Official Madden 2010 - Player Ratings

[BossMyShiiUp24]

Yea, I like them too. I hated having every player frrom 85-99. It made the 85 guys nearly equal to the superstars. Smart move to change everything up like they did.

I bet by the third roster update all the ratings will shoot back up

 

[Poundtherock]

Vikes are up @ http://espn.go.com/videogames/features/madden/madden10?teamId=31

 

[MRN]

Lol at Bobby Wade being at least 2 overall points better than every WR on the Bears. I guarantee you that Devin Hester is a better receiver than he is.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Yea, I like them too. I hated having every player frrom 85-99. It made the 85 guys nearly equal to the superstars. Smart move to change everything up like they did.

Exactly.

When every starter was basically 82+, there was no difference between the elite and the good and the good to the average and the average to the bad between units.

Example, with just these four revealed rosters...

Vikings have maybe the worst QB situation in the league...their QBs now accurately represent that. Not only are they bad, but they are terribly rated and have horrible gameplay ratings.

On the opposite end, they have one of the best D-Lines in the game...try running on that unit when your OL is rated with 70's...it shouldn't happen and now, hopefully, it won't happen.

One of the things that has been missing from the game for YEARS.

Now what needs to accurately be represented in the game, and we won't know until we get the game and we see variation in franchise mode, is whether or not these new rankings are adjusted properly during a franchise's player ratings increase/decrease in the progression part of franchise.

Example...Let's say Adrian Peterson suffers an early season leg injury, causing him to miss the season...does he stay @ a 97? does he increase to a 98/99 because of natural "young player progression" or does he drop down to a 95/94/93/etc because his attributes take a hit after an injury.

Also, not just injury, but less than stellar seasons. Being a 90 overall tackle, Bryant McKinnie needs to "play" like a 90 overall tackle...so, if he allows, lets say 12 sacks in a season...does he stay at a 90 or does he drop to say...into the 70's because he played like that the season before.

If all we see is progression, these numbers by season 2-3-4 in the game's franchise will be back at square one.

Should be interesting.

 

[Bmore]

Nick Collins looks like a beast.

 

[BossMyShiiUp24]

damn the really decreased peoples speed this year. the corners are super slow

 

[Helicopter]

Ok lets be reasonable about Bulgers rating, he is not better than vince young so count out more than 70 ovr. Im going around somewhere 65 for bulger.

Vince Young may end up being the #3 QB on the roster this year behind Collins and Ramsey. Bulger, in my opinion, is better than Collins and Ramsey when he is healthy. Therefore, Bulger is definitely better than Vince Young. Most QBs are.

 

[Helicopter]

The only reason Vince Young may end up at #3 is because he got injured. If the injury never happened we would be looking at vince young 85+

He had a good rookie year...well decent rookie year, but has been horrific ever since.
His rating is about even with his IQ. They got it right with that 68. He doesn't play like a 85+ and shouldn't be rated as such.

Once teams figured out that he always rolls to the right, can't read a defense, locks onto receivers, doesn't accurately get it to them after he locks onto them, and has the emotional stability of a child with Downs Syndrome, it was to the end of the bench by himself he went.

He's just not an NFL quarterback.:crying:

 

[BossMyShiiUp24]

WILDCAT!

yea qb's like vince young will be good for that. I think the titans will be one of the top teams to use the formation on with vince young subbing in and have the speed of johnson