Madden 2010 breakdown

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:19 pm

Redskins on Madden 2010 release ratings.

Not too bad. I think they have our O-Line rated a little high. Other than that (and TTIT is WAAAAYY too highlyrated), Here's the rest of the teams.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:23 pm

Well, Haynesworth is definitely a beast!

Cappster · Post by **Cappster** » Tue Jul 28, 2009 2:29 pm

I hate EA for not bringing Madden to the PC and for hogging all of the rights to the NFL licensing. You guys enjoy the game.

MDSKINSFAN · Post by **MDSKINSFAN** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 10:45 am

Deangelo Hall should be higher than a 79 overall. I guess everyone except Redskins fans overlooked how well he played for us last year.

And how is Fletcher not in the 90's? Constantly underrated.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:21 am

From what I read about 2010, they've changed the grading curve from previous years. When you have someone like Cool

ey who's 91, he's truly going to be elite, as opposed to previously. As a side note, Devin Thomas is severely UNDERRATED in 09 Xbox360. Even rated @ 71-77, that man is a monster!

You'll have to take what I remembered with a grain of salt, b/c as of right now, I don't have a link.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:31 am

VetSkinsFan wrote:From what I read about 2010, they've changed the grading curve from previous years. When you have someone like ey who's 91, he's truly going to be elite, as opposed to previously. As a side note, Devin Thomas is severely UNDERRATED in 09 Xbox360. Even rated @ 71-77, that man is a monster!

You'll have to take what I remembered with a grain of salt, b/c as of right now, I don't have a link.

I remember reading about this. The basic idea is to spread out the realistic "good" player stats, so that they have more room for levels of skill. It will also make the elite players stand out a little more, which has been missing in the series.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 11:57 am

Irn-Bru wrote:
VetSkinsFan wrote:From what I read about 2010, they've changed the grading curve from previous years. When you have someone like ey who's 91, he's truly going to be elite, as opposed to previously. As a side note, Devin Thomas is severely UNDERRATED in 09 Xbox360. Even rated @ 71-77, that man is a monster!

You'll have to take what I remembered with a grain of salt, b/c as of right now, I don't have a link.

I remember reading about this. The basic idea is to spread out the realistic "good" player stats, so that they have more room for levels of skill. It will also make the elite players stand out a little more, which has been missing in the series.

Exactly!

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:24 pm

Oh, and I also remember reading that part of this shift in the "weight" of skill makes it so that speed is not the be-all-end-all for RBs, WRs, and CBs. So I think they are trying to build more into what makes a good player, which means that the average rating of your average player is going to suffer nominally.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:37 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:Oh, and I also remember reading that part of this shift in the "weight" of skill makes it so that speed is not the be-all-end-all for RBs, WRs, and CBs. So I think they are trying to build more into what makes a good player, which means that the average rating of your average player is going to suffer nominally.

That's going to hurt my gameplay ...I'm not that good to begin with. I think I threw 8 INTs last nite vs the Chargers.

MDSKINSFAN · Post by **MDSKINSFAN** » Wed Jul 29, 2009 4:31 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
VetSkinsFan wrote:From what I read about 2010, they've changed the grading curve from previous years. When you have someone like ey who's 91, he's truly going to be elite, as opposed to previously. As a side note, Devin Thomas is severely UNDERRATED in 09 Xbox360. Even rated @ 71-77, that man is a monster!

You'll have to take what I remembered with a grain of salt, b/c as of right now, I don't have a link.

I remember reading about this. The basic idea is to spread out the realistic "good" player stats, so that they have more room for levels of skill. It will also make the elite players stand out a little more, which has been missing in the series.

I remember hearing the same thing. They said they were going to be "harsher" on the ratings to make the best stand out. So recievers like Randy Moss and Larry Fitzgerald will be able to dominate most corners in this game unlike past years when you could put any corner on them and could at least control them.

I played the demo last night and players like Marion Barber and Brandon Jacobs dominate with their strength. They can break almost any corner or safety's tackles and fight for every yard. It plays and looks extremely realistic.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:41 am

MDSKINSFAN wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:
VetSkinsFan wrote:From what I read about 2010, they've changed the grading curve from previous years. When you have someone like ey who's 91, he's truly going to be elite, as opposed to previously. As a side note, Devin Thomas is severely UNDERRATED in 09 Xbox360. Even rated @ 71-77, that man is a monster!

You'll have to take what I remembered with a grain of salt, b/c as of right now, I don't have a link.

I remember reading about this. The basic idea is to spread out the realistic "good" player stats, so that they have more room for levels of skill. It will also make the elite players stand out a little more, which has been missing in the series.

I remember hearing the same thing. They said they were going to be "harsher" on the ratings to make the best stand out. So recievers like Randy Moss and Larry Fitzgerald will be able to dominate most corners in this game unlike past years when you could put any corner on them and could at least control them.

I played the demo last night and players like Marion Barber and Brandon Jacobs dominate with their strength. They can break almost any corner or safety's tackles and fight for every yard. It plays and looks extremely realistic.

Does Romo choke in the first round of the playoffs? THEN it would be realistic!

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:01 am

VetSkinsFan wrote:Does Romo choke in the first round of the playoffs? THEN it would be realistic!

I visit the OS forums a lot, the madden devs post there and get our feedback. I also twittered Ian and Donny a lot and was one of the few Skins fans that aided in getting Hall his ratings boast.

To answer your question Vet, no there isn't. I asked this very question to one of the devs, but it was looked into. A sort of "clutch" rating.

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:41 am

Chris Luva Luva wrote:
VetSkinsFan wrote:Does Romo choke in the first round of the playoffs? THEN it would be realistic!

I visit the OS forums a lot, the madden devs post there and get our feedback. I also twittered Ian and Donny a lot and was one of the few Skins fans that aided in getting Hall his ratings boast.

To answer your question Vet, no there isn't. I asked this very question to one of the devs, but it was looked into. A sort of "clutch" rating.

For the highlighted portions, CLL, I personally thank you. I wanted to take off the 14th so I can get acquainted with my new obsession, but since it's a Friday, I have no need :shock:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:56 am

VetSkinsFan wrote:For the highlighted portions, CLL, I personally thank you. I wanted to take off the 14th so I can get acquainted with my new obsession, but since it's a Friday, I have no need

LOL, I was all in the mix on that one. Donny Moore (the ratings guy) is really open to opinion. You know Hall was originally a 60-something and we all kinda griped about it, considering Halls stellar play. We gave him the stats, explained how the system here fits him and is similiar to what was run in ATL, etc. etc. So they gave him a boost and the rest is up to Hall.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:21 am

They had hall in the 60s? :shock:

Even at his lowest point in Oakland he wasn't that bad.

Or, with the way EA has tweaked the ratings, is 60 the new 80? :lol:

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:24 am

Irn-Bru wrote:They had hall in the 60s? Even at his lowest point in Oakland he wasn't that bad.

Or, with the way EA has tweaked the ratings, is 60 the new 80?

No, 60 is horrific. :lol:

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 11:25 am

I would have thought that physical abilities alone would keep him above 60, even with sub-par skills (which is about the worst you could say of his lowest point).

Yeah, I can see why you all jumped on EA for that. No reason to have him that low. . .I guess EA was picking up on the popular expert analysis (like at Football Outsiders) saying that Hall is way overrated. What's the opposite of hype?

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:01 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:I would have thought that physical abilities alone would keep him above 60, even with sub-par skills (which is about the worst you could say of his lowest point).

Yeah, I can see why you all jumped on EA for that. No reason to have him that low. . .I guess EA was picking up on the popular expert analysis (like at Football Outsiders) saying that Hall is way overrated. What's the opposite of hype?

How they rate is so freaking flawed... I'm sure that they lowered his speed, acceleration and awareness due to his poor play. His 60 rating was based off of Oakland, for some reason his stint in Wash didn't exist to them. It's not like he played ONE GAME for us. Stupid.

I recommended that they have 1-2 two people dedicated to each team so that we can get more accurate and deep ratings. They won't do that though, I hate the NFL and EA for this monopoly.

MDSKINSFAN · Post by **MDSKINSFAN** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:42 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:How they rate is so freaking flawed... I'm sure that they lowered his speed, acceleration and awareness due to his poor play. His 60 rating was based off of Oakland, for some reason his stint in Wash didn't exist to them. It's not like he played ONE GAME for us. Stupid.

For some reason his stint in Washington didn't exist to a lot of football experts and analysts. They are supposedly experts but they ignore his production in that short period of time. It irritates me that the ignorant analysts like Schlereth and other ESPN guys trash the Redskins for "over paying" for Hall and they claim he hasn't produced in the past year, how he's overrated, and every other knock that the media has had on Deangelo Hall since he began his career.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 12:43 pm

Well, to be a bit fair...he needs to do it for an entire season.

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:33 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, to be a bit fair...he needs to do it for an entire season.

He did it for several seasons in ATL. They are basing their analysis off of part of one season spent in Oakland, playing in a system that didn't fit his talents, opposite a shut down CB. No wonder he got so many balls thrown his way.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:59 pm

Deadskins wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, to be a bit fair...he needs to do it for an entire season.

He did it for several seasons in ATL. They are basing their analysis off of part of one season spent in Oakland, playing in a system that didn't fit his talents, opposite a shut down CB. No wonder he got so many balls thrown his way.

Ugh, duh.... I said the same thing a few posts earlier. Difference being, he needs to do it here.

What he did in ATL means nothing. I don't care what he did there, nor do I care about the 80's or 1992. 2009....

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:01 pm

I guess you told me, huh? :lol:

VetSkinsFan · Post by **VetSkinsFan** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:24 pm

Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, to be a bit fair...he needs to do it for an entire season.

You can't hold it against him if he's never had the chance. All we can go on is what he DID have a chance to illustrate. And he rocked here last year. I imagine that he won't deteriorate this year.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Thu Jul 30, 2009 2:26 pm

VetSkinsFan wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Well, to be a bit fair...he needs to do it for an entire season.

You can't hold it against him if he's never had the chance. All we can go on is what he DID have a chance to illustrate. And he rocked here last year. I imagine that he won't deteriorate this year.

Im saying that he needs to do it throughout this entire year to justify EA bumping his rating back into the high 90s. T