My Thoughts on Player Potential

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • St. Francisco
    45-35 Never Forget
    • Feb 2009
    • 4753

    My Thoughts on Player Potential

    Let me begin by saying that I like the addition of potential to players. It's a good indicator of how much you can expect out of an individual, but it could be soooooo much more. Right now, the feature is too straight-forward, but I have an idea on how to make it dynamic, and much more fun.

    Potential is defined as "capable of being or becoming". So in Madden terms, potential should be a measure of how much that player could progress, or how much he could fall off next season. Right now, it's not really used like that. For instance, Peyton Manning has A potential...why? He's not going to progress much further than he is. Other players past their prime also carry A and B potentials, when it's well known that these players should be regressing due to their age. I think a re-working of the definitions of each potential grade is in order.

    Another major factor that I think would significantly add to the fun is season stats. Stats should not only determine how well a player progresses, but what his potential becomes next season. With this in mind, this is my proposal for the new potential grades:

    High Potential (A Potential) - A player with high potential will be relatively young more times than not, and should be fairly rare in the game. The high potential grade will signify that the player has a high chance of progressing rapidly with excellent or good season stats, or moderately with average season stats. High potential could be assigned to a young QB waiting in the wings, who will develop with age. However, too many years in a row of sitting on the bench and doing nothing should impact his potential, and potentially bring it down to above average. Likewise, players with high potential who perform poorly over multiple starts will see limited progression at first, and over time could see their potential brought down to above average.

    Above Average Potential (B Potential) - This is where most highly-drafted rookies will fall, as well as most young players in the game. Players will progress moderately with good season stats, but little to not at all with below-average season stats. A backup player with above average potential will see small yet steady progression through his younger years. A player who performs poorly for two or more seasons could see his potential knocked back to average. Likewise, a player who performs lights out consistently could become high potential.

    Average Potential (C Potential) - The majority of the league will fall here. Players with average potential won't see much progression, but also won't see much regression. This is a perfect potential grade for highly-rated starters across the league, as well as backups or journeymen who seem to have become as good as they're ever going to be. Above average season stats would allow the player to progress very little each season, average season stats would keep him the same, and below average season stats would see the player regress very little each season. Excellent and consistent season stats could move the player up to above average potential, but poor and consistent season stats could move the player down to below average potential.

    Below Average Potential (D Potential) - Late round long shots in the draft, or players who are coming up on the old age are two examples of players who would fall in this category. Players with below average potential will see steady regression each season unless they play lights out, in which case they will see no progression or regression, or could be moved up to average potential. Players who have poor season stats will see their regress quicker.

    Poor Potential (F Potential) - The ultimate project, or players past their prime. Players with poor potential will see rapid regression through the years. Even with excellent season stats, they may still regress a few points each season. It would take consistent results to move them up to below average potential. Aging players would not be able to move up a potential grade, and instead will only be able to slow down the regression by performing well each season. A player who performs average or poorly will see dramatic regression each season.

    As you can see, this new potential system would rely heavily on age and season stats, so there's a lot of room for error if it isn't implemented into the game properly. Perhaps a system that measures the player against the league's average stats at the position as it relates to the amount of games that the players either starts or plays in, and a system to determine what age is appropriate to begin downgrading a player's potential at each position are needed. Still, it would allow for a fun experience in the game. Imagine your 5th round pick coming in with average potential...he gets some good playing time, and moves up to above average. Now he's a starter, and by year four of his career he has high potential, and is rapidly becoming a star in the league.

    In closing, potential should not be a measure of how good a player is. It should be a measure of how much a player would either progress or regress in any given season. Potential should be dynamic, not set in stone.
  • FirstTimer
    Freeman Error

    • Feb 2009
    • 18729

    #2
    Originally posted by St. Francisco
    Let me begin by saying that I like the addition of potential to players. It's a good indicator of how much you can expect out of an individual, but it could be soooooo much more. Right now, the feature is too straight-forward, but I have an idea on how to make it dynamic, and much more fun.

    Potential is defined as "capable of being or becoming". So in Madden terms, potential should be a measure of how much that player could progress, or how much he could fall off next season. Right now, it's not really used like that. For instance, Peyton Manning has A potential...why? He's not going to progress much further than he is. Other players past their prime also carry A and B potentials, when it's well known that these players should be regressing due to their age. I think a re-working of the definitions of each potential grade is in order.

    Another major factor that I think would significantly add to the fun is season stats. Stats should not only determine how well a player progresses, but what his potential becomes next season. With this in mind, this is my proposal for the new potential grades:

    High Potential (A Potential) - A player with high potential will be relatively young more times than not, and should be fairly rare in the game. The high potential grade will signify that the player has a high chance of progressing rapidly with excellent or good season stats, or moderately with average season stats. High potential could be assigned to a young QB waiting in the wings, who will develop with age. However, too many years in a row of sitting on the bench and doing nothing should impact his potential, and potentially bring it down to above average. Likewise, players with high potential who perform poorly over multiple starts will see limited progression at first, and over time could see their potential brought down to above average.

    Above Average Potential (B Potential) - This is where most highly-drafted rookies will fall, as well as most young players in the game. Players will progress moderately with good season stats, but little to not at all with below-average season stats. A backup player with above average potential will see small yet steady progression through his younger years. A player who performs poorly for two or more seasons could see his potential knocked back to average. Likewise, a player who performs lights out consistently could become high potential.

    Average Potential (C Potential) - The majority of the league will fall here. Players with average potential won't see much progression, but also won't see much regression. This is a perfect potential grade for highly-rated starters across the league, as well as backups or journeymen who seem to have become as good as they're ever going to be. Above average season stats would allow the player to progress very little each season, average season stats would keep him the same, and below average season stats would see the player regress very little each season. Excellent and consistent season stats could move the player up to above average potential, but poor and consistent season stats could move the player down to below average potential.

    Below Average Potential (D Potential) - Late round long shots in the draft, or players who are coming up on the old age are two examples of players who would fall in this category. Players with below average potential will see steady regression each season unless they play lights out, in which case they will see no progression or regression, or could be moved up to average potential. Players who have poor season stats will see their regress more quickly.

    Poor Potential (F Potential) - The ultimate project, or players past their prime. Players with poor potential will see rapid regression through the years. Even with excellent season stats, they may still regress a few points each season. It would take consistent results to move them up to below average potential. Aging players would not be able to move up a potential grade, and instead will only be able to slow down the regression by performing well each season. A player who performs average of poorly will see dramatic regression each season.

    As you can see, this new potential system would rely heavily on age and season stats, so there's a lot of room for error if it isn't implemented into the game properly. Perhaps a system that measures the player against the league's average stats at the position as it relates to the amount of games that the players either starts or plays in, and a system to determine what age is appropriate to begin downgrading a player's potential at each position are needed. Still, it would allow for a fun experience in the game. Imagine your 5th round pick coming in with average potential...he gets some good playing time, and moves up to above average. Now he's a starter, and by year four of his career he has high potential, and is rapidly becoming a star in the league.

    Potential should be dynamic, not set in stone.
    I'd be all for them going to an MLB the show type progression model.

    Comment

    • St. Francisco
      45-35 Never Forget
      • Feb 2009
      • 4753

      #3
      Originally posted by FirstTimer
      I'd be all for them going to an MLB the show type progression model.
      How does it work on that game? I'm not into baseball all that much.

      Comment

      • krulmichael
        STRAAAAANGE MUSIC!
        • Feb 2009
        • 10721

        #4
        Originally posted by St. Francisco
        How does it work on that game? I'm not into baseball all that much.
        Don't quote me for this, but I think it's not set in stone like you were saying.

        Let's say a D potential guy has a huge year, hits like 40 HR's, 200 RBI's, etc. His potential the following would be raised to possibly a C or B next season.

        Twitch Channel
        http://www.twitch.tv/krulmichael20


        Season I: 10-6 (NFC North Champions)
        Season II: 9-7 (NFC North Champions)
        Season III: 13-3 (NFC Champions)
        Season IV: 11-5 (NFC North Champions)
        Season V: 2-1

        Comment

        • FirstTimer
          Freeman Error

          • Feb 2009
          • 18729

          #5
          Originally posted by krulmichael
          Don't quote me for this, but I think it's not set in stone like you were saying.

          Let's say a D potential guy has a huge year, hits like 40 HR's, 200 RBI's, etc. His potential the following would be raised to possibly a C or B next season.
          Essentially correct.

          Potential grades can fluctuate.

          Comment

          • G-men
            Posts too much
            • Nov 2011
            • 7579

            #6
            What krul said is exactly what needs to happen. For example, in Madden 11, Arian Foster would have had a D or C potential because he was undrafted and relatively unknown. However, if you put up the exact same stats with him in your first season of franchise, he would not become an A potential like he is now, and his overall would have gone up no more than 1 or 2 points.

            Comment

            • Macken
              Blah
              • Oct 2008
              • 7185

              #7
              Cliff notes?

              Comment

              • killgod
                OHHHH WHEN THE REDSSSSS
                • Oct 2008
                • 4714

                #8
                Originally posted by Macken
                Cliff notes?
                EA still sells Franchise mode short.

                Comment

                • Macken
                  Blah
                  • Oct 2008
                  • 7185

                  #9
                  Originally posted by killgod
                  EA still sells Franchise mode short.
                  we need another thread for that?

                  Comment

                  • DJ Rhude
                    #42 G.O.A.T.
                    • Feb 2009
                    • 4359

                    #10
                    One thing I noticed this year is if you have a player with F potential, and you bump his ratings his potential will also go up...so if my guy is rated 58 ovr and I have a good year with him stat wise and I were to edit his ratings so he went up 10 points to 68, his potential will also go up to around a C or D

                    It may not be the ideal way to make it so potential is not static, but it is an option

                    The best potential system I've seen implemented is in 2K's MLB 2K11 baseball game....I would love to see Madden mimic it one day

                    Check it out: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?not...50114527013194

                    Comment

                    • Fox1994
                      Posts too much
                      • Dec 2008
                      • 5327

                      #11
                      That's an excellent idea and I hope they implement something similar (preferably same) in the near future. But it's anyone's guess to whether or not that will happen. EA seems to have a listening problem when it comes to fans.

                      Comment

                      • Derrville
                        Dallas has no coaching...
                        • Jul 2009
                        • 5321

                        #12
                        I think potentials should fluctuate based off of performance. If Editing players didnt edit potential as well Id be much more disappointed.

                        Comment

                        • Bear Pand
                          RIP Indy Colts
                          • Feb 2009
                          • 5945

                          #13
                          They need to go get rid of potential ratings. Shit makes absolutely no sense. I hate how they code that stuff in and basically predetermine who progresses and who doesn't.

                          Progression should just be based on production and coaching. It'd be cool to add other things like work ethic / attitude but stuff like that is tough to do in a video game. And when players progress it should be mainly the non-physical attributes (stuff like awarness, ball carrier vision) that improve.

                          Players could still have a production letter grade assigned to them but it should be some sort of rating based on their size/athleticism, age and scheme they play in. For example, a 6'6 22 y/o WR with 95 speed should have more potential than a 25 y/o 5'10 80 speed guy. The letter grade would have no impact on how much each player progresses (again it'd come down to production/coaching) it'd just be there to help illustrate that one player has a higher ceiling.

                          EA has already done a lot of the stuff necessary for this in their fb games before. I guess it's probably safer the way they do it now though cause they'd find 10 ways to fuck things up if they changed it.

                          Comment

                          • bucky
                            #50? WTF?
                            • Feb 2009
                            • 5408

                            #14
                            Stats based progression is a shitty model for progression.

                            It's totally ass backwards.

                            First you progress, then your production increases, not the other way around.

                            A whole shit load of real world factors should drive progression.

                            Progression drives ratings movement either up or down for each ability.

                            Ratings should drive production.

                            Comment

                            Working...