HB's - Top 10 Revealed

[Wolfman93011]

well this thread has been entertaining

[MrDefense]

Here is what the fans think based on a poll I currently have on my blog site.

What should be the biggest factor in Madden Ratings?

Statistics - 122 (78%)
Perception - 21 (13%)
Fan Input - 8 (5%)
ESPN Highlights - 5 (3%)

Total votes 156.

It's a small sample in the big scheme of things, but I actually agree with the ratio of Stats to Perception. It's a poll, that I am going to leave up for awhile, I curious to see how/if it changes much going forward.

Everyone who supports the "eye test" should be in favor of a real ratings team for Madden. Would you want one "eye ball" (basically, Donny Moore's opinion), or would you want multiple "eye balls" pushing for the most objective attributes as possible?

I agree with stats being the main ingredient b/c the " eyeball " test leaves room for too much grey area. There are plenty of experts that differ on their opinion of the players so that goes to show ya that the "eyeball" test along isn't enough. For example, some say Flacco is a good QB and its not b/c of him that they haven't won a SB yet and some say the complete opposite.

Stats can be very deceptive as well b/c other factors can determine player stats. Take Welker for example. He puts up Top 3 stats but almost no one will rank him as a Top 10 WR on their boards. Also, he has Brady throwing the ball to him so you have to factor that in too. For RBs is the offensive line that has to be factor in as well as other things, etc......

Perception is a very dangerous thing to rate a player on but it has its role in determining a player attributes but it should make up the least percentage of the outcome of the attributes which it shows on the chart you going off of. The plays that TO and Jerry Rice has made as far as beating the coverage deep, even though their 40 times wasn't that fast, on Madden, you have to go with the perception to make their impact be felt like their real live selves. Same thing with Hester with the 100 speed deal a few Maddens back. He wasn't even the 5th fastest player in the league at the time ( maybe a lot lower than that ), but with how he was returning punts and kickoffs left and right, you had to boost his speed up to give him the impact that he has in real life. EA has already admitted that they do this so it comes as no surprise anymore.

That's why I say if you have like a 3 component of stats, combine, and perception those are all the ingredients you need to be as accurate as you can be with the attributes.

[Nevada_Ballin]

I agree with stats being the main ingredient b/c the " eyeball " test leaves room for too much grey area. There are plenty of experts that differ on their opinion of the players so that goes to show ya that the "eyeball" test along isn't enough. For example, some say Flacco is a good QB and its not b/c of him that they haven't won a SB yet and some say the complete opposite.

Stats can be very deceptive as well b/c other factors can determine player stats. Take Welker for example. He puts up Top 3 stats but almost no one will rank him as a Top 10 WR on their boards. Also, he has Brady throwing the ball to him so you have to factor that in too. For RBs is the offensive line that has to be factor in as well as other things, etc......

Perception is a very dangerous thing to rate a player on but it has its role in determining a player attributes but it should make up the least percentage of the outcome of the attributes which it shows on the chart you going off of. The plays that TO and Jerry Rice has made as far as beating the coverage deep, even though their 40 times wasn't that fast, on Madden, you have to go with the perception to make their impact be felt like their real live selves. Same thing with Hester with the 100 speed deal a few Maddens back. He wasn't even the 5th fastest player in the league at the time ( maybe a lot lower than that ), but with how he was returning punts and kickoffs left and right, you had to boost his speed up to give him the impact that he has in real life. EA has already admitted that they do this so it comes as no surprise anymore.

That's why I say if you have like a 3 component of stats, combine, and perception those are all the ingredients you need to be as accurate as you can be with the attributes.

I believe stats leave too much room for gray areas. A team ahead with 5-10 min to go will pound the rock most of the time, padding the rushing stats. A team behind will throw the ball, padding the passing/receiving stats.


.

[harmon92]

but wont that "inflation" even out over the course of a season...or three seasons? try not to think of it as stats, its only PRODUCTION...but in numerical form.

here's a really DUMB question: what two scouts look at a player and see the same thing, like EVER? the draft is a perfect example of how scouts aren't ever on the same page.

here's some great athletes who aced the "eyeball test" too: jamarcus russell, mike mamula, terrell buckley, jamal anderson, vernon gholston, chris houston, ahmad carroll, charles rogers, alex smith (a better athlete than aaron rogers, btw..chuckle...snicker...smirk)

you'll never guess what they all have in common.

[sgibs]

but wont that "inflation" even out over the course of a season...or three seasons? try not to think of it as stats, its only PRODUCTION...but in numerical form.

here's a really DUMB question: what two scouts look at a player and see the same thing, like EVER? the draft is a perfect example of how scouts aren't ever on the same page.

here's some great athletes who aced the "eyeball test" too: jamarcus russell, mike mamula, terrell buckley, jamal anderson, vernon gholston, chris houston, ahmad carroll, charles rogers, alex smith (a better athlete than aaron rogers, btw..chuckle...snicker...smirk)

you'll never guess what they all have in common.

they never aced the eye ball test in the nfl while putting up productive numbers.

we were talking about Dez Bryant previously and it was mentioned (not by manmic but by sprtsgmr) that bc he hadnt had a 1000 yard season he shouldnt be allowed to be rated over a 75 OVR.

most of those guys you mentioned never had productive seasons like bryant. (smith played well last season)

like i have said before about ratings...

production 33%
history 33%
perception/analysts/eyeball test 33%

each are important and i dont think either one should be looked at to much as they all can lead astray

[mannmicj]

depends on the eye balls. do i want average joe piping in and screaming at the top of his longs that i rated Ben Roetheleisberger wrong?


In order for the eyeball test to have weight it needs to have certain credentials.

What I think in comparison to a NFL analyst gets blown out of the water.

fan input and ESPN highlights really have no weight for ratings IMO. currently i dont like the fan vote to sway ratings as personally I think the ratings she be left to the experts, EA and company. (and what you are doing) but not the average joe.

I completely agree. Fans don't need to vote on ratings. That is the job of the "ratings team".

I don't consider everyone at EA an expert when it comes to player evaluation. Some are more fans than objective NFL observers. I also agree that SC Highlights have no place in Madden ratings, but we know for a fact that they impact Donny's attribute increases, hell he tweets it as it happens. That would fall into "knee jerk" ratings and it's not a credible way to rate players.

You said, "In order for the eyeball test to have weight it needs to have certain credentials." Exactly, and that is why in most cases it's BS. If the eyes are attached to a bias (fan) brain, they are easily swayed by one or two highlights, it becomes total BS. Most fans fall in that category. Sorry, but it's true. The love for their team prevents most of them from being objective. I thought I was going to get killed by Seattle fans at the training camp when I told them certain players are overrated and most likely won't live up to their high expectations (BTW - I am a lifelong Seahawk fan). Being objective is not what most NFL fans are about.

That is why stats are a great tool. If they are looked at objectively, they can be your guide. People who don't like one stat, will make excuse after excuse to discount it. Stats don't have an opinion, they just are. Can stats be misused, yes they can. It's the job of the "ratings team" to utilize the best available data, all of it. Some attributes really do matchup well with statistics, while others don't have a statistical counterpart.

Knowing when to apply statistics and when not to is key. The subjective attributes like SPC need to be discussed with the most objective ratings team possible. If they can't come to a clear agreement, you hold off on boosting an attribute. Allow more time to reveal the answer. Jumping the gun on an attribute boost just creates more work later and you lose credibility along the way. I have recommended each player be evaluated in 3 to 4 game blocks throughout the season prior to increasing an individual attribute. This will eliminate the inconsistent ups and downs (see: Tebow-style ratings system) of individual player attributes.


Since every player will not be on the same schedule (due to: bye weeks, injuries, games played, etc), there will still be weekly roster updates.

Just a few things to think about.

[mannmicj]

now what would be really cool is to see every player and every stat correct.

see a direct comparison between your ratings and how they differ from EA. would take a while but i dont see a better way to prove your overall point then to just direct someone to your OFFICIAL Madden 13 Ratings.

Whenever you get into a conversation with someone you just direct them to a webpage

make it happen in Madden 13 mannic

^^^^

That would be cool, but unfortunately, I have a day job and a family. I try to help EA the best I can.

Even you were shocked at how poorly Peppers and Mathis were rated in BSH (Block Shed). Do to time contrants, I have to do this one attribute at a time. Sorry, but there is only so much time in my day.

BTW - I've proved my point several times, especially with the CAR, CAT, and DAC attributes. Unfortunately, you don't see it or choose not to. I can't help that. Like I said previously, I am done trying to convince you. Moving onto to more open minds I think your love for video games might cloud your judgement at times. First and foremost, I love the NFL and I want it to be as accurately represented in Madden as possible. That is where it all started, it didn't start out of hate. I am not a guy who owns a tons of video games. There is one game that will always be in my house at it's Madden, unless another NFL game comes out, then I will have two. Right now EA has no competition, so they need to accept that and know they will be under the microscope on all levels (including attributes).

EA says, "If it's in the game, it's in the game", I am trying to push them to live by that statement.

[Nevada_Ballin]

but wont that "inflation" even out over the course of a season...or three seasons? try not to think of it as stats, its only PRODUCTION...but in numerical form.

here's a really DUMB question: what two scouts look at a player and see the same thing, like EVER? the draft is a perfect example of how scouts aren't ever on the same page.

here's some great athletes who aced the "eyeball test" too: jamarcus russell, mike mamula, terrell buckley, jamal anderson, vernon gholston, chris houston, ahmad carroll, charles rogers, alex smith (a better athlete than aaron rogers, btw..chuckle...snicker...smirk)

you'll never guess what they all have in common.

A lot of those guys failed my eyeball test. Then again, I watch football a little different than most people. While they are looking at the QB or HB when the ball is snapped, I'm watching the OLine/DLine battle until the ball gets there. Thanks to John Madden's "One Knee Equals Two Feet" book for that tip years ago.

There's a chain of events that happen in every play. Being able to understand that contributes to a successful eyeball test.






.

[Inv]

^^^^

That would be cool, but unfortunately, I have a day job and a family. I try to help EA the best I can.

Even you were shocked at how poorly Peppers and Mathis were rated in BSH (Block Shed). Do to time contrants, I have to do this one attribute at a time. Sorry, but there is only so much time in my day.

BTW - I've proved my point several times, especially with the CAR, CAT, and DAC attributes. Unfortunately, you don't see it or choose not to. I can't help that. Like I said previously, I am done trying to convince you. Moving onto to more open minds I think your love for video games might cloud your judgement at times. First and foremost, I love the NFL and I want it to be as accurately represented in Madden as possible. That is where it all started, it didn't start out of hate. I am not a guy who owns a tons of video games. There is one game that will always be in my house at it's Madden, unless another NFL game comes out, then I will have two. Right now EA has no competition, so they need to accept that and know they will be under the microscope on all levels (including attributes).

Without competition no need to worry being under the microscope as the consumer will buy the product regardless because no alternative available.

EA says, "If it's in the game, it's in the game", I am trying to push them to live by that statement

I think what they mean by that is what you see is what you get you don't like it go buy another NFL game...all the other stuff about caring and yada ..yada.... yada is just marketing ploys/political statements. Without competition to improve the product is decreasing profits without gaining additional share of the market as you already own 100%. It would be silly to do that. As a Madden player who buys madden every year i can't stand it but looking at it from a business perspective it is #GOLD #GENIUS #$$$$$$.

Maddenstein Hats off to you man for putting even the amount of time you do to what you see as needed improvements. The only game I really play is Madden and will buy it again this year hoping for improvements but if they are not there..my $60 bucks will be gone but i will use the time that i had alotted for Madden to spend elsewhere...until exclusive expires.

Competition is what drives a company to improve a product as they are worried about losing the market without competition all you will get is #EXCUSES. Example look at the NBA series....

[sgibs]

I completely agree. Fans don't need to vote on ratings. That is the job of the "ratings team".

I don't consider everyone at EA an expert when it comes to player evaluation. Some are more fans than objective NFL observers. I also agree that SC Highlights have no place in Madden ratings, but we know for a fact that they impact Donny's attribute increases, hell he tweets it as it happens. That would fall into "knee jerk" ratings and it's not a credible way to rate players.

You said, "In order for the eyeball test to have weight it needs to have certain credentials." Exactly, and that is why in most cases it's BS. If the eyes are attached to a bias (fan) brain, they are easily swayed by one or two highlights, it becomes total BS. Most fans fall in that category. Sorry, but it's true. The love for their team prevents most of them from being objective. I thought I was going to get killed by Seattle fans at the training camp when I told them certain players are overrated and most likely won't live up to their high expectations (BTW - I am a lifelong Seahawk fan). Being objective is not what most NFL fans are about.

That is why stats are a great tool. If they are looked at objectively, they can be your guide. People who don't like one stat, will make excuse after excuse to discount it. Stats don't have an opinion, they just are. Can stats be misused, yes they can. It's the job of the "ratings team" to utilize the best available data, all of it. Some attributes really do matchup well with statistics, while others don't have a statistical counterpart.

Knowing when to apply statistics and when not to is key. The subjective attributes like SPC need to be discussed with the most objective ratings team possible. If they can't come to a clear agreement, you hold off on boosting an attribute. Allow more time to reveal the answer. Jumping the gun on an attribute boost just creates more work later and you lose credibility along the way. I have recommended each player be evaluated in 3 to 4 game blocks throughout the season prior to increasing an individual attribute. This will eliminate the inconsistent ups and downs (see: Tebow-style ratings system) of individual player attributes.


Since every player will not be on the same schedule (due to: bye weeks, injuries, games played, etc), there will still be weekly roster updates.

Just a few things to think about.

i would agree with you that stats are great for the novice to be objective.

for the expert - i personally dont believe they need them to evaluate talent and or what a player is capable of


madden ratings are a interesting beast. you need to make sure you dont over inflate a guy based on stats (victor cruz) but you also cant job a guy because they havent had production, or if they have NEVER produced you still cant take away there physical tools (Ramses Barden).

thats why you get "Madden Gems" Ramses Barden is tall, can get off the LOS, and he can go up and get it but hes never translated that onto the field (hes never played really).

theres a lot that goes into it.

[sgibs]

i would agree with you that stats are great for the novice to be objective.

for the expert - i personally dont believe they need them to evaluate talent and or what a player is capable of


madden ratings are a interesting beast. you need to make sure you dont over inflate a guy based on stats (victor cruz) but you also cant job a guy because they havent had production, or if they have NEVER produced you still cant take away there physical tools (Ramses Barden).

thats why you get "Madden Gems" Ramses Barden is tall, can get off the LOS, and he can go up and get it but hes never translated that onto the field (hes never played really).

theres a lot that goes into it.

i think you are on the right track with all that you are doing. one thing that i personally dont like is minimum rating thresholds (might be sprtsgmr) - im warming up to what you are doing espicially with the recent Dez Bryant ranking. Why?

You rated him 24 i think? I rated im 21 - to me all that matters is we are both in agreement (ballpark) with how he compares to the rest of the league.

the rest is semantics - i think you have a lower ratings scale - THIS MIGHT BE THE DISCONNECT lol.

it just hit me - is this all its been over the past year? we rate guys with the same value but overlal you rate guys lower then I do?

BINGO BANGO BONGO?

[mannmicj]

i would agree with you that stats are great for the novice to be objective.

for the expert - i personally dont believe they need them to evaluate talent and or what a player is capable of


madden ratings are a interesting beast. you need to make sure you dont over inflate a guy based on stats (victor cruz) but you also cant job a guy because they havent had production, or if they have NEVER produced you still cant take away there physical tools (Ramses Barden).

thats why you get "Madden Gems" Ramses Barden is tall, can get off the LOS, and he can go up and get it but hes never translated that onto the field (hes never played really).

theres a lot that goes into it.

Others might say Barden hasn't earned the right to get more playing time. That might indicate how talented he is.

So called "experts" use stats all the time. It's funny the way you look at things, it makes me believe you don't actually follow the NFL very close. You are probably too busy with the actual video games to watch, listen, and read about the entire NFL. So you only have time for the quick "eye ball" test. You probably don't even have much time to listen to all of the "experts" you give so much credit to. Who is your most reliable source? Which experts do you value the most?

I spend more time studying the real NFL than the video game version. Don't get me wrong, I will spend a ton of time on the sticks, but it won't come close the time I spend following the NFL.

Like it or not Gibs, many people utilize statistics, not just the novice. As I said before, people who don't agree with stats will make anything up to devalue them.

I will also say (again), you have to look at all of the available stats.

I think you would try to convince a college professor that a 75% was actually good for an "A" instead of the "C" you earned

[mannmicj]

i think you are on the right track with all that you are doing. one thing that i personally dont like is minimum rating thresholds (might be sprtsgmr) - im warming up to what you are doing espicially with the recent Dez Bryant ranking. Why?

You rated him 24 i think? I rated im 21 - to me all that matters is we are both in agreement (ballpark) with how he compares to the rest of the league.

the rest is semantics - i think you have a lower ratings scale - THIS MIGHT BE THE DISCONNECT lol.

it just hit me - is this all its been over the past year? we rate guys with the same value but overlal you rate guys lower then I do?

BINGO BANGO BONGO?

Sports Gamer and I are very different in some aspects.

I don't value OVR at all. Not until the formula is corrected. I look at the ranking of the players, not the OVR. Sports Gamers loves OVR and doesn't get into attributes. I am attributes first. Sports Gamer has some very low OVR ratings for some players, I don't completely agree. That is why I ask him what the actual rank is, not the OVR. Is the player 15 out of 160? What is the actual rank?

We do agree that things need to change and that bias needs to be drastically reduced. Stats can help reduce that bias, when applied objectively.

It's sad Madden fans are so hung up on OVR only, they are really missing the BIG picture. That is why I say look deeper than OVR and into the attributes. EA has conditioned Madden fans to concentrate on OVR, my biggest challenge is to reverse that thinking and get people look at everything. I believe this will force EA to pay closer attention to attribute accuracy, which has always been my main goal.

So, I look at a ranking and you look at OVR. I don't care about OVR as long as the attributes are accurate. The day OVR is changed to a stand alone ranking is the day I will have accomplished my main goal.. It will result in more accurate attributes because EA won't have to be concerned with manipulating OVR anymore. Attributes will still exist for all players, but they won't have some broken formula that connects to OVR.

[WFColonel]

i would agree with you that stats are great for the novice to be objective.

for the expert - i personally dont believe they need them to evaluate talent and or what a player is capable of


madden ratings are a interesting beast. you need to make sure you dont over inflate a guy based on stats (victor cruz) but you also cant job a guy because they havent had production, or if they have NEVER produced you still cant take away there physical tools (Ramses Barden).

thats why you get "Madden Gems" Ramses Barden is tall, can get off the LOS, and he can go up and get it but hes never translated that onto the field (hes never played really).

theres a lot that goes into it.

I disagree with that. A lot of "experts" on TV are not experts, they dont know the whole league, and they dont know the depth within teams.

Perfect example....Curtis Loften (now a NO Saint)

I never heard a WORD about him on ESPN all of his years in ATL. He was doing work in the nfl and not a peep was said about him...When they would list of top MLB's in the game he was always nowhere to be found. I dont even think he had honorable mentions in top 10 lists lol

But once ATL doesnt resign him and the saints sign him all of a sudden Loften is such a great asset. He is now a monster. Some talk about him as an upgrade from Vilma.

Where does that come from?

It doesnt come from these people knowing the game... ATL NEVER IS COVERED by the media..in 2010 atl was 13-3 and the 1st seed and still no coverage at all.

What happened was those "experts" saw the additions the saints made to their team and since everybody knew Vilma was going to be suspended and they looked and saw who that guy was..They looked at the stats and they looked at the production then they MAYBE looked at film of him.

And I understand it..I 100% dont fault them for not knowing every team top to bottom. Its human, they dont have time to watch all of those games esp working for big places like NFLN and ESPN working the hours they work. But what I do have an issue with is them not admitting that they dont know something and try to look like they know it all. I would rather them not speak and me not get information then spew out nonsense.

There are probably a handful of people that really know their stuff like they advertise.

[mannmicj]

I disagree with that. A lot of "experts" on TV are not experts, they dont know the whole league, and they dont know the depth within teams.

Perfect example....Curtis Loften (now a NO Saint)

I never heard a WORD about him on ESPN all of his years in ATL. He was doing work in the nfl and not a peep was said about him...When they would list of top MLB's in the game he was always nowhere to be found. I dont even think he had honorable mentions in top 10 lists lol

But once ATL doesnt resign him and the saints sign him all of a sudden Loften is such a great asset. He is now a monster. Some talk about him as an upgrade from Vilma.

Where does that come from?

It doesnt come from these people knowing the game... ATL NEVER IS COVERED by the media..in 2010 atl was 13-3 and the 1st seed and still no coverage at all.

What happened was those "experts" saw the additions the saints made to their team and since everybody knew Vilma was going to be suspended and they looked and saw who that guy was..They looked at the stats and they looked at the production then they MAYBE looked at film of him.

And I understand it..I 100% dont fault them for not knowing every team top to bottom. Its human, they dont have time to watch all of those games esp working for big places like NFLN and ESPN working the hours they work. But what I do have an issue with is them not admitting that they dont know something and try to look like they know it all. I would rather them not speak and me not get information then spew out nonsense.

There are probably a handful of people that really know their stuff like they advertise.

Very good point. It's the big market vs small market, or popular vs unpopular issue. Your example was excellent. Many so called "experts" are more TV personalities than NFL expert. Being on TV doesn't guarantee you are an expert. Some of the greatest minds in football wouldn't think of doing a broadcast or NFL show. Some of the best minds only write about the NFL and don't get face time that TV folks get.