandon Marshall and other outliers. You don't think that hey maybe they could fudge Marshall a little bit so he isn't all the way up there? Damn dude.

# 23 guppya @ 07/24/15 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	That's why EA should just make everyone a 99 in everything so everyone is happy. Or... They can get real(istic). OR... Allow us to edit draft classes and rosters easier.

Stop trying to be arrogant, thats why I wrote comprimise. If you honestly dont see the flaw in your system that has Marshall Rated higher than Gronk, then you cant accept criticism.

The ratings are there to differentiate between their NFL ranking. Whatever your data says, how can you sit there and say that Marshall is a better football player than Gronkowski.

# 24 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guppya


	Stop trying to be arrogant, thats why I wrote comprimise. If you honestly dont see the flaw in your system that has Marshall Rated higher than Gronk, then you cant accept criticism. The ratings are there to differentiate between their NFL ranking. Whatever your data says, how can you sit there and say that Marshall is a better football player than Gronkowski.

I can say it because I don't place my own bias into it and go strictly off of the data. THAT in itself gives me the right to be fair and objective. I have eliminated as many flaws as me and my team can think of by making everything data driven.

Based on the data, I am sitting here and saying that today, Brandon Marshall is a better overall player. Until the data says otherwise, I will stand by it.

# 25 MoneyOvaHuds @ 07/24/15 03:55 PM

No Bennett love ?

# 26 Wildcats302 @ 07/24/15 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I can say it because I don't place my own bias into it and go strictly off of the data. THAT in itself gives me the right to be fair and objective. I have eliminated as many flaws as me and my team can think of by making everything data driven. Based on the data, I am sitting here and saying that today, Brandon Marshall is a better overall player. Until the data says otherwise, I will stand by it.

And this is why going simply off data is 100% the wrong way to do it. You have to factor in the obvious common sense at times, and the eye test. Honestly your ratings are much more realistic, and a better way of doing it than Madden, but clearly its not close to being perfect either.

# 27 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildcats302


	And this is why going simply off data is 100% the wrong way to do it. You have to factor in the obvious common sense at times, and the eye test. Honestly your ratings are much more realistic, and a better way of doing it than Madden, but clearly its not close to being perfect either.

I trust the scouts' eyes more than my own.

# 28 michapop9 @ 07/24/15 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildcats302


	And this is why going simply off data is 100% the wrong way to do it. You have to factor in the obvious common sense at times, and the eye test. Honestly your ratings are much more realistic, and a better way of doing it than Madden, but clearly its not close to being perfect either.

So whats your suggestion? The way he does it is better than anything thats come out. How would you improve it based on something other than opinion? Bring criticism with a solution.

# 29 Datninja619 @ 07/24/15 04:03 PM

Play nice guys....

I can't wait to turn L Green into a monster in my Chargers franchise. Should be one of the faster TEs! This got me excited.

# 30 BreakingBad2013 @ 07/24/15 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guppya


	Of course it matters its part of visual appeal. Why do you think marketing plays a part in affecting player ratings? If a fan sees that Gronkowski is rated an 82, they will obviously criticize the game. Nobody wants too see their favorite player rated low. Not every player is a hardcore madden player like on this forum. There has to be a compromise.

But if Gronk is the highest rated TE in the game, at 82, and the bottom of the top 5 is a 68... He's not rated low. Lol. Plus, the community conforms to the game, not the other way around.

If Madden reimagined ratings, and followed the same fbg rating for the next 10 years, it would be forgotten.

Well what if my favorite player is Terrell Pryor, we should bump him 20 overall to make him appeal to me more? Again, causals aren't gawking to find overalls. They grab the game because football sounds fun, not because Big Ben is a 94 overall or whatever.

Again, don't market the ratings, market the games

# 31 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jshake8


	If you're going to have anything to do with this video game in the future, I sincerely hope you don't believe this. Do you really not see the flaw in "making everything data driven"? We're talking about the sport with the most moving parts and variables in the world. Each player is impacted by the other 21 players on the field. The ultimate test is the eyeball, and any scout would tell you that. So if you can't even explain your ratings with anything more than data, they shouldn't be taken seriously. Well, you're clearly just ignoring me now. I tried to understand your system at first so that I could support it, and now I'm trying to offer some constructive criticism and you're just being short and rude. I love your ideas about how to separate the weak, from the average, from the great, but you're actual ratings simply don't match what happens on the field. If you want to take your ideas to the next level, and have them used by "professionals" you should be able to stand by them and explain them without getting defensive.

I'm not getting defensive about anything. You clearly are not listening. The scouts make the grades. They make the data. If they say that on the overall scale Gronk < Marshall (by a fraction of the scale...I mean, we are talking about one point here), then I have to abide by it. I am not using simple stats or PFF or anything like that. I am using REAL DATA that is used by a REAL NFL FRONT OFFICE.

How on earth can I question that?

At this point, it is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't use them.

# 32 jblanch32 @ 07/24/15 04:09 PM

I mean, Gronk had a better season than Marshall in almost every category.. (Including per game statistics)

# 33 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 04:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jblanch32


	I mean, Gronk had a better season than Marshall in almost every category.. (Including per game statistics)

Statistics alone, a player, does not make.

# 34 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VdaStampede


	Which is absurd to anyone who watches football. The problem is football is not baseball the entire sport can't be summed up by stats and metrics. Scouts have great info to share no doubt, but they don't determine who plays or sits or who makes the team and who doesn't.

Nor do they tell GMs who to draft.

Like in 2007 when the scouts that provide the data to my site had JaMarcus Russell rated a 4.98 the day before the draft. That's barely a 4th round grade.

Don't blame the scouts for GM/owner miscues. It is rare the scouts ever get to pull the trigger. All they do is observe and report.

Don't kill the messengers.

# 35 BreakingBad2013 @ 07/24/15 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildcats302


	And this is why going simply off data is 100% the wrong way to do it. You have to factor in the obvious common sense at times, and the eye test. Honestly your ratings are much more realistic, and a better way of doing it than Madden, but clearly its not close to being perfect either.

Well, Gronk plays with one of the best passers in the world, he uses his size mostly, over actual technique and skill. He is a obe dimensional route runner, and he had a season where in 6 games he had less than 50 yards.

Brandon Marshall is a much better technical pass catcher thsn Gronk, and unfortunately battled a ton of injuries lsst year, which I feel should lower his ratings.

We're on this Gronk kick like he's a God. The kid is a like foot taller than some DBs, and has a ridiculous size advantage. You'll see more like him soon enough. He's not perfect though, and if he were placed on the Jets, we wouldn't be talking about him.

# 36 sir psycho @ 07/24/15 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I trust the scouts' eyes more than my own.

That pretty much sums up my feelings on this whole subject. If you asked me, who I think is a better player between Gronk and Marshall...for sure I would say Gronkowski. But, the fact is these ratings are coming from real scouts. I trust that they know more about evaluating players than I do. Are they perfect? No...but I'd rather have ratings determined by these scouts than by guys like me just watching football and saying, "Yep, Gronkowski's better...let's make sure he has a higher rating." That last scenario is where we've been for a while with Madden and it doesn't work.

# 37 bigboyc @ 07/24/15 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	I can say it because I don't place my own bias into it and go strictly off of the data. THAT in itself gives me the right to be fair and objective. I have eliminated as many flaws as me and my team can think of by making everything data driven. Based on the data, I am sitting here and saying that today, Brandon Marshall is a better overall player. Until the data says otherwise, I will stand by it.

And that's why your ratings should not be out of the box. Brandon Marshall is NOT a better player than Gronk. Your data may say that.......but anyone with EYES can see Gronk is the better, more important player.

Ask 32 teams anonymously, who is the better player........32 will say Gronk.

# 38 DCEBB2001 @ 07/24/15 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sir psycho


	That pretty much sums up my feelings on this whole subject. If you asked me, who I think is a better player between Gronk and Marshall...for sure I would say Gronkowski. But, the fact is these ratings are coming from real scouts. I trust that they know more about evaluating players than I do. Are they perfect? No...but I'd rather have ratings determined by these scouts than by guys like me just watching football and saying, "Yep, Gronkowski's better...let's make sure he has a higher rating." That last scenario is where we've been for a while with Madden and it doesn't work.

The funny thing is that TEs and WRs are both lumped into the same position grouping, so we can actually compare SOME of their categories apples to apples. Here is a list of a few:

Attribute - Marshall - Gronk
Athleticism in Space: 2.7 - 1.9
Run After Catch: 2.7 - 2.2
Hands: 2.0 - 2.5
Get Open/Adjust to Ball: 2.4 - 2.1
Run Blocking: 0.8 - 1.5
Special Teams Ability: 1.0 - 0.0
Route Running: 3.5 - 4.1
Catch Under Duress: 1.4 - 2.6
Ball Security: 1.2 - 1.0
Injury Holds: 0.4 - 0.4

As you can see, Marshall bests Gronk in 5 categories. Gronk bests Marshall in 4 categories. The weight that each carries in importance to calculating the OVR differs, however.

# 39 The JareBear @ 07/24/15 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigboyc


	And that's why your ratings should not be out of the box. Brandon Marshall is NOT a better player than Gronk. Your data may say that.......but anyone with EYES can see Gronk is the better, more important player. Ask 32 teams anonymously, who is the better player........32 will say Gronk.

I think we are getting too caught up on the overall rating, honestly.

# 40 yankees028 @ 07/24/15 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCEBB2001


	question for you

I love what you do. I was wondering how do you counter act the rookies that come out at 80+ ratings? what your doing would work perfect with the sliders 2k has with adjusting rookies coming into the league

« Previous 123 4 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 16 Player Ratings - Top 5 Tight Ends