Connect with us

7 Players Are Rated an Overall 99 in Madden NFL 19, Your Thoughts?

Madden NFL 19

7 Players Are Rated an Overall 99 in Madden NFL 19, Your Thoughts?

Today, EA Sports revealed the top 7 rated players in Madden NFL 19, all of which have an overall 99 rating.

Check out the names below and links to some more ratings for each player.

Below are the top rated players from the end of last season, in Madden NFL 18.

Let us know what you think.

144 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Discussion
  1. CM Hooe
    Per ProFootballTalk, the seven OVR 99s:
    Aaron Rodgers
    Tom Brady
    Rob Gronkowski
    Antonio Brown
    Aaron Donald
    Von Miller
    Luke Kuechly

    :Facepalm:
    Seven freaking 99 OVR's?
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 96, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.
    Rodgers - One of the best arms and most clutch in the game, but even he has had his downfalls. We aren't talking Payton in his prime, Montana, Unitas, Farve, Marino, it's insulting to those guys to give Rodgers a 99 OVR.
    Gronk - This is so pathetic I can't even comment on it.
    Brown - Moss, Rice, Owens...Brown? Yeah freaking right...again, insulting to those guys to put Antonio Brown at their OVR.
    Donald - Probably the player I have the least problem with, but again, he shouldn't be a 99 OVR. This is no Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, or Merlin Olsen...I'd put him maybe around Warren Sapp territory...a 96/97 OVR in the prime he's in.
    Miller - Almost as bad as Gronk...this is just insulting.
    Kuechly - Underrated in the eyes of household names, but not a 99 OVR.
    I'm sick just looking at this.
    saintrules
    I wouldn't argue that Gronk in his absolute prime deserved a 99, but he's far from that nowadays.

    saintrules
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 95, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.

    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.
    The ratings will never please all. Some want a 99 to be the best ever. Others want a 99 to be the best current. With the way it is now some 99s are better than others. My biggest issue is inflating other ratings to get players to a specific overall. Too often in Madden we see guys get boosts in places they are weaker in real life just so their rating will be high enough. My wish is that the archetype system is expanded on and we really get a ratings system that values specialized players and doesn't need artificial inflation to make players good all around so their rating is high.
    saintrules
    :Facepalm:
    Seven freaking 99 OVR's?
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 96, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.
    Rodgers - One of the best arms and most clutch in the game, but even he has had his downfalls. We aren't talking Payton in his prime, Montana, Unitas, Farve, Marino, it's insulting to those guys to give Rodgers a 99 OVR.
    Gronk - This is so pathetic I can't even comment on it.
    Brown - Moss, Rice, Owens...Brown? Yeah freaking right...again, insulting to those guys to put Antonio Brown at their OVR.
    Donald - Probably the player I have the least problem with, but again, he shouldn't be a 99 OVR. This is no Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, or Merlin Olsen...I'd put him maybe around Warren Sapp territory...a 96/97 OVR in the prime he's in.
    Miller - Almost as bad as Gronk...this is just insulting.
    Kuechly - Underrated in the eyes of household names, but not a 99 OVR.
    I'm sick just looking at this.

    If I'm not mistaken didn't Brady just win the MVP and take his team to the super bowl? Aaron Donald just won Defensive player of the year, Kuechly is widely considered the best linebacker playing right now. I don't have any issue with these.
    Plus, as far as cfm goes, regression will handle this for the older players.
    The first thing I do when I open Madden is take a look at some of the lower or higher overalls and tweak them. I actually kind of enjoy it.
    This year will be no different.
    TB5XSBW
    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.

    Planet Earth.
    You must be from Uranus, as well as the Madden dev team who handles ratings, because that's straight where they pulled this crap from.
    This isn't an issue with particular players, this is an issue with EVERYBODY. The ratings are insanely inflated because players cry and complain based on their ratings in a video game.
    EA is out here to please the NFLPA first, and if you disagree, I don't think you've read enough about it.
    saintrules
    Planet Earth.
    You must be from Uranus, as well as the Madden dev team who handles ratings, because that's straight where they pulled this crap from.
    This isn't an issue with particular players, this is an issue with EVERYBODY. The ratings are insanely inflated because players cry and complain based on their ratings in a video game.
    EA is out here to please the NFLPA first, and if you disagree, I don't think you've read enough about it.

    My post wasn't so much about the Madden ratings as it was about your inaccurate comments about the aforementioned players.
    I don't mind if they lower all of the ratings and don't have any 99 OVR. The two you mentioned would still be the highest rated at their positions, though, and rightfully so.
    TB5XSBW
    My post wasn't so much about the Madden ratings as it was about your inaccurate comments about the aforementioned players.
    I don't mind if they lower all of the ratings and don't have any 99 OVR. The two you mentioned would still be the highest rated at their positions, though, and rightfully so.

    I also agree the two would still be the highest rated at their positions.
    Someone else mentioned this being an argument of "Best All-Time" being 99's or "Best Current Players".
    Now I see I am 100% someone who prefers "Best All-Time" to receive the 99's, not current.
    saintrules
    :Facepalm:
    Seven freaking 99 OVR's?
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 96, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.
    Rodgers - One of the best arms and most clutch in the game, but even he has had his downfalls. We aren't talking Payton in his prime, Montana, Unitas, Farve, Marino, it's insulting to those guys to give Rodgers a 99 OVR.
    Gronk - This is so pathetic I can't even comment on it.
    Brown - Moss, Rice, Owens...Brown? Yeah freaking right...again, insulting to those guys to put Antonio Brown at their OVR.
    Donald - Probably the player I have the least problem with, but again, he shouldn't be a 99 OVR. This is no Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, or Merlin Olsen...I'd put him maybe around Warren Sapp territory...a 96/97 OVR in the prime he's in.
    Miller - Almost as bad as Gronk...this is just insulting.
    Kuechly - Underrated in the eyes of household names, but not a 99 OVR.
    I'm sick just looking at this.
    Why do you keep comparing these guys to retired legends? None of those guys are on the roster.
    Edit: nvm post above answers question. Just a matter of preference. But if I wouldn't expect 99 to be reserved for hof guys only if they aren't on the base roster imo.
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
    I don't have any problems with the ratings. not a big deal to me personally. all of those guys will probably be hall of famers and I think hall of famers getting the 99 is fair. but I understand those who think they are too high.
    Honestly I think the 99's are pretty much who I would have expected. Since there is only 7, I think that in itself is a step in the right direction. Plus if this is like years past, these 99's are just in play now and not necessarily how they are reflected in CFM.
    I remember the days when the devs said they were going to start to stretch out the ratings for players to get much more of a difference between elite players and starters, starters to backups, etc. In my opinion they never went far enough with this stretching and I would much prefer to see guys rated from 50-99 where you have legitimate starters rated in the high 60s. This would make the better players stand out as they should.
    saintrules
    How does that make any sense, whatsoever?
    I wouldn't argue that Gronk in his absolute prime deserved a 99, but he's far from that nowadays.
    The best player at a certain position doesn't deserve a 99, that's not how ratings should work. The rating should reflect the true ability of said player, and in the case of Gronk, he's not anywhere close to a 99 OVR in skill anymore...his injury proneness let ALONE should bring him down, regardless of skill.
    These inflated ratings hurt team building, badly.

    Yes he should be a 99 overall because he's had argurment for goat TE. If you're in the argument for goat in your position you def deserve a 99
    Lazy10
    Loll no he shouldn't, he got owned by the Eagles. He looked garbage that game

    Lol. They ALL looked like a dumpster fire that game. Won't argue that. But Harry is clearly the best safety in the league right now.
    Maybe he should be a 96-98 😂
    Daywalker86
    Lol. They ALL looked like a dumpster fire that game. Won't argue that. But Harry is clearly the best safety in the league right now.
    Maybe he should be a 96-98 😂

    He looked the worst. 97 rating for him is fair
    Daywalker86
    Lol. They ALL looked like a dumpster fire that game. Won't argue that. But Harry is clearly the best safety in the league right now.
    Maybe he should be a 96-98 ��

    Eh. There are a bunch of good safeties in the NFL today and they all do different things incredibly well. I don't think there is a definitive "best safety" in the NFL right now.
    Like, Harrison Smith is awesome and he's easily in this group of awesome safeties, as he's incredible playing downhill against the run (in all facets; positioning, instincts, tackling, the whole deal) and has great instincts in general. However, he doesn't play the deep third quite like Earl Thomas does; he doesn't man up against slot receivers quite like Malcolm Jenkins can; and he's not quite the bonafide athletic stud Eric Berry is.
    Lazy10
    Yes he should be a 99 overall because he's had argurment for goat TE. If you're in the argument for goat in your position you def deserve a 99

    2018 Gronk cannot be considered GOAT tier, not by a long shot. 2011/2014/2015 Gronk, okay, he can make a case.
    In a sense, that's like saying MJ deserved a 99 OVR all through his years because he was the GOAT, or LeBron, or Trout, Kershaw, etc.
    Guys have GOAT years that make them the GOAT, those are the years they should be 99 OVR...not every single year regardless of stats, injuries, off the field issues, etc, and that's my problem with Madden. They elect to say, "Brady is the GOAT, 99 OVR!" When in reality, Brady had his GOAT years in the past, the vast majority of NFL "experts" would agree Brady is NOT in his current prime.
    saintrules
    2018 Gronk cannot be considered GOAT tier, not by a long shot. 2011/2014/2015 Gronk, okay, he can make a case.

    theres where you lose me. in 2017 Gronk had the same stats as 2015 minus 3 touchdowns. so because he caught 3 less touchdowns his ratings should be lower? catching 3 less touchdowns should lower his catching/routerunning etc? I dont agree with that logic. theres no denying Gronk is in the discussion for GOAT tight end, and right now hes still in his prime. whether he catches 8 TDs or 11 TDs, I dont see how that is enough to sway him getting a 99 or not. and whats wrong with a debatable GOAT at his position being a 99 throughout his prime? if you dont think fitting that criteria is deserving of a 99, who are you saving it for?
    BleedGreen710
    theres where you lose me. in 2017 Gronk had the same stats as 2015 minus 3 touchdowns. so because he caught 3 less touchdowns his ratings should be lower? catching 3 less touchdowns should lower his catching/routerunning etc? I dont agree with that logic. theres no denying Gronk is in the discussion for GOAT tight end, and right now hes still in his prime. whether he catches 8 TDs or 11 TDs, I dont see how that is enough to sway him getting a 99 or not. and whats wrong with a debatable GOAT at his position being a 99 throughout his prime? if you dont think fitting that criteria is deserving of a 99, who are you saving it for?

    Let me introduce my friend, 2K ratings...
    LeBron James:
    2K4 – 78 overall
    2K5 – 88 overall
    2K6 – 97 overall
    2K7 – 98 overall
    2K8 – 97 overall
    2K9 – 98 overall
    2K10 – 96 overall
    2K11 – 97 overall
    2K12 – 98 overall
    2K13 – 98 overall
    2K14 – 99 overall and cover player.
    2K15 – 98 overall
    2K16 – 94 overall
    2K17 – 96 overall
    2K18 - 97 overall
    Over the span of fifteen years, the (arguable) second best player in the history of basketball only received one total 99 OVR, which makes complete sense because heading into that season, he deserved it. He was close, many, many times, earning the nearly perfect rating of 98 a total of five times, again, deserving it, through not just his stats, but play on the court and avoidance of injuries.
    I'll put it this way, Gronk, along with the current seven 99 OVR's for Madden 19, are heralded as PERFECT...PERFECT! There isn't a single point higher they can reach, how can you sit back and justify that?
    The main reason I am keeping this going is because I strongly feel the ratings kill team building. Structuring teams and players with the way OVR's work in The Show, 2K, FIFA, or OOTP, is so freaking rewarding. Madden on the other hand, my only option for a professional football game, throws ratings around like it's just some small detail to the game.
    Ask yourself, why do 2K, The Show, etc, all have rating scales in common, but Madden's are so far off?
    CM Hooe
    Eh. There are a bunch of good safeties in the NFL today and they all do different things incredibly well. I don't think there is a definitive "best safety" in the NFL right now.
    Like, Harrison Smith is awesome and he's easily in this group of awesome safeties, as he's incredible playing downhill against the run (in all facets; positioning, instincts, tackling, the whole deal) and has great instincts in general. However, he doesn't play the deep third quite like Earl Thomas does; he doesn't man up against slot receivers quite like Malcolm Jenkins can; and he's not quite the bonafide athletic stud Eric Berry is.

    This is why I wish we could expand on archetypes and reflect real life more by having players that are really strong in certain areas and weak in others. Right now Madden makes too many players too similar. All good safeties are good at the same set of tasks. It removes too much individuality from the game that is sorely needed.
    underdog13
    Why do you keep comparing these guys to retired legends? None of those guys are on the roster.
    Edit: nvm post above answers question. Just a matter of preference. But if I wouldn't expect 99 to be reserved for hof guys only if they aren't on the base roster imo.
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

    I see your edit, but I want to expand on it anyways.
    For me, I want to see a game where a guy as good as Antonio Brown is like an 87. I want your average starter around in the mid 70's. I want some lower end starters in the mid 60's. I want a game where when a once in a generation talent comes he is like a 93. I want where the best player to ever exist is a 96. I want the imaginary best player ever to be a 99.
    I want most guys like Ryan Kerrigan to be an 85 because he is one of the best at what he is asked to do, but in real life football, guys are great in certain areas and then have weaknesses elsewhere. This ties into my reply to CM Hooe. I want a guy that is a jack of all trades, but a master of none to be like an 80 overall. I want the best run supporting safety in the in the league to have high 80's maybe even low 90's if he is that good in run supporting attributes, but if he's pretty weak in coverage I want him to have 70's in that area, 60's if he is a real liability there.
    I want a Madden where a 86 speed is considered fast, a 96 is unreal, but something the fastest players to ever play have. I want a guy that has 72 run blocking to not be instantly cut and deleted from the game. I want a 73 THP QB to be average not terrible.
    I think with a ratings system more spread out with a 90+ player meaning one of the best ever at that position really makes for everyone being more unique and true to their real life counterpart.
    saintrules
    Let me introduce my friend, 2K ratings...
    LeBron James:
    2K4 – 78 overall
    2K5 – 88 overall
    2K6 – 97 overall
    2K7 – 98 overall
    2K8 – 97 overall
    2K9 – 98 overall
    2K10 – 96 overall
    2K11 – 97 overall
    2K12 – 98 overall
    2K13 – 98 overall
    2K14 – 99 overall and cover player.
    2K15 – 98 overall
    2K16 – 94 overall
    2K17 – 96 overall
    2K18 - 97 overall
    Over the span of fifteen years, the (arguable) second best player in the history of basketball only received one total 99 OVR, which makes complete sense because heading into that season, he deserved it. He was close, many, many times, earning the nearly perfect rating of 98 a total of five times, again, deserving it, through not just his stats, but play on the court and avoidance of injuries.
    I'll put it this way, Gronk, along with the current seven 99 OVR's for Madden 19, are heralded as PERFECT...PERFECT! There isn't a single point higher they can reach, how can you sit back and justify that?
    The main reason I am keeping this going is because I strongly feel the ratings kill team building. Structuring teams and players with the way OVR's work in The Show, 2K, FIFA, or OOTP, is so freaking rewarding. Madden on the other hand, my only option for a professional football game, throws ratings around like it's just some small detail to the game.
    Ask yourself, why do 2K, The Show, etc, all have rating scales in common, but Madden's are so far off?

    I'm assuming you're not playing the beta. All I can say is, wait until you play the game before you judge the ratings in cfm.
    saintrules
    Ask yourself, why do 2K, The Show, etc, all have rating scales in common, but Madden's are so far off?

    If we're going to talk about how other games do things and claim those games handle ratings objectively correctly, we'd be remiss to not talk about how MLB The Show 18's representation of Babe Ruth possesses ratings well above 99 (125 Power / Contact ratings vs Left / Right, 125 Clutch, 125 Discipline, etc.). I believe several other players in MLB The Show have individual ratings above 99 as well. Madden has similarly issued ratings at and above 100 in the past, both in the default roster and in Ultimate Team, so I don't think it's necessarily true that EA is claiming OVR 99 players are "perfect".
    Regardless, while I would prefer a scale which made OVR 99 "best of all time" as the rest of you describe, I obviously do not think Madden is inherently wrong for wanting their ratings methodology to focus on who are the best players in the NFL right now. It's mostly a religious argument to me at this point.
    CM Hooe
    If we're going to talk about how other games do things and claim those games handle ratings objectively correctly, we'd be remiss to not talk about how MLB The Show 18's representation of Babe Ruth possesses ratings well above 99 (125 Power / Contact ratings vs Left / Right, 125 Clutch, 125 Discipline, etc.). I believe several other players in MLB The Show have individual ratings above 99 as well. Madden has similarly issued ratings at and above 100 in the past, both in the default roster and in Ultimate Team, so I don't think it's necessarily true that EA is claiming OVR 99 players are "perfect".
    Regardless, while I would prefer a scale which made OVR 99 "best of all time" as the rest of you describe, I obviously do not think Madden is inherently wrong for wanting their ratings methodology to focus on who are the best players in the NFL right now. It's mostly a religious argument to me at this point.

    I think in a perfect world we would be able to select our preference similar to OOTP does. But, as we all know the world isn't perfect and the ratings in madden are just that, ratings in madden. They shouldn't be objectively compared to other sports games.
    I'm fine with Madden keeping their scale the way it is, though, if only they wouldn't inflate other ratings to get guys to a certain overall. Don't give Brady a stronger arm and make him slightly faster because you want him to be a 96 or whatever. Same with a guy like Kerrigan I brought up. Don't inflate his zone coverage to an 80+ just so he can be a top 10% player in the game.
    I can look past their system now where a 99 just means best active player, but I can't look past artificial inflation. I've already gone into about how it makes for everyone to feel the same, so no reason to go into that anymore.
    TB5XSBW
    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.

    Wait are you talking about the last super bowl? I saw Brady hitting a bunch of open guys. And some pretty easy passes. Foles made more impressive throws in the game.
    Brady is great. But he’s not my goat. And it’s probably not even his fault.
    You know what one of my biggest pet peeves are? When people go, "OMG he shouldn't be a 99! That's ridiculous! ... He's more like a 97." Like, does that 2 point gap REALLY make that much of a difference to you? Lol
    Drives me up the wall, but maybe I'm the only one... :brickwall
    Some of you seem to like the way FOF rated players with most starters in the 60's and 70's and those higher are usually the god-tier level that rarely happens. You'd have maybe one player at an 80 at a position and if you hit 90 it would be a generational talent like Manning, Sanders, Lewis, etc.
    horrormaster
    Some of you seem to like the way FOF rated players with most starters in the 60's and 70's and those higher are usually the god-tier level that rarely happens. You'd have maybe one player at an 80 at a position and if you hit 90 it would be a generational talent like Manning, Sanders, Lewis, etc.

    That sounds great to me. Sign me up.
    kehlis
    That sounds great to me. Sign me up.

    Agree 200%. I am really hoping that a player editor comes out on the PC that really streamlines the process of editing players and can also allow for mass edits. If so I'll probably have my game set up to reflect a roster like that and I'll do all I can to get my draft classes to reflect it as well.
    rovert22044
    You know what one of my biggest pet peeves are? When people go, "OMG he shouldn't be a 99! That's ridiculous! ... He's more like a 97." Like, does that 2 point gap REALLY make that much of a difference to you? Lol
    Drives me up the wall, but maybe I'm the only one... :brickwall

    When its really funny is when it is more like an 87 rated OL that someone will scoff at, saying they could see, maybe 86, but probably just an 85 is fair.
    I just think ratings especially the overall rating is more about generating buzz than actually having any impact on the field. In CFM we know that overall is used to determine contracts and that's about it. Plus, all of this won't matter about a week into the season and one of these players plays poor or someone else plays great. It's all fluff to get us talking.
    The rating system and how it affects gameplay and simmed games is really where the problem is. I have done A LOT of work on the ratings when making classic rosters. In order to get players to play close to their real-life counterparts, certain ratings are inflated. The problem is that it can then cause problems with the sim engine results.
    Then there is the issue of the OVR formula. In order to get certain players rated high enough on OVR, certain ratings are inflated even if they do not match the player. I was hoping the new archetype and scheme system would fix that, and perhaps it helps, but the evidence so far is no.
    I would love to be able to have a real conversation with folks at EA about how ratings work and affect each other based on the large amount of testing I have done over the last several years.... but I doubt that conversation will ever happen. That was one thing I was hoping to look into if I had a beta code, but I did not get one.
    Good thing for those who disagree with the ratings scale (myself included), we have the ability to edit the ratings and now edit draft classes. We can reshape our CFMs they way we see fit, and I hope PC wise this process can be expedited.
    My biggest problem with 99ovr players comes from the non-99ovr players who perform near identically to them. To reach the 99 these players have inflated ratings that bump it up but very little on the field impact compared to a 93ovr counterpart.
    Plus they skew FA contracts and/or arent resigned due to the high ovr.
    saintrules
    :Facepalm:
    Seven freaking 99 OVR's?
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 96, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.
    Rodgers - One of the best arms and most clutch in the game, but even he has had his downfalls. We aren't talking Payton in his prime, Montana, Unitas, Farve, Marino, it's insulting to those guys to give Rodgers a 99 OVR.
    Gronk - This is so pathetic I can't even comment on it.
    Brown - Moss, Rice, Owens...Brown? Yeah freaking right...again, insulting to those guys to put Antonio Brown at their OVR.
    Donald - Probably the player I have the least problem with, but again, he shouldn't be a 99 OVR. This is no Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, or Merlin Olsen...I'd put him maybe around Warren Sapp territory...a 96/97 OVR in the prime he's in.
    Miller - Almost as bad as Gronk...this is just insulting.
    Kuechly - Underrated in the eyes of household names, but not a 99 OVR.
    I'm sick just looking at this.

    There is seriously no reason to get worked up over who's a 99. It's a relative number, it only compares to the other players who are rated by the same scale and, for that matter, at the same position.
    All it means is they're the best in the game at that position. Making someone a 99 in Madden doesn't make him "the best ever." It just means the standard by which OVR is calculated is different.
    A player's OVR is 99... if I change 1 number in the DB, I can turn that into an 89 without touching the player's attributes at all. I could turn a 65 into a 99 that way as well. You could rate every player in the game 25 in every attribute and I could make them all 99s by tuning the OVR. OVR has no effect on gameplay, and it isn't even a real reflection of the guy's ratings. That's tuned to make sure someone's a 99, even if his attributes don't compare to some retired Hall of Famer. If I'm being honest, we wanted to get rid of it in '13 and replace it something less fine and transparently relative, but marketing was afraid people will freak if they didn't get their precious 99s.
    Most the players are not in thier prime like Rodgers, Gronk, Miller, Brady. One good year from Gurley and now hes as 99 is funny.
    I play MuT anyway since CFM is as deep as a puddle and they will all be mid 80's during release.
    Also after a few roster updates EA will drop the ratings since they are just giving popular players fake ratings for attention.
    IDC what the overall is since it is just a relatively arbitrary number but I agree that I wish the ratings gap was increased so the players could feel more unique. When I think about it I feel like I'm talking out of my *** a little bit because I have no idea what the difference in the game engine is between 90, 89, and 80, but I definitely think a ratings gap will make players feel more unique.
    saintrules
    :Facepalm:
    Seven freaking 99 OVR's?
    Brady - At best I'd give him a 96, he is a Top 3 QB of ALL-TIME, but the fact of the matter is he's not that guy anymore and is supplemented by an even BETTER coach. Any player in talks of retirement shouldn't be a 99, seriously.
    Rodgers - One of the best arms and most clutch in the game, but even he has had his downfalls. We aren't talking Payton in his prime, Montana, Unitas, Farve, Marino, it's insulting to those guys to give Rodgers a 99 OVR.
    Gronk - This is so pathetic I can't even comment on it.
    Brown - Moss, Rice, Owens...Brown? Yeah freaking right...again, insulting to those guys to put Antonio Brown at their OVR.
    Donald - Probably the player I have the least problem with, but again, he shouldn't be a 99 OVR. This is no Mean Joe Greene, Bob Lilly, or Merlin Olsen...I'd put him maybe around Warren Sapp territory...a 96/97 OVR in the prime he's in.
    Miller - Almost as bad as Gronk...this is just insulting.
    Kuechly - Underrated in the eyes of household names, but not a 99 OVR.
    I'm sick just looking at this.
    Rodgers is the true GOAT. There has not been a better QB in the history of the nfl than Rodgers. That's a fact.
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Operation Sports mobile app
    Godgers12
    Rodgers is the true GOAT. There has not been a better QB in the history of the nfl than Rodgers. That's a fact.
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Operation Sports mobile app

    I don't want to get into an argument about GOAT's but Rodgers is an amazing talent who any given year gives his team a chance to win but I would argue there isn't a player that has done more with less each year than Tom Brady. I'm not saying he's the GOAT but there is an argument to be made for him. Rodgers is going to the HOF that's for sure. But I don't think I would even put him ahead of Favre yet.
    Okay I'm gonna run from angry Packer fans now.
    J.Cole
    My biggest deal isn't even this it's Wentz only being rated an 85
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Operation Sports mobile app

    I thought about that too, I'm not an Eagles fan, probably the furthest thing from it but Wentz is a very good player. I was surprised by his rating, if I'm not mistaken he's a star or superstar. My thing would really be that he needs to prove he's as good as he looked. Derek Carr was having an MVP season the year before and he got injured and had an average to above average year. I believe his rating this year will reflect that.
    Sphinx
    I don't want to get into an argument about GOAT's but Rodgers is an amazing talent who any given year gives his team a chance to win but I would argue there isn't a player that has done more with less each year than Tom Brady. I'm not saying he's the GOAT but there is an argument to be made for him. Rodgers is going to the HOF that's for sure. But I don't think I would even put him ahead of Favre yet.
    Okay I'm gonna run from angry Packer fans now.
    Brady would be working a 9-5, married to a random fat chick, living in a mobile home park, worrying if the power will be shut off every month if it werent for BB. He made him not the other way around. Anyone can succeed in that system, matt cassell anyone? BB is 16-5 without Brady. Also Rodgers hasn't had a top 10 D since 2010 and only twice in his career. Brady has one almost every year. Let us not forget he should also be 2-5 in SBs. He shouldn't have even went to it 01, because you know Tuckgate. Then you have the Seahawks and Falcons both being incredibly short bus level stupid. He also has a kicker to thank for the other 2.
    /end rant
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Operation Sports mobile app
    Godgers12
    Brady would be working a 9-5, married to a random fat chick, living in a mobile home park, worrying if the power will be shut off every month if it werent for BB. He made him not the other way around. Anyone can succeed in that system, matt cassell anyone? BB is 16-5 without Brady. Also Rodgers hasn't had a top 10 D since 2010 and only twice in his career. Brady has one almost every year. Let us not forget he should also be 2-5 in SBs. He shouldn't have even went to it 01, because you know Tuckgate. Then you have the Seahawks and Falcons both being incredibly short bus level stupid. He also has a kicker to thank for the other 2.
    /end rant
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Operation Sports mobile app

    I'll give you all of that, I mean I completely disagree. But I absolutely respect the opinion. I would point out that Brady is more than a system qb, just about anyone that has played with him acknowledges his work ethic being beyond expectations. Also, even guys with amazing talent (Jeff George anyone) can fall short without a good coach or good head on their shoulders.
    Make no mistake, I am not saying that Rodgers isn't an amazing talent, he is and was going back to college. Watching him at Cal, I thought he was the best QB going into the draft and it wasn't even close.
    Sphinx
    I thought about that too, I'm not an Eagles fan, probably the furthest thing from it but Wentz is a very good player. I was surprised by his rating, if I'm not mistaken he's a star or superstar. My thing would really be that he needs to prove he's as good as he looked. Derek Carr was having an MVP season the year before and he got injured and had an average to above average year. I believe his rating this year will reflect that.

    That's probably fair it's just weird that he actually went down from his end-of-year madden 18 rating
    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Operation Sports mobile app
    The rosters are always going the be broken because they rate them according to hype as well as "right now"
    Someone could be given 99 elusiveness. If we take Barry Sanders as the most elusive running back of all time, it would realistically mean that a player given 99 elusiveness should be on a Sanders level. Which just isn't the case in today nfl. It should be based on all time.
    But the hype is the biggest issue in the game. If I remember correctly, there were glaring issues on the Bears taking Tribusky, as there were concerns on his arm strength being too low to make the throws in the windy city and that Mahomes big arm made more sense. But M18 rates MT as a 93 THP? (I think) and Mahomes a 94? (again I may be wrong, but they were much closer than they perhaps should have been)
    The fact that these 7 are rated 99 OVR is just, yet again, the biggest reason that we need roster editors and XP sliders
    No player in the modern day NFL should be rated a 99. Looks like I'll be editing my own roster again this year, that is if I even buy 19.
    Sphinx
    I don't want to get into an argument about GOAT's but Rodgers is an amazing talent who any given year gives his team a chance to win but I would argue there isn't a player that has done more with less each year than Tom Brady. I'm not saying he's the GOAT but there is an argument to be made for him. Rodgers is going to the HOF that's for sure. But I don't think I would even put him ahead of Favre yet.
    Okay I'm gonna run from angry Packer fans now.

    LOL. I'd put him ahead of Favre and by a ton on interceptions alone. Favre get's kudos for being an ironman.
    Can't blame Rodgers for Ted Thompson. lol
    I hate these debates, so subjective. lol
    adembroski
    There is seriously no reason to get worked up over who's a 99. It's a relative number, it only compares to the other players who are rated by the same scale and, for that matter, at the same position.
    All it means is they're the best in the game at that position. Making someone a 99 in Madden doesn't make him "the best ever." It just means the standard by which OVR is calculated is different.
    A player's OVR is 99... if I change 1 number in the DB, I can turn that into an 89 without touching the player's attributes at all. I could turn a 65 into a 99 that way as well. You could rate every player in the game 25 in every attribute and I could make them all 99s by tuning the OVR. OVR has no effect on gameplay, and it isn't even a real reflection of the guy's ratings. That's tuned to make sure someone's a 99, even if his attributes don't compare to some retired Hall of Famer. If I'm being honest, we wanted to get rid of it in '13 and replace it something less fine and transparently relative, but marketing was afraid people will freak if they didn't get their precious 99s.

    Quoting again.
    I'm going to start #refer to AJ's post and ask people to make sure to read before posting.
    Key point in post above: OVR has no effect on gameplay, not a reflection on the players ratings!
    So, in other words, who cares?
    a lot of position ovrs are impacted by inj and tgh, gronks certainly should be. if i update a PS players tgh from 79 to 85 it increases their ovr. gronk has an injury history so to my mind cant be 99.
    Adam, whilst i understand OVR doesn't affect gameplay, it affects everything in roster management though, i pay more if ovr is higher, not if production is consistent or on the up or enables the team to work better as a unit.
    udfas get more money, not the league minimum, if get signed as a fa in the season and wow the moeny they get is linked to their ovr, even comparing a 68 wr with a 71 wr
    Aside from Brady I'm cool with all of these. Brady has never had elite arm strength and he's regressed a tad in his zip on the ball. Plus, as you can see with that awful QB screen from the superbowl, he can barely move in the open field. Other than that...no complaints here.
    Ueauvan
    a lot of position ovrs are impacted by inj and tgh, gronks certainly should be. if i update a PS players tgh from 79 to 85 it increases their ovr. gronk has an injury history so to my mind cant be 99.
    Adam, whilst i understand OVR doesn't affect gameplay, it affects everything in roster management though, i pay more if ovr is higher, not if production is consistent or on the up or enables the team to work better as a unit.
    udfas get more money, not the league minimum, if get signed as a fa in the season and wow the moeny they get is linked to their ovr, even comparing a 68 wr with a 71 wr
    Inj and Tgh effect ovr? Since when?
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
    I'm Ok with these payers being 99 ovrl ,except maybe Kuechly.
    Brady not only is the most accomplished QB in NFL history, but also has been playing at a very high level for the last 3/4 years. He just won the MVP and had a GREAT performance in the SB. Aaron Rodgers is perhaps the most skilled QB of all time. Even coming from injury last season, he is worth a 99 ovrl.
    Brown is the best WR in the league right now and what he's been doing for the past 5 seasons is absolutely ridiculous. Gronk, is probably the best TE in the history of NFL. I do not think there is a more dominant player today than he does when he is healthy, and since injury does not affect ovrl, to me it's fair to Gronk be 99 ovrl.
    Aaron Donald is the DPOY, 1st team all-pro on the last 3 years. He is just unstoppable, the best DL in the game right now. Miller is a 6x time all pro and pro bowler, a super Bowl MVP and the 2nd fastest guy to reach 80 sacks in NFL history. He absolutely deserve this 99 ovrl.
    Kuechly is the only player I disagree with on this list. He's amazing, but I do not think he's level with the other 6 players or if he's the best ILB in the league right now.
    The list is ok to me. But, let's not forget that if we do not agree, we can edit whatever we want and every week these ovrls are updated by EA.:grin:
    The issue with all of this is much deeper than the surface level of rating players which is what this thread has gotten away from. My original post, relating to the seven 99 OVR's, is in the past since we established I am someone who prefers the 99's to be the HoF guys.
    I don't play MUT, so anything related to what Tom Brady is going to be in MUT is irrelevant. I don't do play h2h with friends, so anything related to week to week changes is also irrelevant. I play offline, CFM, for 15+ seasons every year with one team. As someone who has done the same in 2K, The Show, NCAA, and NHL, I will still go to my grave saying Madden has a significant lack of attention to detail when it has come to ratings, differential of players, and because of this, longevity in the game.
    This lack of attention to detail is why Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers will NOT feel different. It is why in FA when I need a QB, I just look for the higher rated player because why wouldn't I? It is why when I am drafting and I get a 65 OVR player I basically call it a complete bust because I know damn well there's nothing I can use him for, even though he might be fantastic in one category, but his OVR basically makes him play like a potato. I just cut him, pickup someone with a few points higher in FA, and call it a day.
    Anybody who has played 2K, The Show, or any game with fantastic attention to detail in ratings knows exactly what I am talking about. They don't sit there and give a player higher ratings in some category to make them a certain OVR, nor do they let two similar OVR's feel exactly the same.
    Ratings/Attributes/Skills is flawed in Madden, has been for a long time, and I am afraid it always will be.
    I'm a Pats fan, and even I think Brady and Gronk should not be a 99 OVR. No QB should be right now. Brady should be like a 96 or so but not 99. Rodgers should be a 96 as well.
    Gronk should be more like a 90 OVR at this point. He can't stay healthy.
    saintrules
    This lack of attention to detail is why Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers will NOT feel different.

    They are both awesome players throwing the football, but they nevertheless do feel different in Madden. Aaron Rodgers in particular is significantly better at evading pressure and operating outside the confines of the pocket thanks to his better ratings in SPD, AGI, ACC, ELU, and TOR.
    At the very least, the difference in speed between the two players should be incredibly obvious.
    his OVR basically makes him play like a potato.

    OVR has never had any bearing on a player's on-field performance. If a player is an OVR 65, it's because he likely is very bad at most skills relevant to his position.
    underdog13
    Inj and Tgh effect ovr? Since when?
    Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

    They have for a while for sure. I've had players who I've used all their XP on just improving their injury rating by like 5 points and doing so bumped their OVR up a couple of points.
    SN49ers
    I'm Ok with these payers being 99 ovrl ,except maybe Kuechly.
    Brady not only is the most accomplished QB in NFL history, but also has been playing at a very high level for the last 3/4 years. He just won the MVP and had a GREAT performance in the SB. Aaron Rodgers is perhaps the most skilled QB of all time. Even coming from injury last season, he is worth a 99 ovrl.
    Brown is the best WR in the league right now and what he's been doing for the past 5 seasons is absolutely ridiculous. Gronk, is probably the best TE in the history of NFL. I do not think there is a more dominant player today than he does when he is healthy, and since injury does not affect ovrl, to me it's fair to Gronk be 99 ovrl.
    Aaron Donald is the DPOY, 1st team all-pro on the last 3 years. He is just unstoppable, the best DL in the game right now. Miller is a 6x time all pro and pro bowler, a super Bowl MVP and the 2nd fastest guy to reach 80 sacks in NFL history. He absolutely deserve this 99 ovrl.
    Kuechly is the only player I disagree with on this list. He's amazing, but I do not think he's level with the other 6 players or if he's the best ILB in the league right now.
    The list is ok to me. But, let's not forget that if we do not agree, we can edit whatever we want and every week these ovrls are updated by EA.:grin:

    People in online leagues can't change the ratings, unless their league has some sort of protocol for agreed upon ratings changes, and other people just can't handle their dude getting "disrespected" by EA so they flip out.
    Rodgers, Brady, Brown, Gronk, Donald.. no brainers.. transcendent players.
    Bobby Wagner is every bit as good as Luke Kuechly.
    No problem with Von Miller. But I'm one to believe 99 should be reserved for legend-types. For my $$$ he's close, but just not there yet.
    I don't like the overall rating at all. Get rid of it!
    Make it like in SEGAs Football Manager. No overall rating, but every skill has a range from 1 to 20. So you can select the player by the skills and not by his OVR rating.
    What I'm about to post is not the OVR formula. That's proprietary. But it's a close enough approximation that it will illustrate why you shouldn't care who's a 99.
    Each rating is assigned a weight. A weighted average will be created. Lets go with kicker since it only has 3 relevant ratings.
    We'll say the kicker weights are 1 for AWR, 4 for KPW, and 8 for KAC. Our player has a 78 AWR, 91 KPW, and 94 KAC... that's a weighted sum of :
    1,194 = ( 78 * 1 ) + ( 91 * 4 ) + ( 94 * 8 ).
    Now we turn that into a weighted average by dividing by the total weight :
    91.95 = 1,194 / 13
    Here's where it gets odd... the next number assignments are designer discretion and change constantly. I did them in Madden 12, but I'm not sure if my final numbers shipped. You have a ceiling and an anchor point. The ceiling number pulls the OVR up, and the anchor pulls it down. Again, what I'm about to post is NOT the formula EA uses, but it's mathematically pretty close.
    I'm going to assign ceiling of 99, and anchor of 25 to start. His overall rating is 93.
    93 = ( 91.95 * .01 ) * ( 99 - 25 ) + 25
    Now, again, this is not the REAL formula. The one I'm using really wouldn't work for this, but it illustrates my point. Let's say I want to lower that. I'll just change the numbers, now he's an 80 because I changed the numbers to 98 and 10.
    80 = ( 91.95 * .01 ) * ( 98 - 10 ) + 10
    THE POINT: the OVR formula changes year to year and can be made to ensure the OVR is comparing CURRENT players. A 99 does not mean perfect, it does not mean better than Walter Payton and Joe Montana... it's just tuned to come up with some approximation of the ability to compare across positions.
    krautsandwich
    I don't like the overall rating at all. Get rid of it!
    Make it like in SEGAs Football Manager. No overall rating, but every skill has a range from 1 to 20. So you can select the player by the skills and not by his OVR rating.

    You can do this already if you choose to , OVR tho is used in marketing the game as much as anything , in the game itself it's only used for CPU team building mechanics
    My list of these 7:
    Donald 99
    Rodgers 98
    Von 98
    Brady 97
    AB 97
    Keuchly 96
    Gronk 96
    If AB was taller / capable of really elevating and going up top to make those catches I could see 99, but he's somewhat limited.
    From what I've seen so far once you take your roster into your CFM the ratings look really good based on scheme. Like I'm really, really impressed. Obviously I can't say too much but I think you guys will be pleased. I've already been working on my XP sliders so I've really been digging into the ratings. It's still early but so far I'm very happy.
    JayCutlersCig
    Why the hell does any of this matter if we can go in and change ratings ourselves?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    Well, depending on how bad they are in one's eyes that means they may have over 1,500 players to edit. Plus they cannot do anything if they play online H2H.
    solmon
    My list of these 7:
    Donald 99
    Rodgers 98
    Von 98
    Brady 97
    AB 97
    Keuchly 96
    Gronk 96
    If AB was taller / capable of really elevating and going up top to make those catches I could see 99, but he's somewhat limited.

    As someone who uses Pit exclusively let me assure you that AB is not in anyway limited, and he can even win aggressive catch jump balls that almost everyone else drops on contact.
    He's the best player on the regular rosters, bar none, imo.
    stinkubus
    As someone who uses Pit exclusively let me assure you that AB is not in anyway limited, and he can even win aggressive catch jump balls that almost everyone else drops on contact.
    He's the best player on the regular rosters, bar none, imo.

    Yeah, I’m going to agree with you. AB can go up and get the ball in all but the most extreme circumstances. I mean, sure, I could dream up a specific scenario where I might want another receiver ideally, but those situations are few and far between. It would be like someone saying that Jerry Rice was too slow to be considered an all time great. Umm, okay...didn’t look too slow breaking ankles at the top of the route for over 20,000 yards.
    Everyone is a critic.
    briz1046
    You can do this already if you choose to , OVR tho is used in marketing the game as much as anything , in the game itself it's only used for CPU team building mechanics

    Right, but as you can see EA uses the skills to raise the overall rating. Example: Tom Brady. 96 throw power. I think we all agree that Brady has many skills, but he never had the best arm. I bet EA just made his arm strong to raise his ovr rating.
    krautsandwich
    Right, but as you can see EA uses the skills to raise the overall rating. Example: Tom Brady. 96 throw power. I think we all agree that Brady has many skills, but he never had the best arm. I bet EA just made his arm strong to raise his ovr rating.

    Seriously, a 96 THP is ridiculous assuming that ratings translate in M19 the same way they do on M18. The fact they give that to the 1000 year old Brady just makes it worse...
    On M18, I have seen QBs be very effective with THP in the 70s. It becomes more of a rhythm passing game and for the user, becomes a challenge as you have to use proper ball placement and timing. DB ratings sync much better with the lower THP and you see much better WR animations.
    You can build the best gameplay engine in the world, it can be a well-oiled, fine tuned machine....but all that work can be ruined by hyper-inflating ratings like this.....
    TB5XSBW
    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.

    Gronk is a great TE - but can you truly say he is perfect? I know "99" isn't 100, but within Madden, that's as close to perfect as it gets.
    Is Gronk a perfect blocker? He's really good, but great? Gronk isn't what he was 5 years ago either when it comes to shedding tackles. This also brings up my other issue with Madden, Gronk is notoriously hampered by injury - in 2017 he was suffering from a leg bruise, injury should have some kind of impact on overall and how they are week to week.
    As for Brady, I can see justification for him being 99 - at the same time, people there is a system at play here. Now Madden 19 does have "system factor" in it, but I'm guessing these are just raw overalls - Brady and his average arm strength alone shouldn't make him a 99.
    Then you have Antonio Brown - the dude has great hands and route running ability, but isn't particularly fast - he ran a 4.47 nearly a decade ago, no doubt he has slowed in that department. Wouldn't a 99 overall receiver be near perfect in every category?
    99 should be for players in their prime and who have peaked. The one I could make an argument for would be Aaron Donald - he's in his prime years while also proving he's a generational talent at the DT position.
    mattjames2010
    Gronk is a great TE - but can you truly say he is perfect? I know "99" isn't 100, but within Madden, that's as close to perfect as it gets.
    Is Gronk a perfect blocker? He's really good, but great? Gronk isn't what he was 5 years ago either when it comes to shedding tackles. This also brings up my other issue with Madden, Gronk is notoriously hampered by injury - in 2017 he was suffering from a leg bruise, injury should have some kind of impact on overall and how they are week to week.
    As for Brady, I can see justification for him being 99 - at the same time, people there is a system at play here. Now Madden 19 does have "system factor" in it, but I'm guessing these are just raw overalls - Brady and his average arm strength alone shouldn't make him a 99.
    Then you have Antonio Brown - the dude has great hands and route running ability, but isn't particularly fast - he ran a 4.47 nearly a decade ago, no doubt he has slowed in that department. Wouldn't a 99 overall receiver be near perfect in every category?
    99 should be for players in their prime and who have peaked. The one I could make an argument for would be Aaron Donald - he's in his prime years while also proving he's a generational talent at the DT position.

    Gronk is as close to perfect as you can get, and so is Tom Brady. No issue with either of them being highly rated.
    Gronk is a fantastic blocker. He had some issues early on in the season because he was coming off of injury, but after the first quarter or so of the season, his blocking returned to form.
    Brady's arm strength and accuracy on deep passes has actually improved tremendously in recent years. He's a much better and more complete QB than he was early in his career. It's no surprise that his peers voted him the best player in the league for the 2nd consecutive year.
    LOL "Brady's arm strength has improved"
    Unless he's on something, his arm strength hasn't "improved". He came into the league with an average arm and it has stayed that way. I'm not taking away his accuracy, and I'm sure it has improved going deep - but go ahead and compare the velocity of his passes to some of the strongest arms in the league. He's middling. That doesn't mean Brady isn't a great player - but there is not debate against this, Brady is a great within a great system - now if I saw that Brady's overall being impacted by the system he is in, yes, I could see him being 99. The issue is, if I take him out of the Pats and place him in the Browns system, he would be the same old Brady throwing 45 TDs and single digit INTs within the Madden sim. All this Madden "system" crap is and has always been an illusion.
    There is not a single TE in the league that should be 99 right now in Madden - each TE has obvious flaws and Gronk simply isn't in his prime.
    Your mindset is exactly why we have inflated stats - and I can almost promise you, because EA is EA, every RB overall will be inflated as well which will make them all similar with little to no uniqueness.
    Then again, people who are objective is not who EA looks at - they look at fanboy outcry, cookieboy youtubers, and glitch exploiters.
    mattjames2010
    LOL "Brady's arm strength has improved"
    Unless he's on something, his arm strength hasn't "improved". He came into the league with an average arm and it has stayed that way. I'm not taking away his accuracy, and I'm sure it has improved going deep - but go ahead and compare the velocity of his passes to some of the strongest arms in the league. He's middling. That doesn't mean Brady isn't a great player - but there is not debate against this, Brady is a great within a great system - now if I saw that Brady's overall being impacted by the system he is in, yes, I could see him being 99. The issue is, if I take him out of the Pats and place him in the Browns system, he would be the same old Brady throwing 45 TDs and single digit INTs within the Madden sim. All this Madden "system" crap is and has always been an illusion.
    There is not a single TE in the league that should be 99 right now in Madden - each TE has obvious flaws and Gronk simply isn't in his prime.
    Your mindset is exactly why we have inflated stats - and I can almost promise you, because EA is EA, every RB overall will be inflated as well which will make them all similar with little to no uniqueness.
    Then again, people who are objective is not who EA looks at - they look at fanboy outcry, cookieboy youtubers, and glitch exploiters.

    I'm not comparing his arm strength or the velocity of his passes to that of other (inferior) QBs. I'm comparing his arm strength and deep accuracy to earlier in his career. Having said that, that's only one aspect of being a QB. Everyone knows by now what his strengths are. Also, he's been in many different systems in NE. I don't think even you know where you're going with this "system" nonsense.
    There's not one area of Gronk's game you can point to and say that he has declined or that he is no longer in his prime. You tried with the blocking argument but you failed miserably.
    I stated earlier in the thread that I wouldn't mind if they stopped giving out 99 OVR ratings. However, if they are intent on doing so, Brady and Gronk are two players who should definitely be in that club.
    JoshC1977

    You can build the best gameplay engine in the world, it can be a well-oiled, fine tuned machine....but all that work can be ruined by hyper-inflating ratings like this.....

    Genuine question and not meant facetiously at all , but as they are the ones building/ tuning the game , wouldn't you expect it to function best within the framework of the ratings as EA intend ( inflated ) , surely wholesale lowering of ratings ( of any attribute individually or across the board) SHOULD result in a poorer experience rather than an improved one ?
    Again this is a genuine question not a criticism if anything you're saying
    krautsandwich
    I don't like the overall rating at all. Get rid of it!
    Make it like in SEGAs Football Manager. No overall rating, but every skill has a range from 1 to 20. So you can select the player by the skills and not by his OVR rating.

    What I would prefer is a "scout/coach" rating. So say when the draft comes around, each player would be different on each teams board. Now obviously, there will be certain players in the top 5-10 that most team scouts agree upon - for example, Andrew Luck in 2012 draft, I'm sure in terms of talent he was #1 on most teams draft board.
    Then you have a player like Alvin Kamara - he's not a Fournette-type talent, so scouts won't have him rated as a first round talent. However, coaching rating would play a factor in here - so Saints enjoy a RBBC and like their receiving backs due to their system, so he'd be rated a little higher than most teams boards.
    EA could completely remove overalls if they added in more in-depth statistics. If a team emphasis slot receivers, add in a statistic of how a receiver does out of the slot. If a team wants a deep threat, throw in a stat category of how many deep passes a player caught - you can do something like this for every positional group.
    I also think randomness/unpredictability needs to be put in. Say a player out of college had little to no injuries, well have that be random, maybe a healthy player in college starts to get banged up in the NFL - maybe a player like Adrian Peterson who was banged up in college is relatively healthy throughout his NFL career. That "injury rating" at a combine report could turn teams away, while others may take a chance and end up with a star or get burned.
    How about EA adds in one year wonders, troubled players off and on the field, late bloomers, or players with longevity? The thing is, I don't want to be able to SEE any of these things with a "player info" - I want to be able to take a chance on a player and either wreck my franchise or sign a player that takes me over the top. Building a championship team should not be easy, it should be the hardest thing to do in a sports game.
    I already know even people on this board will have issues with what I said, but randomness and unpredictability is part of the game of football - if you want a semi-accurate representation of it, that must be added in at some point. Maybe it's something modders can work on? We'll see.
    Let’s play “find-the-Pats-fan-born-in-2000”. I win!
    I’m kidding, of course. I’m not saying this as a salty fan of a division rival, but Tom Brady’s shown signs of regression these past few years. His passes don’t have the same zip (let’s be honest, he’s a straight dimer, but he never had a cannon) that they used to.
    I’d give him an 84-86 THP with accuracy in the upper 90s. 98 Short, 97 Mid, and maybe 93 Deep.
    Then again, I never was a fan of the different levels of accuracy. If you’re accurate, you’re accurate.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    canes21
    Well, depending on how bad they are in one's eyes that means they may have over 1,500 players to edit. Plus they cannot do anything if they play online H2H.

    Ah, okay. I’m an offline player so that makes sense.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    JayCutlersCig
    I’m kidding, of course. I’m not saying this as a salty fan of a division rival, but Tom Brady’s shown signs of regression these past few years.

    Wins SB in 2014 with one of the best 4th quarters in SB history.
    Wins SB in 2016 by putting together the greatest 4th quarter performance in SB history.
    Brings his team back with a masterful 2nd half performance in the 2017 AFCCG against the best secondary in the league.
    Puts together the single greatest postseason performance by a QB in NFL history in SBLII.
    Is voted best player in the league by his peers in back to back seasons (2016 & 2017.)
    I bet Dolphins fans wish Ryan Tannehill would show similar signs of regression anytime now.
    TB5XSBW
    I'm not comparing his arm strength or the velocity of his passes to that of other (inferior) QBs. I'm comparing his arm strength and deep accuracy to earlier in his career. Having said that, that's only one aspect of being a QB. Everyone knows by now what his strengths are. Also, he's been in many different systems in NE. I don't think even you know where you're going with this "system" nonsense.
    There's not one area of Gronk's game you can point to and say that he has declined or that he is no longer in his prime. You tried with the blocking argument but you failed miserably.
    I stated earlier in the thread that I wouldn't mind if they stopped giving out 99 OVR ratings. However, if they are intent on doing so, Brady and Gronk are two players who should definitely be in that club.

    ...you won't compare Brady to others in the league, because if you do, you would see he's middling in that regard. If we take his raw overall, Brady is not great across the board - he has elements of his game within a great system that elevates him (That's not a knock, every great player normally is at their best in the right system, like Montana) - However, if you remove Brady from the system and just look at him at every level, he's not very athletic and he doesn't have a strong arm - this clearly brings his overall down, it's only when you factor in the system that plays in and how it plays to his greatness that his overall takes a jump.
    And I can clearly point to things Gronk has declined in - this isn't a guy who runs hard anymore, he's not dragging players with him into the end zone, he goes down easier than he used to - and Gronk was never a GREAT blocker consistently, he was a good blocker - He wasn't prime Witten in that regard. There isn't a great receiving TE in the league that is fantastic in every aspect of the game, this is why I am saying that there are no TEs in the league that are 99 - "best in the league" speaks for the state of the position, and it's well-known all-around TEs are on their way out.
    It would actually HELP Madden if we put a bigger emphasis on TE overall ratings when it comes to blocking, it would help the need to rotate TEs in and adjust your substitutions accordingly to the situation.
    We're not getting anywhere with your mindset - it keeps us within a cycle of mediocrity due to fanboyism getting in the way. You can still have great players without glorifying every aspect of their game. I'll ask you to knock it off already.
    TB5XSBW
    Wins SB in 2014 with one of the best 4th quarters in SB history.
    Wins SB in 2016 by putting together the greatest 4th quarter performance in SB history.
    Brings his team back with a masterful 2nd half performance in the 2017 AFCCG against the best secondary in the league.
    Puts together the single greatest postseason performance by a QB in NFL history in SBLII.
    Is voted best player in the league by his peers in back to back seasons (2016 & 2017.)
    I bet Dolphins fans wish Ryan Tannehill would show similar signs of regression anytime now.

    *sigh*
    ....you can regress in areas and still win a championship in a team sport. Eli Manning (twice) and Nick Foles both out dueled your boi on the biggest stage - does that make them better QBs? No, it obviously doesn't, because there are other things you must factor in. Football IQ, accuracy, and genius system keeps Brady from aging quickly.
    mattjames2010
    ...you won't compare Brady to others in the league, because if you do, you would see he's middling in that regard. If we take his raw overall, Brady is not great across the board - he has elements of his game within a great system that elevates him (That's not a knock, every great player normally is at their best in the right system, like Montana) - However, if you remove Brady from the system and just look at him at every level, he's not very athletic and he doesn't have a strong arm - this clearly brings his overall down, it's only when you factor in the system that plays in and how it plays to his greatness that his overall takes a jump.
    And I can clearly point to things Gronk has declined in - this isn't a guy who runs hard anymore, he's not dragging players with him into the end zone, he goes down easier than he used to - and Gronk was never a GREAT blocker consistently, he was a good blocker - He wasn't prime Witten in that regard. There isn't a great receiving TE in the league that is fantastic in every aspect of the game, this is why I am saying that there are no TEs in the league that are 99 - "best in the league" speaks for the state of the position, and it's well-known all-around TEs are on their way out.
    It would actually HELP Madden if we put a bigger emphasis on TE overall ratings when it comes to blocking, it would help the need to rotate TEs in and adjust your substitutions accordingly to the situation.
    We're not getting anywhere with your mindset - it keeps us within a cycle of mediocrity due to fanboyism getting in the way. You can still have great players without glorifying every aspect of their game. I'll ask you to knock it off already.

    Not being the most athletic or not having the strongest arm in the league isn't going to keep him from being the best at his position in the NFL, and therefore should not prevent him from being the highest rated QB. With the way EA does their ratings, it means giving him a 99 OVR. I have no problem if they stop dishing out 99 OVR, and instead he's a 94 OVR but still ranked #1.
    He hasn't played in a single system. He has played in several different systems throughout his career in the NFL. Unsurprisingly, he has excelled in all of them.
    It's clear that you've never watched Gronk play for more than a handful of games each season. His blocking has been great throughout his career. To see how he can blow up guys like Malik Jackson and JJ Watt, and then to see how dominant he is in the passing game, without any team having an answer for him other than to attempt to injure him, is quite astounding.
    You're making the mistake of thinking that giving out 99 OVR has some huge adverse effect on gameplay. There were things in previous games that were far more egregious. 99 OVR ratings should be among the lowest things on the list of concerns.
    As far as "keeping us in a cycle of mediocrity" and your take on Madden 19 and beyond, I'm pretty sure you haven't played the beta, so I'm not going to take any of your opinions seriously on the matter.
    mattjames2010
    *sigh*
    ....you can regress in areas and still win a championship in a team sport. Eli Manning (twice) and Nick Foles both out dueled your boi on the biggest stage - does that make them better QBs? No, it obviously doesn't, because there are other things you must factor in. Football IQ, accuracy, and genius system keeps Brady from aging quickly.

    Sure you can. Peyton Manning was a prime example of that. He clearly regressed and absolutely sucked in 2015, but still won a championship. What does that have to do with Brady putting together all-time great performances? You're being incredibly salty and letting that interfere with your ability to process facts.
    briz1046
    Genuine question and not meant facetiously at all , but as they are the ones building/ tuning the game , wouldn't you expect it to function best within the framework of the ratings as EA intend ( inflated ) , surely wholesale lowering of ratings ( of any attribute individually or across the board) SHOULD result in a poorer experience rather than an improved one ?
    Again this is a genuine question not a criticism if anything you're saying

    (Disclaimer: this is all based on my experiences with Madden 18 (and before) using default gameplay sliders NOT with the M19 beta)
    This is a very fair question...I'll rephrase my point....
    The problem with the hyper-inflated ratings (i.e. players with overalls greater than 85 or so) is that they result in hyper-inflated gameplay. Big hits, big catches, big throws, etc. It's perfect for selling arcade style gameplay like the online H2H kids want. So yes, from that standpoint the roster and engine do typically work well together.
    What I was previously referring to was the desire for REALISTIC gameplay; which means, in spite of all the hard work they might do on the engine, over-inflated ratings essentially undermine all the good things that they have tried to accomplish (again, from the perspective of them wanting something actually resembling real football).
    canes21

    For me, I want to see a game where a guy as good as Antonio Brown is like an 87. I want your average starter around in the mid 70's. I want some lower end starters in the mid 60's. I want a game where when a once in a generation talent comes he is like a 93. I want where the best player to ever exist is a 96. I want the imaginary best player ever to be a 99.

    This is absolutely the best answer...
    And it also goes with how the game currently works. John Ross ran a combine record 4.22, got rewarded with a 98spd in M18. Which is a perfect representation of how all of this should work. His 4.22 is undeniably great, but perhaps not this perfect imaginary sub 4.2 number to get a 99. Just apply this same concept everywhere else in the game.
    TB5XSBW
    Not being the most athletic or not having the strongest arm in the league isn't going to keep him from being the best at his position in the NFL, and therefore should not prevent him from being the highest rated QB. With the way EA does their ratings, it means giving him a 99 OVR. I have no problem if they stop dishing out 99 OVR, and instead he's a 94 OVR but still ranked #1.
    He hasn't played in a single system. He has played in several different systems throughout his career in the NFL. Unsurprisingly, he has excelled in all of them.
    It's clear that you've never watched Gronk play for more than a handful of games each season. His blocking has been great throughout his career. To see how he can blow up guys like Malik Jackson and JJ Watt, and then to see how dominant he is in the passing game, without any team having an answer for him other than to attempt to injure him, is quite astounding.
    You're making the mistake of thinking that giving out 99 OVR has some huge adverse effect on gameplay. There were things in previous games that were far more egregious. 99 OVR ratings should be among the lowest things on the list of concerns.
    As far as "keeping us in a cycle of mediocrity" and your take on Madden 19 and beyond, I'm pretty sure you haven't played the beta, so I'm not going to take any of your opinions seriously on the matter.

    > Not being the most athletic or not having the strongest arm in the league isn't going to keep him from being the best at his position in the NFL
    Dude, I'm not repeating 50 times after this, I'll give you one last chance to get it
    Being the "best" at your position in the NFL (this is still highly debatable) does not justify a 99 overall. I specifically pointed out parts of his game that factor into a QBs rating - so he's 99 with nearly not athleticism and an average arm? WHY? So a statue QB who isn't elusive and needs a clean pocket deserves a 99? There's an obvious flaw to his game couples with a middling arm. There's actually a better argument for Rodgers being 99 since he's athletic, arguably has BETTER accuracy than Brady, still has a strong arm - he's the "Best" in terms of Madden QBs, based on what they include within their ratings for a QB. Yet, Brady who is a statue QB and weak arm is comparable to an all-around great QB? Give me a break.
    > He hasn't played in a single system. He has played in several different systems throughout his career in the NFL. Unsurprisingly, he has excelled in all of them.
    First off, Brady was just a good to borderline great QB for the first 6 years of his career (he was surrounded by great talent) - Around that time he was throwing less than 30 TDs and double digit INTs nearly every season. He blossomed again in 2007 with the addition of Moss and Welker and the evolution of the spread.
    Brady has played within a spread system, this hasn't changed, he's help redefine it the way Montana and Walsh brought in the west coast. There wasn't a "variety" of different systems - you don't know what you're talking about.
    You're either trolling or being obtuse on purpose. Start being a serious guy before I entertain your posts any further. Thanks.
    TB5XSBW
    Sure you can. Peyton Manning was a prime example of that. He clearly regressed and absolutely sucked in 2015, but still won a championship. What does that have to do with Brady putting together all-time great performances? You're being incredibly salty and letting that interfere with your ability to process facts.

    What "all-time great"? Brady wasn't "all-time great" against the Falcons, he HELPED put the Pats into a hole in that game. Sure, the comeback was exciting to watch, but it wasn't an all-time great performance. Throwing a pick 6 in a game when your team was already in trouble is a huge negative.
    Settle down.
    mattjames2010
    What "all-time great"? Brady wasn't "all-time great" against the Falcons, he HELPED put the Pats into a hole in that game. Sure, the comeback was exciting to watch, but it wasn't an all-time great performance. Throwing a pick 6 in a game when your team was already in trouble is a huge negative.
    Settle down.

    Re-read what I said about that game. It was the greatest 4th quarter performance in postseason history, and possibly of any game (regular season included.)
    mattjames2010
    > Not being the most athletic or not having the strongest arm in the league isn't going to keep him from being the best at his position in the NFL
    Dude, I'm not repeating 50 times after this, I'll give you one last chance to get it
    Being the "best" at your position in the NFL (this is still highly debatable) does not justify a 99 overall. I specifically pointed out parts of his game that factor into a QBs rating - so he's 99 with nearly not athleticism and an average arm? WHY? So a statue QB who isn't elusive and needs a clean pocket deserves a 99? There's an obvious flaw to his game couples with a middling arm. There's actually a better argument for Rodgers being 99 since he's athletic, arguably has BETTER accuracy than Brady, still has a strong arm - he's the "Best" in terms of Madden QBs, based on what they include within their ratings for a QB. Yet, Brady who is a statue QB and weak arm is comparable to an all-around great QB? Give me a break.
    > He hasn't played in a single system. He has played in several different systems throughout his career in the NFL. Unsurprisingly, he has excelled in all of them.
    First off, Brady was just a good to borderline great QB for the first 6 years of his career (he was surrounded by great talent) - Around that time he was throwing less than 30 TDs and double digit INTs nearly every season. He blossomed again in 2007 with the addition of Moss and Welker and the evolution of the spread.
    Brady has played within a spread system, this hasn't changed, he's help redefine it the way Montana and Walsh brought in the west coast. There wasn't a "variety" of different systems - you don't know what you're talking about.
    You're either trolling or being obtuse on purpose. Start being a serious guy before I entertain your posts any further. Thanks.

    Being the best at his position, as well as being the best player in the entire league (according to his peers) over the last 2 seasons warrants the highest rating in the game. There's no argument at all for Rodgers to be rated higher than him, as Brady is the superior QB and football player. I'm sorry that you/your team have been traumatized by Brady, but these are facts that you can't get around.
    It might help if you bothered to actually understand the game of football on a meaningful level, as opposed to evaluating players, specifically QBs, based on individual attributes.
    TB5XSBW
    Re-read what I said about that game. It was the greatest 4th quarter performance in postseason history, and possibly of any game (regular season included.)

    ....who cares? There are multiple factors in the "4th quarter performance" - he also lobbed up a ball that had no business being caught by Edelman and nearly threw an INT as well. A young Falcons D falling apart and being gassed played a major role in Patriots comeback - again, exciting to watch.
    Either way, this doesn't factor in any way to attributes that are within Madden. You're losing the plot.
    I have an experiment for you - go put in Madden 18, drop Brady's throw power from 97 to 85-86 and see where his rating is at, then made his deep ball accuracy closer to resemble how it is in real life. Get back to me on his QB rating.
    All this Brady talk is hilarious. I think it's safe to assume that Madden portrays Brady as the best QB in the game. However the way Madden uses its ratings, which puts a lot of emphasis on throwing power, giving Brady a more realistic attribute rating base would result in a lower overall. So the easiest thing for them to do, since throwing power is weighted so high, is to raise his throwing power attribute, therefore inflating his overall, again to reflect him being viewed as the top 1 or 2 quarterbacks in the game. Arguing that his throwing power should be 97 is laughable. But in the construct of the game, and the way the ratings work with overall, this is what they did. Really not sure why people get so agitated about it LOL.
    TB5XSBW
    Being the best at his position, as well as being the best player in the entire league (according to his peers) over the last 2 seasons warrants the highest rating in the game. There's no argument at all for Rodgers to be rated higher than him, as Brady is the superior QB and football player. I'm sorry that you/your team have been traumatized by Brady, but these are facts that you can't get around.
    It might help if you bothered to actually understand the game of football on a meaningful level, as opposed to evaluating players, specifically QBs, based on individual attributes.

    Simply pointing out that he's "better" is not an argument. It's debatable if he's the best.
    I've provided a very good argument that he's a great QB that is paired with one of the greatest head coaches of all time. Now, imagine Rodgers being paired with an equally great coaching staff....
    Let's take a look at Rodgers statistics, shall we?
    For his career, Rodgers has never had a season below a 90 rating, 7 of his 10 seasons he's had 100+ rating, he's only had TWO seasons where he threw double digit INTs - he has 2,670 yards rushing with 24 rushing TDs, and has 65.1% accuracy rating for his entire career
    The biggest knock on Rodgers is that he's often banged up - but in pure production standpoint, he actually tops Brady.
    So I would love for you to provide an argument for a guy who has superior arm strength to Brady, far more accurate, better decision maker, and a lot more athletic WHY IN THE HELL Brady should be at 99 when you can clearly point out his inferiority in multiple categories? This isn't even factoring in Rodgers playing with poor O-line play and a shoddy coaching staff.
    Again, we are talking about a Madden rating here - Do you get why Madden needs to bump up his throw power significantly? Because if they had it low, they wouldn't be able to have your boi's rating as high as it is.
    tdawg3782
    All this Brady talk is hilarious. I think it's safe to assume that Madden portrays Brady as the best QB in the game. However the way Madden uses its ratings, which puts a lot of emphasis on throwing power, giving Brady a more realistic attribute rating base would result in a lower overall. So the easiest thing for them to do, since throwing power is weighted so high, is to raise his throwing power attribute, therefore inflating his overall, again to reflect him being viewed as the top 1 or 2 quarterbacks in the game. Arguing that his throwing power should be 97 is laughable. But in the construct of the game, and the way the ratings work with overall, this is what they did. Really not sure why people get so agitated about it LOL.

    And that's the problem with Madden gameplay. Whether he's the "best" is debatable, but within context of how Madden does their ratings there is an obvious flaw there in the design.
    When I'm playing as Brady or Rodgers, if all of their ratings are the same, I essentially have the same QB outside of the athleticism. EA has never understood the nuances of individual players. I can pick up a controller and turn any QB in the game into a perennial pro-bowler also with any RB being a 1,000 yard rusher.
    EA needs to blow up the entire franchise because at it's very foundation it's flawed - the problem here is, they simply do not have time to do this and if they start back at square one it would be another 5-7 rebuild which means we'll need to go back through new problems that emerge.
    All we can hope for is an annual release for the PC and the Frostbite becomes easier to mod because EA just doesn't get, or if they do, they simply don't have the time or the care to really fix major problems.
    Two things define how good a football player is:
  2. How talented he is
  3. How good of a fit he is with his team (scheme/personnel-dependent talent)

    Number 1 is really the ratings. This is where Brady is meh. He's accurate, has a passable arm (not 96 THP-worthy though...that's a joke), but shines from an intelligence perspective and knowledge perspective. From a "true talent" perspective, he might be an 85 overall.
    Number 2 has nothing to do with ratings but this is where the scheme/archetype system in this year's Madden should be huge. His "true talent" level should play up with the Pats scheme and personnel....turning that 85 true talent to something more like a 95+. This is what I like to think of as the "production overall".
    The problem with Madden's out-of-box with Brady as a "true talent" 99 is that it would effectively make him a 110 "production overall" or something once in franchise - which is pretty much ridiculous.
    Now....if these are your "play now" ratings....ok whatever, it doesn't matter. But this is exactly the reason why we need a totally different rating system for franchise mode; so that true talent can be complemented by the scheme/archetype system.
  4. mattjames2010
    Simply pointing out that he's "better" is not an argument. It's debatable if he's the best.
    I've provided a very good argument that he's a great QB that is paired with one of the greatest head coaches of all time. Now, imagine Rodgers being paired with an equally great coaching staff....
    Let's take a look at Rodgers statistics, shall we?
    For his career, Rodgers has never had a season below a 90 rating, 7 of his 10 seasons he's had 100+ rating, he's only had TWO seasons where he threw double digit INTs - he has 2,670 yards rushing with 24 rushing TDs, and has 65.1% accuracy rating for his entire career
    The biggest knock on Rodgers is that he's often banged up - but in pure production standpoint, he actually tops Brady.
    So I would love for you to provide an argument for a guy who has superior arm strength to Brady, far more accurate, better decision maker, and a lot more athletic WHY IN THE HELL Brady should be at 99 when you can clearly point out his inferiority in multiple categories? This isn't even factoring in Rodgers playing with poor O-line play and a shoddy coaching staff.
    Again, we are talking about a Madden rating here - Do you get why Madden needs to bump up his throw power significantly? Because if they had it low, they wouldn't be able to have your boi's rating as high as it is.

    Rodgers isn't a better decision maker at all. You're embarrassing yourself. He takes far fewer risks than Brady. This is why he throws very few interceptions. It's also why he never leads any comebacks in the 4th quarter.
    Rodgers isn't anywhere near as good pre-snap as Brady. No one currently playing is in his league in that regard. Intelligence and ability to read a defense and adjust are by far the two most important attributes of a QB. It's why even at 40, it's not debatable (it's not at all debatable, because I'm sure we'd all take the word of experts and current/former players over some salty guy online) that he's the best player in the league. If there's one thing that Madden does wrong with respect to QB ratings, it's that it doesn't put enough emphasis on these attributes.
    I think that they should bring back the production rating as a means of cooking the books for the OVR rating. Brady's production can boost up that OVR without them having juice up his arm strength to make that 99 happen. Also it can obviously help in CFM when some 75 OVR puts up absurd stats over a couple of years and the Production ratings can help get the OVR to something like a 85 instead of an 80 which he might have through his Skill Point application. That will allow him to ask for a more appropriate contract at negotiation time.
    TB5XSBW
    Rodgers isn't a better decision maker at all. You're embarrassing yourself. He takes far fewer risks than Brady. This is why he throws very few interceptions. It's also why he never leads any comebacks in the 4th quarter.
    Rodgers isn't anywhere near as good pre-snap as Brady. No one currently playing is in his league in that regard. Intelligence and ability to read a defense and adjust are by far the two most important attributes of a QB. It's why even at 40, it's not debatable (it's not at all debatable, because I'm sure we'd all take the word of experts and current/former players over some salty guy online) that he's the best player in the league. If there's one thing that Madden does wrong with respect to QB ratings, it's that it doesn't put enough emphasis on these attributes.

    If it weren't at all debatable then no one would be posting in this thread, lol.
    TB5XSBW
    Rodgers isn't a better decision maker at all. You're embarrassing yourself. He takes far fewer risks than Brady. This is why he throws very few interceptions. It's also why he never leads any comebacks in the 4th quarter.
    Rodgers isn't anywhere near as good pre-snap as Brady. No one currently playing is in his league in that regard. Intelligence and ability to read a defense and adjust are by far the two most important attributes of a QB. It's why even at 40, it's not debatable (it's not at all debatable, because I'm sure we'd all take the word of experts and current/former players over some salty guy online) that he's the best player in the league. If there's one thing that Madden does wrong with respect to QB ratings, it's that it doesn't put enough emphasis on these attributes.

    > He takes fewer chances
    Back that up with a stat. "Fewer 4th quarter comebacks" has multiple factors in that.
    And right here is an article on it
    http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news/aaron-rodgers-criticism-colin-cowherd-fourth-quarter-comebacks-packers-tony-romo/vd1mdb2wu2bl1nwca6p3kuj4m
    You want to try again, bucko?
    > Rodgers isn't anywhere near as good as Brady pre-snap
    Back it up. Provide a source.
    I'm not getting anything other than bold claims by you. NEXT!
    mattjames2010
    > He takes fewer chances
    Back that up with a stat. "Fewer 4th quarter comebacks" has multiple factors in that.
    And right here is an article on it
    http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/news/aaron-rodgers-criticism-colin-cowherd-fourth-quarter-comebacks-packers-tony-romo/vd1mdb2wu2bl1nwca6p3kuj4m
    You want to try again, bucko?
    > Rodgers isn't anywhere near as good as Brady pre-snap
    Back it up. Provide a source.
    I'm not getting anything other than bold claims by you. NEXT!

    Here is my source: Brady was voted the best player (not QB, but overall player) in the entire league by his peers for the 2nd consecutive year. That has never happened before. You can disagree with the players who play this game for a living if you wish, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you've actually got a brain.
    So that leaves a couple possibilities. Is he better because he is a better overall athlete than Rodgers? Or is he better because he has a higher football IQ and is more composed in the late stages of a game and in the postseason.
    mattjames2010
    What I would prefer is a "scout/coach" rating. So say when the draft comes around, each player would be different on each teams board. Now obviously, there will be certain players in the top 5-10 that most team scouts agree upon - for example, Andrew Luck in 2012 draft, I'm sure in terms of talent he was #1 on most teams draft board.
    Then you have a player like Alvin Kamara - he's not a Fournette-type talent, so scouts won't have him rated as a first round talent. However, coaching rating would play a factor in here - so Saints enjoy a RBBC and like their receiving backs due to their system, so he'd be rated a little higher than most teams boards.

    So what you're saying here is that teams should prefer certain types of players... let's call them "archetypes," based on the sort of system or, uhh, how about "scheme", that they run?
    That's a phenomenal idea, we should tell EA!
    TB5XSBW
    Here is my source: Brady was voted the best player (not QB, but overall player) in the entire league by his peers for the 2nd consecutive year. That has never happened before. You can disagree with the players who play this game for a living if you wish, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you've actually got a brain.

    Okay, I'll bite: you're not seriously hinging your entire argument for Tom Brady being head-and-shoulders better than any other single player in the league on an NFL Network produced narrative-driven puff piece which has countless issues and snubs every year, are you?
    Like, I get that there's an argument to be made for Tom Brady - I wouldn't make it, I think Aaron Rodgers is the single greatest individual football player I've ever had the fortune to watch play for so many reasons - but let's endeavor to have a slightly more nuanced discussion than who's at the top of a media-produced poll.
    CM Hooe
    Okay, I'll bite: you're not seriously hinging your entire argument for Tom Brady being head-and-shoulders better than any other single player in the league on an NFL Network produced narrative-driven puff piece which has countless issues and snubs every year, are you?
    Like, I get that there's an argument to be made for Tom Brady - I wouldn't make it, I think Aaron Rodgers is the single greatest individual football player I've ever had the fortune to watch play for so many reasons - but let's endeavor to have a slightly more nuanced discussion than who's at the top of a media-produced poll.

    The media has nothing to do with what's being discussed. This is a list voted on by NFL players.
    mattjames2010
    What "all-time great"? Brady wasn't "all-time great" against the Falcons, he HELPED put the Pats into a hole in that game. Sure, the comeback was exciting to watch, but it wasn't an all-time great performance. Throwing a pick 6 in a game when your team was already in trouble is a huge negative.
    Settle down.

    Pay no mind to him. When the Patriots have to reset in a few years, the rose colored glasses will come off. Or he’ll jump ship completely.
    As a Dolphins fan...I’ve never put them on.
    TB5XSBW
    The media has nothing to do with what's being discussed. This is a list voted on by NFL players.

    I'm well aware. I still question its legitimacy.
    Even if we allow that the piece is purely representative of what NFL players actually think, Aaron Rodgers has not played against the following teams in at least three seasons:
    Baltimore Ravens (2013)
    Buffalo Bills (2014)
    Cleveland Browns (2013)
    Miami Dolphins (2014)
    New Orleans Saints (2014)
    New England Patriots (2014)
    New York Jets (2014)
    Pittsburgh Steelers (2009)
    Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2014)
    The vast majority of players and coaches on these teams would have neither the time nor justification to ever watch Aaron Rodgers play football, as opposed to the game film of their upcoming opponents actually on the schedule. You and I both have probably watched more Aaron Rodgers games than some players on these teams over that time span. To that end, the NFL Hot 100 is no more legitimate than the FBS coaches poll, in which many college football coaches have openly admitted they don't watch teams and just read box scores. Hell, Steve Spurrier used to vote for Duke every season in the poll because he could. What I'm arguing here is that proximity doesn't necessarily equate to expertise.
    If you're going to make an argument for Brady being better than Rodgers, you're going to have to bring something stronger.
    TB5XSBW
    Being the best at his position, as well as being the best player in the entire league (according to his peers) over the last 2 seasons warrants the highest rating in the game. There's no argument at all for Rodgers to be rated higher than him, as Brady is the superior QB and football player. I'm sorry that you/your team have been traumatized by Brady, but these are facts that you can't get around.
    It might help if you bothered to actually understand the game of football on a meaningful level, as opposed to evaluating players, specifically QBs, based on individual attributes.

    There’s no need to bash somebody and say that they don’t “understand football on a meaningful level”. IE, how the Patriots were absolute garbage for their first 30 years of existence (with some exceptions ofc). You probably never experienced a time when there was parity and better talent in the league, which is fine because I never have, either.
    Just because you pull for the NFL’s version of the Sith Empire doesn’t make you a football genius. Moving on, staying on topic.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    TB5XSBW
    The media has nothing to do with what's being discussed. This is a list voted on by NFL players.

    To be frank I'd take the opinion of some media pundits over that of many actual players , many no next to nothing about layers on other teams especially out of division or conference , the nfl top 100 and pro bowl voting are no way to rank players
    adembroski
    So what you're saying here is that teams should prefer certain types of players... let's call them "archetypes," based on the sort of system or, uhh, how about "scheme", that they run?
    That's a phenomenal idea, we should tell EA!

    I think hes meaning more than some teams prefer certain player types , thats part of it , but also the quality of scouting should differ between teams , some teams being better at assessing DBs , others Old etc
    Each team should have scouting staff with a variety of costs and specialities/ weakspots
    JoshC1977
    (Disclaimer: this is all based on my experiences with Madden 18 (and before) using default gameplay sliders NOT with the M19 beta)
    This is a very fair question...I'll rephrase my point....
    The problem with the hyper-inflated ratings (i.e. players with overalls greater than 85 or so) is that they result in hyper-inflated gameplay. Big hits, big catches, big throws, etc. It's perfect for selling arcade style gameplay like the online H2H kids want. So yes, from that standpoint the roster and engine do typically work well together.
    What I was previously referring to was the desire for REALISTIC gameplay; which means, in spite of all the hard work they might do on the engine, over-inflated ratings essentially undermine all the good things that they have tried to accomplish (again, from the perspective of them wanting something actually resembling real football).

    If you lower the ratings then players can't do anything especially on defense.
    Without 85+ BSH players in your front 7 you have no hope of stopping a strong rushing attack. Without at least a few 80+ ZCV players you must blitz relentlessly to stop the pass. Without 90+ PMV or FMV pass rushers you'll almost never get home sending just three or four, so again you must blitz.
    To my knowledge sliders do not change the relevant thresholds, so without players rated highly in the most crucial attributes you'll never get a defender to jump a pass, blow up a run, or beat his man one on one on a pass rush.
    Doing this really degrades the game and makes it similar to older versions of Madden where your user and fast blitzes were your only hope on D because the AI players were mostly helpless.
    CM Hooe
    I'm well aware. I still question its legitimacy.
    Even if we allow that the piece is purely representative of what NFL players actually think, Aaron Rodgers has not played against the following teams in at least three seasons:
    Baltimore Ravens (2013)
    Buffalo Bills (2014)
    Cleveland Browns (2013)
    Miami Dolphins (2014)
    New Orleans Saints (2014)
    New England Patriots (2014)
    New York Jets (2014)
    Pittsburgh Steelers (2009)
    Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2014)
    The vast majority of players and coaches on these teams would have neither the time nor justification to ever watch Aaron Rodgers play football, as opposed to the game film of their upcoming opponents actually on the schedule. You and I both have probably watched more Aaron Rodgers games than some players on these teams over that time span. To that end, the NFL Hot 100 is no more legitimate than the FBS coaches poll, in which many college football coaches have openly admitted they don't watch teams and just read box scores. Hell, Steve Spurrier used to vote for Duke every season in the poll because he could. What I'm arguing here is that proximity doesn't necessarily equate to expertise.
    If you're going to make an argument for Brady being better than Rodgers, you're going to have to bring something stronger.

    We've already gone over the numerous records, cumulative and single game, that he holds, in both regular and postseason. We know about the numerous game winning drives he has. We know about the 5 rings and 4 SB MVPs. You've got most analysts, experts, current players, former players, who say he's the best. At some point you have to stop being salty, wake up, and face reality.
    CM Hooe
    I'm well aware. I still question its legitimacy.
    Even if we allow that the piece is purely representative of what NFL players actually think, Aaron Rodgers has not played against the following teams in at least three seasons:
    Baltimore Ravens (2013)
    Buffalo Bills (2014)
    Cleveland Browns (2013)
    Miami Dolphins (2014)
    New Orleans Saints (2014)
    New England Patriots (2014)
    New York Jets (2014)
    Pittsburgh Steelers (2009)
    Tampa Bay Buccaneers (2014)
    The vast majority of players and coaches on these teams would have neither the time nor justification to ever watch Aaron Rodgers play football, as opposed to the game film of their upcoming opponents actually on the schedule. You and I both have probably watched more Aaron Rodgers games than some players on these teams over that time span. To that end, the NFL Hot 100 is no more legitimate than the FBS coaches poll, in which many college football coaches have openly admitted they don't watch teams and just read box scores. Hell, Steve Spurrier used to vote for Duke every season in the poll because he could. What I'm arguing here is that proximity doesn't necessarily equate to expertise.
    If you're going to make an argument for Brady being better than Rodgers, you're going to have to bring something stronger.

    AFC East is a complete cakewalk; it’s essentially like Lebron in the Eastern Conference. Rodgers has faced a number of juggernauts, both postseason and otherwise: the SB against Pittsburgh is a game that forever stands out in my mind. I saw him drop a pass in the bucket between Polomalu and Clark for a TD and I’ve never been more impressed. Not to mention the 2017 NFC Divisional Round. That pass to Cook was insane.
    I think Aaron Rodgers is the gunslinger/shifty QB from the 70s, Fran Tarkenton without the speed. He is by far the most entertaining QB to watch for me.
    Both are brilliant QBs but I agree with you: Rodgers is better than Brady, and I’d want him with the ball with 1:00 left and down by 4. I think Brady’s had a lot of good luck thrown his way: The Tuck Rule, Kasay’s kick out of bounds, Kyle Shanahan laying an egg in the SB, not to mention that stout defense for much of his career.
    I think Rodgers has a bit more talent than Tom Terrific. Please don’t kill me.
    TB5XSBW
    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.

    I remember the chiefs had an answer in Eric berry until his Achilles stopped working.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    tdawg3782
    All this Brady talk is hilarious. I think it's safe to assume that Madden portrays Brady as the best QB in the game. However the way Madden uses its ratings, which puts a lot of emphasis on throwing power, giving Brady a more realistic attribute rating base would result in a lower overall. So the easiest thing for them to do, since throwing power is weighted so high, is to raise his throwing power attribute, therefore inflating his overall, again to reflect him being viewed as the top 1 or 2 quarterbacks in the game. Arguing that his throwing power should be 97 is laughable. But in the construct of the game, and the way the ratings work with overall, this is what they did. Really not sure why people get so agitated about it LOL.

    The game would be more fun if the only way you could go deep with Brady is moonballs on HB wheels and seam routes when you can scheme them open, but he would be deadly accurate on short to medium stuff.
    Guys like him and Alex Smith can drive 15 yard outs to the field side and that's what is busted about Madden's passing game. Neither could reliably deliver that pass IRL. With Brady even the deepest shots down the field are available (I will admit Smith is much more limited) and that's just not how the Pats do it.
    If a means to nerf these type of player's DAC and/or THP without lowering their overall could be utilized player differentiation would take a big step forward.
    JayCutlersCig
    Rodgers is better than Brady, and I’d want him with the ball with 1:00 left and down by 4.

    That's not surprising. As a Dolphins, you've become so accustomed to losing that you clearly have come to embrace it.
    TB5XSBW
    That's not surprising. As a Dolphins, you've become so accustomed to losing that you clearly have come to embrace it.

    Let me get this straight. Two people have different opinions about a subject that is very much influenced in the eye of the beholder? But you you can't just realize that you two are not going to agree? You know, the whole agree to disagree thing. It's not that anybody is wrong. It's just two people taking in the information they have and stating their opinion.
    You on the other hand have used underhanded comments back to any who disagree with your opinion. You are reaching troll status quite quickly considering you've been a part of OS for a month. We get it. You are a Pats fan until the end. You love your players. You support them and feel strongly about how good you think they are. That's awesome. How about you let others have their opinions as well huh? And let this thread get back on track.
    tdawg3782
    Let me get this straight. Two people have different opinions about a subject that is very much influenced in the eye of the beholder? But you you can't just realize that you two are not going to agree? You know, the whole agree to disagree thing. It's not that anybody is wrong. It's just two people taking in the information they have and stating their opinion.
    You on the other hand have used underhanded comments back to any who disagree with your opinion. You are reaching troll status quite quickly considering you've been a part of OS for a month. We get it. You are a Pats fan until the end. You love your players. You support them and feel strongly about how good you think they are. That's awesome. How about you let others have their opinions as well huh? And let this thread get back on track.

    It is honestly best to leave it alone. He's also in the other thread doing all he can to say the Xbox One X is on par if not better than gaming PCs. Just let it be.
    canes21
    It is honestly best to leave it alone. He's also in the other thread doing all he can to say the Xbox One X is on par if not better than gaming PCs. Just let it be.

    That’s hilarious.
    canes21
    It is honestly best to leave it alone. He's also in the other thread doing all he can to say the Xbox One X is on par if not better than gaming PCs. Just let it be.

    Seems like you have massive reading comprehension issues.
    adembroski
    So what you're saying here is that teams should prefer certain types of players... let's call them "archetypes," based on the sort of system or, uhh, how about "scheme", that they run?
    That's a phenomenal idea, we should tell EA!

    ....yeah, maybe you should. Despite your unjustified snark, when the game is released and their "system" and "archetypes" turns out to be an illusion and you as a player will have to take control of 32 teams to adjust around their bullcrap, we can come back here to this thread and you can attempt your sarcasm again.
    You think EA's AI is going to determine a slot receiver to an outside receiver? LOL please. How about a 3rd down pass rusher? Come on.
    TB5XSBW
    Here is my source: Brady was voted the best player (not QB, but overall player) in the entire league by his peers for the 2nd consecutive year. That has never happened before. You can disagree with the players who play this game for a living if you wish, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you've actually got a brain.
    So that leaves a couple possibilities. Is he better because he is a better overall athlete than Rodgers? Or is he better because he has a higher football IQ and is more composed in the late stages of a game and in the postseason.

    This isn't an argument.
    I asked you to back it up with a source, "popular vote" is not sufficient. Give me the REASONS why they choose Brady. You made two claims, one about Rodgers (already too you out on that one) and one about Brady.
    Don't waste my time with non-arguments. Either provide something or GTFO.
    mattjames2010
    This isn't an argument.
    I asked you to back it up with a source, "popular vote" is not sufficient. Give me the REASONS why they choose Brady. You made two claims, one about Rodgers (already too you out on that one) and one about Brady.
    Don't waste my time with non-arguments. Either provide something or GTFO.

    Of course you won't accept sources that are far more knowledgeable about the game than you. This isn't a debate, kiddo. This was settled long ago. This is me telling you the way it is, and you stomping your foot and crying because you cant accept it.
    It's very amusing watching you lose it after getting absolutely obliterated.
    TB5XSBW
    What planet are you living on? Both of these players are still at the top of their games. Brady has been playing the best football of his career, and literally put up the best postseason performance in league history in SBLII and completely wiped his a$$ with Philly's defense - a defense most were saying would be a horrible match up for NE's offense. Regarding the coach you just mentioned - Belichick is no doubt the GOAT, but he also single handedly cost the team #6 and wasted Brady's brilliant performance.
    Gronk is still Gronk. A dominant freak which no team has an answer for.
    THANK YOU!! I get people like to pretend that Tom and Gronk aren't deserving of any recognition, but c'mon now.
    Sent from my SM-G950U using Operation Sports mobile app
    TB5XSBW
    Of course you won't accept sources that are far more knowledgeable about the game than you. This isn't a debate, kiddo. This was settled long ago. This is me telling you the way it is, and you stomping your foot and crying because you cant accept it.
    It's very amusing watching you lose it after getting absolutely obliterated.

    Of course I don't accept the popular opinion just for the sake of popularity - I ask for opinions to be backed up. If it gets backed up with sufficient evidence, my opinion would sway.
    The fact that I can provide you with statistics that prove you wrong and yet you counter with "Well the popular vote says" is not obliterating anything, it's a cop out. If you can't provide your own source, can back up your own claims with statistics - then you're not winning anything. The same goes for any coach and player that can't do the same.
    You should be able to point out the specifics and you have failed to do so. Again, if you're trolling, then good job, kid. If not, I want you to back up your claim with an actual source that shows me data about Brady being better presnap - the only thing I can find on that is an article from 2011 that says Rodgers was the best in the league since becoming a starter at recognizing the blitz.
    I'm getting bored now.
    I can see we’re trying to get back on topic, but we clearly can’t because of a certain someone.
    CM? Roadman? Little help, please?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    mattjames2010
    ....yeah, maybe you should. Despite your unjustified snark, when the game is released and their "system" and "archetypes" turns out to be an illusion and you as a player will have to take control of 32 teams to adjust around their bullcrap, we can come back here to this thread and you can attempt your sarcasm again.
    You think EA's AI is going to determine a slot receiver to an outside receiver? LOL please. How about a 3rd down pass rusher? Come on.

    What exactly are you trying to get at here? Genuine question. With the archetypes being the way they are now and the new specialist depth charts the AI 100% should be able to differentiate a slot receiver from a boundary one and play them properly.
    JayCutlersCig
    I can see we’re trying to get back on topic, but we clearly can’t because of a certain someone.
    CM? Roadman? Little help, please?
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

    To be fair, this is still in context of ratings in Madden - I am trying to point out why Brady isn't deserving of a 99 rating (unless system is being factored in)
    And to be clear, I don't even think Rodgers is deserving of a 99 at this point. I think Donald is the only one I'd truly give a 99 to since I can actually point to him being at his peak right now and dominating at every level.
    One side of this argument is just getting too emotional and has fan goggles on - it shows why it's so difficult to have an accurate sports games, people can't be objective. That's how you have Tom Brady being a superman with a Favre-like arm in Madden.
    Roadman isn't a mod, however, it's getting annoying seeing this back n forth continuing onward.
    My strong suggestions would be to end it and get the thread going back to the OP stat.(no pun intended)
    Or people can start hitting the Report A Post button as well.
    TB5XSBW
    Of course you won't accept sources that are far more knowledgeable about the game than you. This isn't a debate, kiddo. This was settled long ago. This is me telling you the way it is, and you stomping your foot and crying because you cant accept it.
    It's very amusing watching you lose it after getting absolutely obliterated.

    I hate to go this route, but you leave me no choice.
    The fact that you have no logical argument and, instead, choose to insult someone else over their opinion is incredibly immature and reveals your true age. You must have either A) started following football in 2007 or B) are so blinded by your love of the Pats that you can’t accept anyone else’s opinion.
    I don’t care that you called Miami a bunch of losers; I was born into the fanbase and I’ll die in the fanbase. You’re not above anybody else because you pull for one of the best teams in football. Get over yourself, dude. What team are you gonna go for when Tom hangs up the cleats?
    You’re embarrassing yourself. That’s all I have to say, and that’s the *last* thing I say. I do apologize if what I said was a bit over the line, but enough is enough.
    Moving the hell on.
    Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
    mattjames2010
    To be fair, this is still in context of ratings in Madden - I am trying to point out why Brady isn't deserving of a 99 rating (unless system is being factored in)
    And to be clear, I don't even think Rodgers is deserving of a 99 at this point. I think Donald is the only one I'd truly give a 99 to since I can actually point to him being at his peak right now and dominating at every level.
    One side of this argument is just getting too emotional and has fan goggles on - it shows why it's so difficult to have an accurate sports games, people can't be objective. That's how you have Tom Brady being a superman with a Favre-like arm in Madden.

    Agree, but the back n forth with the same posters over the last few pages should cease including the borderline insulting that is going on.
    canes21
    What exactly are you trying to get at here? Genuine question. With the archetypes being the way they are now and the new specialist depth charts the AI 100% should be able to differentiate a slot receiver from a boundary one and play them properly.

    ....this is not new. You get EA made this claim 7 years ago, right? They actually stated in an interview during E3 that "Teams will draft based on scheme" - they pointed out an example that since Davis liked fast WRs, the Raiders would be more likely to draft faster WRs - this didn't happen. It was a bogus claim and the AI didn't adapt to new coaches coming in, the draft logic of each team stayed the same.
    As for the AI being able to determine a slot receiver over a boundary one - you're still not getting it. What is the point of a team like the Patriots drafting a slot WR when you go into the game, and 99% of their snaps come on the boundary?
    What is the point of drafting a player like Kamara when the AI doesn't differentiate between a hybrid back that is better suited for equal rushes and receiving? Instead, because it's Madden, you sim the season and look at the stats and Kamara will have 250-350 rushing attempts because the AI doesn't fit the playbooks to it's players. Instead, like every other Madden that actually allows editing, you'll have to be the one that goes in and changes up a playbook and EVEN THEN the sim stats will play out like Kamara is a workhorse back.
    What I am proposing is far more dynamic and complex AI - and yes, by the way, this can be done - this has been done in Front Office Football since the damn 90s.
    And you bring up any claim you want that has come from EA, as I said, we'll come back to this thread when their new system is so bare bones that modders will have to clean up the mess.
    mattjames2010
    Of course I don't accept the popular opinion just for the sake of popularity - I ask for opinions to be backed up. If it gets backed up with sufficient evidence, my opinion would sway.
    The fact that I can provide you with statistics that prove you wrong and yet you counter with "Well the popular vote says" is not obliterating anything, it's a cop out. If you can't provide your own source, can back up your own claims with statistics - then you're not winning anything. The same goes for any coach and player that can't do the same.
    You should be able to point out the specifics and you have failed to do so. Again, if you're trolling, then good job, kid. If not, I want you to back up your claim with an actual source that shows me data about Brady being better presnap - the only thing I can find on that is an article from 2011 that says Rodgers was the best in the league since becoming a starter at recognizing the blitz.
    I'm getting bored now.

    Only in your imagination have you provided any statistics to prove anything wrong. The default position is that Brady is the greatest QB in the history of the game, as that's the widely accepted position of the vast majority of people far more knowledgeable than some random guy "mattjames2010." Me, and those with a brain who recognize this fact, have won this debate long ago. Therefore, if you know anything about argumentation and logic, the onus is on you to try to disprove that beyond all doubt. You haven't even come close to doing so (and given that you've got as much to work with as flat earthers, you never will.) Better get to it, champ.
    TB5XSBW
    Only in your imagination have you provided any statistics to prove anything wrong. The default position is that Brady is the greatest QB in the history of the game, as that's the widely accepted position of the vast majority of people far more knowledgeable than some random guy "mattjames2010." Me, and those with a brain who recognize this fact, have won this debate long ago. Therefore, if you know anything about argumentation and logic, the onus is on you to try to disprove that beyond all doubt. You haven't even come close to doing so (and given that you've got as much to work with as flat earthers, you never will.) Better get to it, champ.

    Yeah, you're trolling. Still provided nothing and I have.
    We're done here.
    mattjames2010
    Yeah, you're trolling. Still provided nothing and I have.
    We're done here.

    We were done several years ago when the debate was settled. Not sure why you decided to go on this insurmountable journey, but at least you've come to your senses and decided to bow out.
    mattjames2010
    ....this is not new. You get EA made this claim 7 years ago, right? They actually stated in an interview during E3 that "Teams will draft based on scheme" - they pointed out an example that since Davis liked fast WRs, the Raiders would be more likely to draft faster WRs - this didn't happen. It was a bogus claim and the AI didn't adapt to new coaches coming in, the draft logic of each team stayed the same.
    As for the AI being able to determine a slot receiver over a boundary one - you're still not getting it. What is the point of a team like the Patriots drafting a slot WR when you go into the game, and 99% of their snaps come on the boundary?
    What is the point of drafting a player like Kamara when the AI doesn't differentiate between a hybrid back that is better suited for equal rushes and receiving? Instead, because it's Madden, you sim the season and look at the stats and Kamara will have 250-350 rushing attempts because the AI doesn't fit the playbooks to it's players. Instead, like every other Madden that actually allows editing, you'll have to be the one that goes in and changes up a playbook and EVEN THEN the sim stats will play out like Kamara is a workhorse back.
    What I am proposing is far more dynamic and complex AI - and yes, by the way, this can be done - this has been done in Front Office Football since the damn 90s.
    And you bring up any claim you want that has come from EA, as I said, we'll come back to this thread when their new system is so bare bones that modders will have to clean up the mess.

    I agree with the bold. I have been asking for Owners/Coaches that reflect the depth that is offered in Out of the Park. As for what is in the rest of the post, and the underlined part especially, I can't really say much on it or else I'd be breaking the NDA of the beta.
    TB5XSBW
    We were done several years ago when the debate was settled. Not sure why you decided to go on this insurmountable journey, but at least you've come to your senses and decided to bow out.

    So I’m enjoying the conversation on some of the deficiencies that is Maddens rating systems and how it impacts the game and people’s opinion of what that could mean for the future in this thread. I however have no patience for blind fan boy cheerleading and trolling. If you have nothing to bring to the conversation please move along.
    May I just say that unless you have played the beta or have some other knowledge of cpu roster management, you are just speculating.
    In regards to the 99 overall players, I don't know why this is something people get in a fight about. If you play in CFM most of those guys will go down or retire in a season or two. So who cares?
    mtmetcalfe
    So I’m enjoying the conversation on some of the deficiencies that is Maddens rating systems and how it impacts the game and people’s opinion of what that could mean for the future in this thread. I however have no patience for blind fan boy cheerleading and trolling. If you have nothing to bring to the conversation please move along.

    NFL players are all blind Brady fanboys. You learn something new every day.
Continue Reading

More in Madden NFL 19

Trending


Related

To Top