Page 2 of 3
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 9:46 am
by hatsOFF2gibbs
jklote wrote:SkinsHead56 wrote:I'm mildly upset at this but how accurate is this info? At the very least the Skins are ranked higher than the cowpukes
The Cowboys are going to be GOOD next year. Julius Jones is $$$
That's why we have STaylor. He's more $$$$ ...if he ever shows up.
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 10:05 am
by redskins12287
Well this is just another reason for me to hate madden. I guess I'll be playing ESPN 2005 for the next 6, 8 years? How long does madden own the rights for?
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 11:33 am
by air_hog
redskins12287 wrote:Well this is just another reason for me to hate madden. I guess I'll be playing ESPN 2005 for the next 6, 8 years? How long does madden own the rights for?
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 12:36 pm
by gay4pacman
Whoever is playing ESPN 2005 is making a horrible selection when it comes to video gaming. MAdden is far superior FAR superior
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 12:43 pm
by EasyMoney
These will change.
Last year the D ratings by position were:
DL: Daniels: 83, Wynn 79, Griffin 87, Noble 75
LB: Arrington: 97, Barrow: 90, Washington 89
CB: Springs: 89, Harris: 78
S: Taylor: 85, Bowen: 79, Clark: 69, Lott: 65
I imagine that Griffin, Washington, Springs, Taylor & Clark will all go up. Taylor had like a 55 awareness rating last year.
ey was a 69 overall and I'm sure he'll go up.
Players we added: Holdman: 86, Patten: 78, Rabach: 83, Moss: 89.
I can see Patten & Rabach going up. Patten was injured the previous year but led the Pats in TD's and held the highest YPC last year. Rabach played the entire year for Flynn who was injured but still started after Flynn came back.
I wouldn't worry about these ratings quite yet. When IGN posts them in late July early August and our D is still rated that low... then I would start to worry. It also had Blache as our D Coor. Hopefully they put GW in this year.
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 2:37 pm
by spudstr04
YA'll get over it, it's a freaking video game..when the season is over i have no doubt that we will be better than the game says we are....who cares what EA sports thinks about us, the noly thing I care about is the real game..not the PS2 version
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 2:46 pm
by Punu
well im not sweat'n it that much, but im still gonna be concerned, I've been playing madden since '92!
And when our defense finally rocked the NFL, it was just nice looking forward to seeing our team ranked very high in madden. I play it all the time and im always the SKINS...
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 2:55 pm
by EasyMoney
spudstr04 wrote:YA'll get over it, it's a freaking video game..when the season is over i have no doubt that we will be better than the game says we are....who cares what EA sports thinks about us, the noly thing I care about is the real game..not the PS2 version
Well we all obviously care about the real game too. But I also like to play Madden. It's the best representation of pro football out there and I control what happens with the Skins in the game. That's probably a reason everyone gets bent out of shape when the ratings come out. I wouldn't worry about it either. EA ALWAYS bases their ratings on what happened the previous year. We lost three "starters". Marshall and a few other guys on the depth chart will come up. Don't want to beef with you Spud. But if you don't play it and you don't care about it, why did you comment on it?
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:19 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
spudstr04 wrote:YA'll get over it, it's a freaking video game..when the season is over i have no doubt that we will be better than the game says we are....who cares what EA sports thinks about us, the noly thing I care about is the real game..not the PS2 version
Dont come into a topic unless you have something constructive to bring to it.
Madden is the largest videogame franchise and its a big deal to a lot of us. If people complain about ESPN ranking us, then we surely can complain about how others do also. Go play some pokemon or something.
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:21 pm
by redskincity
These rating will change by August, but to have us as low as 74 just for the hell of it is BS.
We will be ranked in the 90s on Defense and heres why; Sean Taylors ratings will jump sky high. I would say he will be atleats in the low 90s. C Griffin wont be 88 anymore he was hell in the middle I would atleast give him a 95 rating. Those two alone will make our defensive stats jump above 90.
Offense on the other hand, has to prove itself to get any love from EA.
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:22 pm
by redskincity
spudstr04 wrote:YA'll get over it, it's a freaking video game..when the season is over i have no doubt that we will be better than the game says we are....who cares what EA sports thinks about us, the noly thing I care about is the real game..not the PS2 version
Um....So.
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 5:50 pm
by REDEEMEDSKIN
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Madden is the largest videogame franchise and its a big deal to a lot of us.
For the sports gaming "enthusiasts"...The only thing sports geeks might take more seriously than their sports are video games about sports. We can hardly blame them, considering a Hawks-Bobcats game is at least 10 times more exciting on NBA Live than actually live. So it wasn't surprising that the new sports titles at the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3), which closed Friday after a four-day run at the L.A. Convention Center, created buzz larger than Maria Sharapova would at a nude beach.
In a few short months, sports gaming types will have the opportunity to be blown away by the next generation technologies of Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, and serious improvements in games for the "old fashioned" Xbox, PS2 and GameCube. The big boys of software are ready with new features and story lines, in the traditional franchises (EA's Madden), new spins on old ones (Midway's "Blitz- The League." Think Playmakers, digitized), and totally new creations (989's "Road to Sunday," where football, gambling, organized crime, and underground fighting competitions form a happy union), among others. And that's just pigskin. We have seen the future of video game sports, people, and it is freakin' sick.
But for every surefire hit, there are dozens more concepts that are simply the gaming equivalent of drafting DeSagana Diop. A really bad idea. So we decided to dig a little deeper to find those titles that never made it out of development. As it turns out, there are plenty of interesting sports games that will never see daylight. A sampling:
HOLDOUT! The Terrell Owens Contract Game
The Game: It's you, T.O., vs. Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie. Your mission? To overcome years of Philadelphia history and make your holdout pay off. Our "agent action" feature allows you to control Drew Rosenhaus, writing his press releases and conducting his interviews to become a master of "spin meistering."
Special Features: Use our "holdout downtime" feature to create exciting '05 end-zone dances and design even tighter fitting Under Armour.
Kellen Winslow's Motocross Follies
The Game: The brash TE insists a motorcycle can be mastered on the fly? Let's see what he's really got. Follow Kellen's antics as he takes on Jeremy McGrath, Nate Adams, Travis Pastrana, et.al., without a lick of instruction. The more dangerous, the better. For bonus points, try to rewrite your contract to receive bonuses after accidents!
Special Features: Why limit Cleveland's highest profile ACL tear to one extreme sport, when so many others can senselessly blow his knee out? See Kellen skate a half pipe, ski jump or ride a bull. There are a million ways to crush his bones. Find them all.
Read the rest here.
Happy Gaming!
- Redeemedskin 
Posted: Mon May 23, 2005 9:24 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
redskincity wrote:These rating will change by August, but to have us as low as 74 just for the hell of it is BS.
We will be ranked in the 90s on Defense and heres why; Sean Taylors ratings will jump sky high. I would say he will be atleats in the low 90s. C Griffin wont be 88 anymore he was hell in the middle I would atleast give him a 95 rating. Those two alone will make our defensive stats jump above 90.
Offense on the other hand, has to prove itself to get any love from EA.
Off the top of my head...
Clark - Low 80's
Taylor - High 80's - Low 90's
Bowen - High 70's
Springs - low-mid 90's
Walt - low 80'a
Rogers - Low-Mid 80'a
Arrington - high 80's (mainly due to him being injured last season)
Washington - Low 90's
Im not exactly sure what to rate our linemen. I don't think Noble is going to get out of the basement with a rating in the 70's...
This is what I think EA will give us.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 8:43 am
by redskincity
Those are almost right.
Springs will jump because he made NFL history last year with his performance.
Taylor should have been rookie of the year and was ranked 85 last season. I think you are right he will be low 90's
Arrington will not drop from 98 overall into the 80's (forget about). They didnt do it to anybody else so why him?
Marcus was 88 last year. He should be in the mid 90s. He was also INMO ranked to low coming from Indy.
Bowens will be in the high 80s. He was man handling QBs before his injury. EA will give him points for that.
Walt: mid 80s
Lemar Marshall: high 70s
Rodgers: 78-82
"The Hammer" 75 with strenth of 88. LOL
Plus we get extra points for being 1st for so many weeks and finishing third, thanks to the funk of our offense.(Hopefully)
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 10:57 am
by Skinsfan55
Fellas, you can still edit players you think were rated unfairly...
Didn't you make Springs, Griffin, Smoot, etc. better than they were last year on the game? I sure did.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 1:10 pm
by EasyMoney
Skinsfan55 wrote:Fellas, you can still edit players you think were rated unfairly...
Didn't you make Springs, Griffin, Smoot, etc. better than they were last year on the game? I sure did.
Well you can take them to camp and boost their ratings but you can't change their ratings any other way. At least I haven't found out how to do it yet. The option is there... it just doesn't let you do it.
My predictions for the D this year.
Wynn: 82 / Noble: 79 / Griffin: 94 / Daniels: 80
Warner: 71 / Salavae'a: 77 / Evans: 70
Washington: 94 / Holdman: 84 / Arrington: 95
Clemons: 71 / Barrow: 81 / Marshall: 78
Springs: 94 Rogers: 83
Harris: 80 Wilds: 67
Clark: 83 Taylor: 93
Bowen: 79 Prioleau: 80
Lott: 72
That's about what I expect EA to rate the D going off of the way they rated players in previous years.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 2:59 pm
by Skinsfan55
It's under "Rosters" you can edit every single player in the entire game
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 3:00 pm
by Skinsfan55
Oh, also I base my improvements on other existing players for max accuracy.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 3:30 pm
by EasyMoney
Skinsfan55 wrote:It's under "Rosters" you can edit every single player in the entire game
Right you can change their name, their school, their number, their position (if you have over the minimum players for that position), their height and weight but that's pretty much it.
But you can't change their ratings or their skin tone. I've tried everything but maybe I'm missing something?
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 3:44 pm
by WshSkins22
yes you can edit it go to attributes, it cant be done under franchise mode though only under main menu
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 4:12 pm
by EasyMoney
WshSkins22 wrote:yes you can edit it go to attributes, it cant be done under franchise mode though only under main menu
Ahhhhh, now that makes much more sense. Thanks WshSkins, I didn't know that.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 6:17 pm
by Chris Luva Luva
You cant change those ratings when you play online and in tournament, you have to use the default rosters.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 6:36 pm
by air_hog
EasyMoney wrote:Skinsfan55 wrote:
Didn't you make Springs, Griffin, Smoot, etc. better than they were last year on the game? I sure did.
My predictions for the D this year.
Wynn: 82 / Noble: 79 / Griffin: 94 / Daniels: 80
Warner: 71 / Salavae'a: 77 / Evans: 70
Washington: 94 / Holdman: 84 / Arrington: 95
Clemons: 71 / Barrow: 81 / Marshall: 78
Springs: 94 Rogers: 83
Harris: 80 Wilds: 67
Clark: 83 Taylor: 93
Bowen: 79 Prioleau: 80
Lott: 72
That's about what I expect EA to rate the D going off of the way they rated players in previous years.
You guys can change the rating all you want, if you want to cheat. I'm guessing you guys changed our ratings, but left everyone elses the same... cool
Just play with whatever the game gives you, and MAKE them better throughout the season, not by changing some attributs.
And EasyMoney:
I know it's is easy for us to make all our guys good, but your ratings are too high bro.
-Yes Washington is good, but 94 is like elite catagory... I'd give him about 90-88.
-Harris too is good, but I see him in the 75-70, not 80. Same with Springs. Springs is good, but 94 is like great. I'd make Springs about 89-85. And I don't see how a Rookie can be 83 when he hasn't even played a game yet. I see 100-90 as superstars/pro bowlers. 89-88 good/great players and maybe the top 5 picks from the Draft. Then 79 and below is for the other top rookies and proven veterans.
But I wouldn't mind those high ratings though
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 7:21 pm
by redskincity
Yes Washington is good, but 94 is like elite catagory... I'd give him about 90-88.
-Harris too is good, but I see him in the 75-70, not 80. Same with Springs. Springs is good, but 94 is like great. I'd make Springs about 89-85. And I don't see how a Rookie can be 83 when he hasn't even played a game yet. I see 100-90 as superstars/pro bowlers. 89-88 good/great players and maybe the top 5 picks from the Draft. Then 79 and below is for the other top rookies and proven veterans.
What are you talking about Too high?? The rating you just mention are what they are now.
You dont think any of the guys showed any improvement?
Washington is rated 90 right now in the roster updates.
Sean Taylor was a rookie and was ranked 85 last year.
Please dont send EA any suggestions when it come to the Redskins.
Posted: Tue May 24, 2005 7:53 pm
by air_hog
redskincity wrote:Yes Washington is good, but 94 is like elite catagory... I'd give him about 90-88.
-Harris too is good, but I see him in the 75-70, not 80. Same with Springs. Springs is good, but 94 is like great. I'd make Springs about 89-85. And I don't see how a Rookie can be 83 when he hasn't even played a game yet. I see 100-90 as superstars/pro bowlers. 89-88 good/great players and maybe the top 5 picks from the Draft. Then 79 and below is for the other top rookies and proven veterans.
What are you talking about Too high?? The rating you just mention are what they are now.
You dont think any of the guys showed any improvement?
Washington is rated 90 right now in the roster updates.
Sean Taylor was a rookie and was ranked 85 last year.
Please dont send EA any suggestions when it come to the Redskins.
I think Marcus is a GREAT linebacker. I'm just saying that I believe spots around 95 and above belong to the ELITE linebackers (Ray Lewis, Derrick Brooks, LaVar (when healthy)) Not to say that Marcus isn't as good as LaVar, it's just something I can't describe.
And last year I played ESPN, not Madden, and they had Marcus at about like 78 or something where I think he should have been about 80-83. And in ESPN, the only rookies who I think were in the 80's were Taylor, Winslow, and Fitzgerald.
Don't get me wrong, I think all of our players are good, but I guess I'm just a fan of the little bit lower rankings, and then the high ranks for the very best.
But I would love it if Marcus and Sean/Shawn got the respect they deserve, I just don't know if they can get it after a 6-10 season.