Madden Gripes!
Well, i rushed out to my local Wal Mart to pick up Madden 08 and this game is pretty impressive. Gameplay is great all around, but i wanted to whine about a few Bear ratings that got real screwed up.
#1 - Kyle Orton is a 71. In and of itself, this isn't terrible, he is a third stringer...but here is where it gets bad, Chris Leak is a 72! What!? Kyle Orton was better in college, was a better prospect in the draft, Won 10 games as a rookie quarterback...but Chris Leak is rated better than him? Seriously, boost Orton to a 75.
#2 - Mark Anderson is slower than Alex Brown...seriously. Mark Anderson is only 1 overall point behind Brown (85 to 84) but his speed only registers 79 while Brown gets 83. What Chicago Bears team did EA Sports model their 08 Bears team after?
#3 - This one isn't too bad, but they made Mike Brown the starting Free Safety (luckily they granted him with 88 speed) and Arch the starting SS. The way i see the Bears depth chart sitting will be Manning starting at FS and Brown starting at SS with Arch as the backup SS and McGowan the backup FS.
Also, this isn't too worthy of it's own gripe #, but after Harris (97) and Adams (77) the next best is Dusty D at 66...seems a little low since most of the below average players usually register around 70. One thing to look forward to come the opening day roster update...Darwin Walker is rated at 85 so we will have a nice Harris with Walker/Adams combo.
//end semi-sorta-kinda rant
0 recs |
30 comments
Comments
How good are the Bears, overall?
by shawndgoldman on
Aug 14, 2007 10:15 AM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Here is a list of player ratings
A lot of overating and no vastly underated players. The biggest overatings in my estimation are:
Wale 89
Leak 72
m. Brown 90
by Devin47 on
Aug 14, 2007 11:22 AM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Mike Brown is easily
by mikebdot on
Aug 14, 2007 11:40 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It's not the same rating system....
(you should be able to kind of read this)
2006 Scouting Report - Scouts Inc.
Grade: 76 | Key
Alert: None
Comment:
Brown is an old-fashioned football player who plays bigger and faster than his measurables suggest. He is tough, smart and somewhat underrated. He might be the league's most disciplined and technically sound safety. He does all the little things and never gets sloppy or careless. He has great instincts, and his preparation and recognition skills allow him to get great jumps on the ball. He wastes virtually no motion and closes extremely well on balls. His first-step quickness is outstanding and he excels at reading quarterbacks and anticipating plays. He can cover the deep half or attack the line of scrimmage. He has excellent range in cover 2 and can regularly reach the perimeter. He covers a lot of ground and rarely is fooled by play fakes. He can turn and run with tight ends and backs. He is not, like many cover 2 safeties, a liability in man-to-man coverage. He is an excellent tackler who consistently breaks down and wraps up. His excellent leaping ability negates his size deficit in many matchups. His size might hinder his durability, but he otherwise makes up for any physical shortcomings--and then some.
Bears - Top 10 Safety - Top 10 All Players - Top 10
RK PLAYER GRADE RK PLAYER GRADE RK PLAYER GRADE
1 Brian Urlacher 95 1 Ed Reed 95 1 Tom Brady 98
2 Olin Kreutz 80 2 Troy Polamalu 90 2 Peyton Manning 96
3 Adewale Ogunleye 80 3 Roy Williams 85 3 Brian Urlacher 95
4 Roberto Garza 79 4 Rodney Harrison 85 4 Chad Johnson 95
5 John Tait 78 5 Sean Taylor 82 5 Marvin Harrison 95
6 Lance Briggs 77 6 Brian Dawkins 81 6 Reggie Wayne 95
7 Mike Brown 76 7 Bob Sanders 79 7 Tony Gonzalez 95
8 Adam Archuleta 75 8 Tony Parrish 78 8 LaDainian Tomlinson 95
9 Alex Brown 75 9 Michael Lewis 77 9 Jonathan Ogden 95
10 Charles Tillman 75 10 Mike Brown 76 10 Ed Reed 95
by tyger1147 on
Aug 14, 2007 11:45 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Behind Tony Parrish?
by mikebdot on
Aug 14, 2007 12:40 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
In my opinion...
Or, in other words, what can his expected impact be for his team for the entire year. Mike Brown has missed 33 of the Bears' last 53 games. He's OBVIOUSLY had less of an overall impact for his team than others. I think it's fair to say that it will continue that way.
by tyger1147 on
Aug 14, 2007 4:03 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
In my opinion...
by mikebdot on
Aug 14, 2007 4:05 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
While I might agree...
So... taking that into consideration, and assuming they take some sort of average (weighted or not) of the various 0-99 rankings, it seems pretty obvious that a video game does take that into consideration. It's pretty simple, actually.
(Not only that, but the afore-mentioned was in reference to the scouting information.)
by tyger1147 on
Aug 14, 2007 11:40 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Gambler's fallacy:
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 7:53 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Gambler's fallacy
by dejackso on
Aug 15, 2007 8:32 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
They can predict
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 8:57 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
To some extent, they can...
Now, you are correct that someone injuries are flukes and that predicting the type of injury (season injury, nagging, whatever) may not be predictable...but one can separate injury proned players from other players if one knows all the factors.
Ex: Shawn Alexander last year was predicted to be injured due to his number of carries the previous season.
by dejackso on
Aug 15, 2007 9:42 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
God, I hate when retards say stuff like that.
STFU w/ the "stats can't predict the future" crap. It's creating a straw man.
by tyger1147 on
Aug 15, 2007 9:06 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
First of all...
I didn't say "stats can't predict the future" I said the past can't predict the future. I'm talking specifically about an "injury bug".
I remember earlier in the season when everyone said "oh, Barry Bonds will break the record by the all-star break". Hardy har har.
People use statistics to make all sorts of piss poor predictions too. Just because they are right half the time doesn't mean the predictions were right, it could also mean they were lucky.
It's all a numbers game. I know this. I just don't think injuries fall into that category. Especially since Brown's injuries were not the same injuries. Knee, calf, foot. I think that was the progression? Even if they were all on the same leg, I think they are completely independent. But I could be wrong. I've allowed that possibility.
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 9:26 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I just can't take the pressure!!!!!!!
It's already been a long week at work. Need to vent.
I think my hope that Brown will play the whole season is clouding my judgment. I still think every injury is a new dice roll, but perhaps some roll d20s and others roll a d6.
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 9:42 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Cough, dork!
However, some players (McNabb, Vick, RBs with more than 370 carries in a season) are more likely to get hurt in some ways because of the way that they play the game, prepare for the game, etc..
by dejackso on
Aug 15, 2007 9:46 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
One of my pet theories...
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 10:03 AM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
This maybe true
Don't you think that trained professional medical staffs would have the exact answer on this? If so, wouldn't they disallow taping that prevents smaller injuries only to aid bigger ones?
by Chad on
Aug 15, 2007 12:24 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Well, the taping
In my opinion, the physiology of the body is not as understood as it really could be. How does one go about testing the tensile strength of a live tibia? I mean, they can take bones without the muscles and ligaments all in working order from a cadaver and figure it out pretty close, but they're all approximations. Same goes with how much strain is placed on the knee when making a cut on artifical turf with a taped ankle as you're hit by Warren fucking Sapp. I'm sure they do studies on this from time to time modeling the body, etc., but pretty much every single physiology professor will tell you "don't let your kids play football, it will destroy their bodies, especially their brains".
The whole "Jocks are dumb" stereotype is pretty well true because they take more hits to the head than someone in the band (on average...those drumline dudes can get kind of crazy with their sticks/mallets).
by mikebdot on
Aug 15, 2007 12:40 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Correction
I've seen interviews with him and coaches saying he never took anything. It's called being tough.
Sure, he'd ice and tape but according to him and others he wouldn't take painkillers.
by PopeFlick on
Aug 16, 2007 7:54 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What depth chart are you looking at?
This is what the Bears have been saying ALL ALONG, ever since they've brought Adam over. Brown at Free, Arch at Strong, Manning the first off the bench at either spot. Maybe you want it different, but Madden is going to default it the way the team has it. Madden has this one correct.
Besides, hasn't Mike Brown always been a free and arch always been a strong? And aren't they the two best safeties? Why would you bring someone in to be strictly an insurance back up?
by tyger1147 on
Aug 14, 2007 11:40 AM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Oh...my bad...
by lopey986 on
Aug 14, 2007 12:45 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I dunno...
by tyger1147 on
Aug 14, 2007 3:49 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
hmm
i doubt that.
by mike b on
Aug 14, 2007 8:30 PM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
College stats
Games / Comp / Att / Comp % / YDS / TD / INT
2001 Purdue
| 6 | 69 142 48.6% 686 2 3
2002 Purdue
| 12 | 192 317 60.1% 2257 13 9
2003 Purdue
| 13 | 251 414 60.6% 2885 15 7
2004 Purdue
| 11 | 236 389 60.7% 3090 31 5
Total
| 42 | 748 1262 59.3% 8918 61 24
Chris Leak
Games / Comp / Att / Comp % / YDS / TD / INT
2003 Florida
| | 190 320 59.4% 2435 16 11
2004 Florida
| | 238 399 59.6% 3197 29 12
2005 Florida
| | 235 374 62.8% 2639 20 6
2006 Florida
| | 232 365 63.6% 2942 23 13
Total
| | 895 1458 61.4% 11213 88 42
I don't get how you can say that Orton had the better college career. It looks pretty one sided in favor of Leak. Orton might have been a better prospect, but completion percentage is the best indicator of NFL success when translating from college stats...and they're both pretty good in that department.
by dejackso on
Aug 15, 2007 8:44 AM CDT
reply
actions
0 recs
Orton...
by lopey986 on
Aug 15, 2007 1:04 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yeah?
2004
1 Matt Leinart Southern California 1,325
2 Adrian Peterson Oklahoma Fr. 997
3 Jason White Oklahoma Sr. 957
4 Alex Smith Utah Jr. 635
5 Reggie Bush Southern California So. 597
6 Cedric Benson Texas Sr. 187
7 Jason Campbell Auburn Sr. 162
8 J.J. Arrington California Sr. 115
9 Aaron Rodgers California Jr. 67
10 Braylon Edwards Michigan Sr. 62
by dejackso on
Aug 15, 2007 4:38 PM CDT
up
reply
actions
0 recs









