Madden NFL 10: Top Ten Position Ratings (Gamespot)

[marcoyk]

is it just a coincidence that 3/5 of the biggest shakers were on the redskins. I'm a redskins fan and i agree that devin thomas should go down, but deangelo hall went down to below 70?!?!?! a little extreme there. and fred smoot didn't have a bad year last year.

[slick1186]

Quote: Originally Posted by kcarr

That means that 3% of players on active rosters are above 95 overall. If the lowest overalls are even as low as 30, that is putting 3% of the league in the top 7% of ratings. This seems alright when you first look at it, but really it should follow more of a bell curve with the largest portion of players by far fitting into the middle portion of the ratings. I really think it should fit somewhere around the following list: 30-35, 1% 36-41 3% 42-47 10% 48-64 15% 65-71 21% 72-78 21% 79-84 15% 85-90 10% 91+95 3% 96+ 1% That means in that 10 category you would have around 16 players, near 50 in the next, around 5 or 6 per team in the next so an average team should have around 7 or 8 players above 85. That makes around 237 players in that 85+ area. There are what, 100 or so pro bowlers every year plus some who should go or some who decline. These players and those others in contention for those slots should go in this area. The 79-84 area should be pretty much all starters or at least players who would start on most teams and can be solid starters. By here you have about 15 players per team (including all levels mentioned so far) so good teams with a lot of depth like pitt or NE might have 20 or 25 players in this area. Teams like detroit however will bring it back down to average by only having maybe 4 or 5. The next 2 areas should be the bulk of most teams. The top half of these should be your average starters. An average team should have 26 or 27 players at this level or better meaning their starting lineups should be filled out with a quality backup or two. The bottom half of this are players who are considered weaknesses as starters but can include players who can contribute sensationally due to a unique skill set or who can be solid backups and fill in. The bottom few groups are guys who probably should never start and if they see any time it is because of injuries or because they have a special skill set that allows them to make an impact. These guys will generally play special teams and fill out your roster. Most late round picks will fall into this area but some should have the potential to move out of this range.

kcarr point well taken all i am saying is 3% in the game isnt bad. At the same time i agree with you that the majority of the players should be in the middle of the pack as in real life, there more than 16 players who can completely alter a game and if you put a limit on how many of those players are aroud then you take away from the game as a whole and what those special players bring to it.

[kcarr]

Quote: Originally Posted by slick1186

kcarr point well taken all i am saying is 3% in the game isnt bad. At the same time i agree with you that the majority of the players should be in the middle of the pack as in real life, there more than 16 players who can completely alter a game and if you put a limit on how many of those players are aroud then you take away from the game as a whole and what those special players bring to it.

Yes, there are more than 16 players who can completely alter a game. How many are expected to do that week in and week out though? Anyone over 85 should be able to really change a game. There are even people in the lower ratings who can. I see sproles for instance able to change a game despite what should be a pretty low overall.

[slick1186]

you also have take into account offensive linemen and there are also going to be kickers and punters included in that group its not just skill positions

[ballaspence9493]

i'm surprised cassel is only an 83...

also, ya, if slaton was 97, i wouldnt buy the game. lol. jk, id jus change his overall to 50

[AC IS ART]

Quote: Originally Posted by marcoyk

is it just a coincidence that 3/5 of the biggest shakers were on the redskins. I'm a redskins fan and i agree that devin thomas should go down, but deangelo hall went down to below 70?!?!?! a little extreme there. and fred smoot didn't have a bad year last year.

Exactly, I'm starting to wonder if they watch Redskins game tape or go off of what ESPN/Media says. DeAngelo Hall was bad with Oakland, but he clearly was the other top corner on the Redskins (minus Rogers). To have our starting corner lower than our nickel (Smoot) is ridiculous...to have him lower than these unproven rookies (Jenkins, Davis, Butler, Alphonso, Smith, McBath,etc.) is asinine !

[D_NyCe]

Calvin Johnson 92

I'm glad he's in the 90's but....

Roddy White 94??

I'ma fan of Roddy but if he's 94 Calvin and Brandon Marshall should be 95 imo, and I said this in another thread too, I knew it was gon happen but I don't agree with Fitzgerald having a higher overall rating than Quan, they should both be the same at least imo, and I'm not really feeling Deangelo Williams at 95, I'ma fan of him also but idk about it quite yet