Finally wanted to create a separate thread posting the most recent roster file for use with the updated uniforms I posted, and the new stadiums posted by elguapo. I was given Mike's permission a LONG time ago to alter the player ratings as I saw fit, so have finally begun to play with those. So far, I have only changed ratings for the following teams (decided to start with those teams from the era I know best - late 70's ): 1976 & 77 Raiders, 1977, 78 and 79 Cowboys; and 1978 & 79 Steelers. Most of the QB's on ALL teams have been re-rated.
I will continue to work through more as I go, and hope to have the full roster edited over the next several months. I am taking my time with this and trying my best to assess every player individually. Thank God for pro-football-reference.com as that has been my bible for this project.
The rating system I'm using is very generic - more of a test, really. I have each position and skill set to one rating, depending on the level of each player - i.e. Poor, Below Average, Average, Above Average, Pro Bowl level, and All Pro/HOF level. Very simple, and largely inspired by the old Strat-o-Matic game. So you'll notice some players with almost identical ratings and some large variances in some of the other categories. Athletic ratings such as Speed, Acceleration, Agility and Strength are more objective in nature, whereas football skills such as Blocking, Tackling, Passing, "Carrying", Catching and Kicking / Kick returning are subjective. One will note that many of the players from the era I have re-rated are rated lower than average on Speed and Strength, in particular. This is by design, especially the latter as I try to take into effect the differences in player weight then vs. now (particularly with the linemen).
Again, nothing too scientific here, just trying to bring them more in line with the current teams overall, but with a level that's reasonable. So far, I'm not very happy with the Avg Rushing Yards per carry, so don't know if that is a ratings issue, or sliders - i'm using the old Redwolf CPU vs. CPU sliders. All thoughts and suggestions are welcome!
Version "1.0" below....
Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
- Attachments
-
- MuscleMike-LM67.zip
- (948.22 KiB) Downloaded 148 times
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Here's version 1.1:
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in BOLD):
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
76, 77 Raiders
77, 78, 79, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
78, 79 Steelers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90 49ers
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in BOLD):
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
76, 77 Raiders
77, 78, 79, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
78, 79 Steelers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90 49ers
- Attachments
-
- MuscleMike-LM67 ver 1.1.zip
- (950.33 KiB) Downloaded 113 times
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Thanks for the roster. I appreciate it.
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:18 am
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Wonder how mike came up with ratings.?
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Footballlover wrote:Wonder how mike came up with ratings.?
I had printed out an old post from Muscle_Mike about how to make custom teams. In it he says the following about ratings...
"On ratings I don't really follow a set rule. I'll base it on stats. Sure some RB may be the fastest on the team, but if he only rushed for 20 total yards during the 68 season I won't give him a 90 speed because I don't want him breaking away for 80 yard TDs if that's not what happened so I'll keep his numbers low. Same with WRs.
On QB's I'll drop the accuracy lower than 90 if he had more INT's than TD's. I like to keep most of the DB's slower than WR's so I get a few more long bombs in the game. Just look at the stats to figure ratings.
If the defense sucked I don't give a lot of 90 tackle ratings. Speed and awareness also get dropped a little lower for these guys. Unfortunately EA made it so Madden goes into comeback mode in sim games so sometimes a bad defense will look good and a good offense may sometimes go 3 and out."
-
- Veteran
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2013 9:18 am
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
Interesting.. Thank You...
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
version 1.2 attached.
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in BOLD):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74 Vikings
76, 77 Raiders
77, 78, 79, 81, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
78, 79 Steelers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90 49ers
00 Ravens
I'll focus on finishing the remaining 60's and 70's Raider teams, 70's Steelers and Vikings teams, and 80's/90's 49er teams next, as those should be quicker to do. Then I'll start on the others, probably working my way from the current teams back.
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in BOLD):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74 Vikings
76, 77 Raiders
77, 78, 79, 81, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
78, 79 Steelers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90 49ers
00 Ravens
I'll focus on finishing the remaining 60's and 70's Raider teams, 70's Steelers and Vikings teams, and 80's/90's 49er teams next, as those should be quicker to do. Then I'll start on the others, probably working my way from the current teams back.
- Attachments
-
- MuscleMike-LM67 ver 1.2.zip
- (950.85 KiB) Downloaded 101 times
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
As I'm working my way through the historic roster and changing player ratings, it has dawned on me that perhaps we've been managing the HB vs. FB thing wrong as it relates to these historic rosters all along. There is a clear difference in how the FB position is played today vs. how it was prior to the 80's and 90's. Traditionally, the FB was just another running back - usually the bigger and stonger of the two backs that occupied most backfields - and the one the offense centered around most on short yardage and the usual running downs. The HB (or tailback) was the smaller and quicker of the two, and was the better at catching passes in the flat, running sweeps, draws, etc. On many (if not most) of the historic teams from the mid-70s and before, the fullback accounted for the majority of the carries on offense, and it was the halfback that was basically the "secondary" threat in the running game. Again, case in point - nearly every elite team during the 60's and 70's.
In the modern game, the HB and FB are two distinctive positions with the FB (if a team even has one) being nothing more than a blocking back, H Back, or a quasi-tight end who will catch the occasional pass out of the backfield. And therefore in Madden the two positions are rated very differently. Considering what the FB used to be, my thought was to just change those traditional FB's (Jim Brown, Larry Csonka, Jim Taylor, etc.) to HB's and rate them as such. Where there is no actual FB in the modern sense, I will basically fill that position on the roster with a no-name "dummy" player that I'll just leave off of the depth chart. Instead i'll place the HB or secondary back on the depth chart in that FB position as they'll at least be in the backfield and occasionally run and/or receive a pass, depending on what playbook is used (the Andy Reid playbook appears to be the closest to a classic 2-back pro-set offense than any of the others).
In other words, anyone from those historic teams who was a "running back" will be a HB in the game, and will be rated as such. Here's the other thing to consider: In the depth charts, we've been placing those high production FB's into the #1 HB slot anyway, so that they get the majority of the carries. Problem with this has always been that those players don't perform to the best of their potential because they are playing out of position, and thus their Awareness rating is adjusted significantly downward when it really shouldn't be. This also factors heavily into the overall team rating, making those teams appear weaker at the running back position than they should. I think it works better to have a HB assigned to the FB position in the depth chart than the other way around.
Anyway, that's my thought and my intent is to make these changes going forward, and to go back and change those teams i've already re-rated as well. Am curious what everyone' thoughts are on this - good idea? bad idea? doesn't matter either way? Would love to see some feedback on this. I'm sure this could apply to the Madden 08 historic rosters as well..
Thanks in advance for any and all feedback!
In the modern game, the HB and FB are two distinctive positions with the FB (if a team even has one) being nothing more than a blocking back, H Back, or a quasi-tight end who will catch the occasional pass out of the backfield. And therefore in Madden the two positions are rated very differently. Considering what the FB used to be, my thought was to just change those traditional FB's (Jim Brown, Larry Csonka, Jim Taylor, etc.) to HB's and rate them as such. Where there is no actual FB in the modern sense, I will basically fill that position on the roster with a no-name "dummy" player that I'll just leave off of the depth chart. Instead i'll place the HB or secondary back on the depth chart in that FB position as they'll at least be in the backfield and occasionally run and/or receive a pass, depending on what playbook is used (the Andy Reid playbook appears to be the closest to a classic 2-back pro-set offense than any of the others).
In other words, anyone from those historic teams who was a "running back" will be a HB in the game, and will be rated as such. Here's the other thing to consider: In the depth charts, we've been placing those high production FB's into the #1 HB slot anyway, so that they get the majority of the carries. Problem with this has always been that those players don't perform to the best of their potential because they are playing out of position, and thus their Awareness rating is adjusted significantly downward when it really shouldn't be. This also factors heavily into the overall team rating, making those teams appear weaker at the running back position than they should. I think it works better to have a HB assigned to the FB position in the depth chart than the other way around.
Anyway, that's my thought and my intent is to make these changes going forward, and to go back and change those teams i've already re-rated as well. Am curious what everyone' thoughts are on this - good idea? bad idea? doesn't matter either way? Would love to see some feedback on this. I'm sure this could apply to the Madden 08 historic rosters as well..
Thanks in advance for any and all feedback!
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
version 1.3 attached, and now incorporating the HB/FB rules as mentioned above...
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in RED):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74, 75, 76 Vikings
74, 75, 76, 77 Raiders
74, 75, 78, 79 Steelers
75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
75 Rams
77 Broncos
85 Bears
88, 89, 90, 92 49ers
00 Ravens
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in RED):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74, 75, 76 Vikings
74, 75, 76, 77 Raiders
74, 75, 78, 79 Steelers
75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
75 Rams
77 Broncos
85 Bears
88, 89, 90, 92 49ers
00 Ravens
- Attachments
-
- MuscleMike-LM67 ver 1.3.zip
- (952.76 KiB) Downloaded 98 times
Re: Muscle Mike roster compatible with New Uniforms/stadiums
version 1.4 attached...
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in RED):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74, 75, 76 Vikings
72, 74, 75, 76, 77 Raiders
72, 74, 75, 78, 79 Steelers
75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 85, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
75 Rams
77 Broncos
81 Chargers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90, 92, 94 49ers
00 Ravens
01 Patriots
The following teams have now been re-rated (newly rated in RED):
66, 67 Packers
71, 72, 73, 74 Dolphins
73, 74, 75, 76 Vikings
72, 74, 75, 76, 77 Raiders
72, 74, 75, 78, 79 Steelers
75, 77, 78, 79, 81, 85, 92, 93, 94, 95 Cowboys
75 Rams
77 Broncos
81 Chargers
85 Bears
88, 89, 90, 92, 94 49ers
00 Ravens
01 Patriots
- Attachments
-
- MuscleMike-LM67 ver 1.4.zip
- (954.46 KiB) Downloaded 95 times
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests