Madden NFL 12 Player Ratings - Green Bay Packers and Minnesota Vikings

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by JJ_Bills9

Agreed. This is really the core of the argument. There are certain ratings in this game that the developers have concrete numbers to go off of, and they choose to just come up with stuff off the top of their head. Like speed, and strength, jumping, stuff like that... not hard to figure out since there are numbers you can look at to get very accurate ratings. Now awareness, throwing accuracy, blocking skills? Those are a bit of a guessing game, but they should be able to be in the ball park to something accurate.

Well if I am able to come up with scouting data for the other ratings, I would think that the guys with the big salaries at EA could.

After all, they are a big multi-million dollar gaming company and I'm just a little baby website owner.

Please...

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I have Barnett at 86 WITH the injury.

How do you have Sam Shields rated 69 because of injury and then have Barnett rated 86 coming off an injury bad enough to put him on IR. And he's been injured each of the last 3 seasons?

[kunner]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

How do you have Sam Shields rated 69 because of injury and then have Barnett rated 86 coming off an injury bad enough to put him on IR. And he's been injured each of the last 3 seasons?

So you have Barnett, who has had 2 season ending injuries in the past 3 years, one a wrist injury and the other a torn up knee, at 86 overall. While Shields, who hurt his shoulder in one game, gets docked into the 60s? really man, you gotta be more consistent with your ratings. Going by your method, Barnett would be an upper 90s LB if he had no injuries.

[kunner]

just wanted to add to my last post, if you dont like the ratings. Change them. There is no law that says you have to play with the ratings out of the box.

[TearsOfPurple]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

My argument, however, is how do you know what attributes to performance? How do you know that it is SPEED that attributes to Finley being the better player? What about Finley's AGI being better? Or being the better route runner? Or reading the defense better? My point is that you cannot simply make a player faster just because he is better. That is what EA does. They make players faster because they play better, when in reality they may be better because they are more technical. When I watch Finley, I see a guy who runs good routes and out muscles anyone for a ball. He has GREAT hands. However, when I see Quarless, I see a fast straight-line runner who has tighter hips. He isn't as agile or as good of a route runner. He has difficulty reading defenses. Watch this Vid. Who do you think is faster? 45 year old Jerry Rice or this kid at a Nike Combine? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fzX30Efvtg My guess is that the kid is MUCH faster than Jerry at that age, but because Jerry is such a good route runner and knows what he is doing against man coverage he DESTROYS the DB and makes him look like a fool. The kid isn't even in the frame at the end of the route! So in essence, you don't have to be fast to be good. That is what I think of Finley. He is a tad slower than Quarless, but is much more technically sound. So why make him faster when he truly isn't? That would make as much sense as rating Jerry Rice a 99 in SPD and that poor kid a 79 in SPD when we all know that is probably not true.

This post wins the argument, no idea why it was ignored.

Anyway, BACK ON TOPIC:

I think the Viking's ratings are pretty fair. I do agree with the poster on the first page, Erin Henderson isn't that bad. He's high 60s at worst, low 70s at best.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by kunner

So you have Barnett, who has had 2 season ending injuries in the past 3 years, one a wrist injury and the other a torn up knee, at 86 overall. While Shields, who hurt his shoulder in one game, gets docked into the 60s? really man, you gotta be more consistent with your ratings. Going by your method, Barnett would be an upper 90s LB if he had no injuries.

Barnett was a 91 before the injury. Shields was a 71. He also gave up a TD in the Super Bowl to Mike Wallace.

Jarrett Bush had an INT in the big game and was in on the game-ending 4th down play. In fact, he almost picked that one of as well. Bush is a bit more aware and has better tackling skills. Why do you think he also plays FS? Shields still has a lot of learning to do. He was a rookie after all. It's one of those coaching decisions made every day in the NFL. When you go nickle, do you put in the young kid with the high ceiling who hasn't peaked yet, or the 4 year vet who is less athletic but a bit more polished right now? The Packers chose the first option by putting Shields in the entire year. Doesn't mean he was light-years ahead of Bush though. This is something I wish Madden would take into consideration by getting rid of the OVR rating like back in Madden 99. Makes you make tough choices and see who works best for your team and playing/coaching style.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by TearsOfPurple

This post wins the argument, no idea why it was ignored.

The reason most of these posts are ignored is because people can't handle logic, reason, and truth. I try to bring evidence over and over again and it seems I am only met with opinion. How can someone argue with something that makes this much sense.

You would have to be only 1% serious to disagree with something like that...and we have a place for those people. Down the hall, last door on the left...welcome to the one-percent club.

http://imgsrv.1053thefan.com/image/k...rcent_club.jpg

[kunner]

Your quoting what you say as truth, when it reality it is your opinion. If someone's opinion is that your ratings are wrong and Madden's are right, its their opinion. You cant argue someone's opinion. My opinion is that you have people rated lower than they should be, while your opinion is that Madden has them rated higher than they should be. Doesnt make either one of us right. I dont play with the set ratings, i tweak them to how i feel they best represent on the field.

Judging by the preseason game i watched tonight, Graham Harrell and Matt Flynn should have insane accuracy and play recognition ratings, if you go by how they last played in games.

This whole thread is opinion, so im not right, your not right, nobody is right when it comes to the ratings.