Demetrius Bell - Roster Update/Progression Problem

[Phife1442]

I have a prediction. When the next roster update comes out, Demetrius Bell (the new LT for the Bills) will not be a 50 ovr anymore. He will be at least a 70 ovr. They will make that change for no valid reason other than that is a minimum rating for a starting OT in the league.

Now if i were to play with Bell at LT for 5 yrs, he will probably never reach 70 ovr. Say he puts in a quality year, then he will be 75-80 ovr next year.

I understand the argument that people have that this is not progression, but a re-evaluation and the 50 ovr was wrong. But, shouldnt the game allow for a re-evaluation as well, otherwise you have tagged a player like bell as a practice squad player FOREVER without any hope of progression.

Why cant he play in my franchise for a year and increase up to around a 70 if he played well? From there the progression should be normal 3-5 ovr per year, but at least give us the chance to take someone from obscurity.

If its in the game...

[granddogg]

If he will be put at 70 then what is the point in this worthless thread ???

[will12203]

why just a 70? when other rookie Olinemen are rated higher and have not played a NFL down yet? What makes him the worse starting LT just because he was undrafted???

[Shade71]

They went back to having a full spectrum of ovr ratings like it used to be. Be glad he isnt a 25 ovr like he would have been in much older maddens. And yeah its probably because he was undrafted, until he gets to show something, thats just how it is with alot of players. If you dont agree with their rating just edit the guy.

[Synkopated]

Quote: Originally Posted by will12203

why just a 70? when other rookie Olinemen are rated higher and have not played a NFL down yet? What makes him the worse starting LT just because he was undrafted???

Actually that's exactly the reason.

[Frank784]

I think some people are missing your point op. I definitely agree with what you're saying. If a guy is drafted in the later rounds, or has been a backup for a couple of years, chances are that his rating is pretty low. I'm in the same exact situation with the Bucs. We will have 2 new starting Lbs this season with one being 65 overall and the other being around 62. They were backups until the recent roster cuts and will hopefully be rated a bit higher in the new update, but I've been starting them in my franchise from week 1.

It could take years and needing many tackles/ints/sacks to even get them to the mid 70s in my Franchise. The bucs have at least half a dozen players in the same position where backups will now be starting for us. I understand dropoffs from starts to reserves, but once a guy is put into a starting position, he should progress a good amount as he was made a starter for a reason.

We can all complain about our teams' players being underrated, but in situations like this, I agree with what you think should happen.

[TeamBuilder]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phife1442

I have a prediction. When the next roster update comes out, Demetrius Bell (the new LT for the Bills) will not be a 50 ovr anymore. He will be at least a 70 ovr. They will make that change for no valid reason other than that is a minimum rating for a starting OT in the league. Now if i were to play with Bell at LT for 5 yrs, he will probably never reach 70 ovr. Say he puts in a quality year, then he will be 75-80 ovr next year. I understand the argument that people have that this is not progression, but a re-evaluation and the 50 ovr was wrong. But, shouldnt the game allow for a re-evaluation as well, otherwise you have tagged a player like bell as a practice squad player FOREVER without any hope of progression. Why cant he play in my franchise for a year and increase up to around a 70 if he played well? From there the progression should be normal 3-5 ovr per year, but at least give us the chance to take someone from obscurity. If its in the game...

I agree, I was debating the same thing.

Madden 2006 Had Perfect Progression

[ThePebble19]

I agree to a certain extent.

Demetrius Bell sucks about as much as he did at the start of camp, maybe a little less. So, if there original rating was accurate in their minds, he should move up a few points for earning that starting spot...So maybe he's a 55 instead of a 50. If he gets moved to a 70+, it is for just like you said, no valid reason. He has done nothing to warrant that jump in ratings from July to September. He's still the same giant question mark.

But, here is what they should do.

You raise his OVR to maybe a mid 50s rating, or near there for the obvious reason that he has continued to progress enough to win the starting job...And then, you adjust his potential to say, a B or so. Obviously the people in the organization think highly enough that they are willing to cut a guy who played pretty well for them for 2 years, and another who was a 2 time Pro Bowler and give Bell the job. I would say that speaks volumes on the potential that the Bills feel that he has.

And then, you are getting a more realistic result. He will probably suck at first, but as you move through your dynasty, he becomes better because his progression rating is higher, and it allows him to become the LT that the Bills hope they have.

[Phife1442]

My main gripe about the ratings is that they are obviously flawed if they change him, which they have to because he is a 50 ovr with F potential.

If you are a Bills fan you know that Bell was someone they want to play and feel can do well, but EA never knew that. You would also know he was drafted, 7th round last year. It actually annoyed me the moment I saw his rating and potential in the game because he has great potential to be the next Jason Peters (college tight end converted to an athletic LT)

Ratings for lower rated young players (65 and below say) should be extremely dynamic and allow for big swings in change just like EA will do to his rating.

[ThePebble19]

Quote: Originally Posted by Phife1442

My main gripe about the ratings is that they are obviously flawed if they change him, which they have to because he is a 50 ovr with F potential. If you are a Bills fan you know that Bell was someone they want to play and feel can do well, but EA never knew that. You would also know he was drafted, 7th round last year. It actually annoyed me the moment I saw his rating and potential in the game because he has great potential to be the next Jason Peters (college tight end converted to an athletic LT) Ratings for lower rated young players (65 and below say) should be extremely dynamic and allow for big swings in change just like EA will do to his rating.

agreed. This is why I say that they shouldn't alter his rating all that much and adjust his potential. So long as the potential system is working correctly for higher pot. players, he should progress nicely over the course of 3-4 years....