Team Ratings for 06

[Jami]

Don't know how many of you have seen this, so I'll post it. These are the ratings each team has in Madden 06:

(Ratings go Overall-Offense-Defense)

NFC East
Philadelphia 96 96 94
Washington 77 82 74
Dallas 73 72 79
NY Giants 72 68 75

NFC North
Minnesota 90 86 92
Green Bay 80 92 63
Detroit 78 87 74
Chicago 73 70 76

NFC South
Carolina 86 87 92
Atlanta 85 80 87
Tampa Bay 75 76 83
New Orleans 72 83 66

NFC West
Seattle 86 89 84
St. Louis 82 90 69
Arizona 78 78 79
San Francisco 67 70 68

AFC East
New England 97 92 96
NY Jets 81 86 76
Buffalo 78 70 95
Miami 70 68 79

AFC North
Pittsburgh 91 89 92
Baltimore 86 85 90
Cincinnati 85 85 76
Cleveland 61 62 60

AFC South
Indianapolis 90 99 68
Jacksonville 84 83 86
Houston 83 84 83
Tennessee 69 76 66

AFC West
San Diego 88 90 79
Kansas City 85 91 77
Oakland 81 88 65
Denver 74 73 80

@ GB having 2nd worse defense in the game

[ajrancid]

How can Denver - a playoff team on the rise - be ranked the fourth worst in the AFC? Just doesn't make any sense to me.

[JacktheRipper]

Those ratigns seem a tad unbalanced to me. Correct me if I'm wrong but most NFL teams are pretty equal as far as talent is concerned. Sure some teams like the Eagles and such have a little more but it's always seemed like the coach made the team in the NFL. That's why I don't like seeing teams rated in the 70s overall compared to the 96s and such.

We can convert those into NCAA grades and see that Philly would be an A overall with A defense and A offense. Now Green Bay would be a B- overall with an A- offense and a D- defense. That's like comparing Houston or USF to Oklahoma last year. There is not that much of a talent differance in the NFL so I think those ratings are a big mistake.

[sep]

Panthers better than the Falcons

[JETS393]

Cincinnati 85 85 76
NY Jets 81 86 76

Can Special Teams or whatever make that much of a difference?

Bah. I laugh at these ratings

[Jami]

Keep in mind that the game isn't released until August, so there's plenty of time for them to do adjusting if it's needed. *AHEMpackersdefenseAHEM* Come on..we know they're bad, but they're better than the Vikings defensively. I don't think the additions of Darren Sharper, Fred Smoot, and Pat Williams will cause the Vikings to have a 92-rated defense. That's completely out of whack.

[Freak93]

I agree some of these ratings are bad, but something like the Panthers better than the Falcons is very true. I am not trying to offend anyone but the Falcons are one dimensional on offense if you ask me. Yeah you can run, but than you get someone who shuts down your quarterback and such than what do you do? You do not have a quarterback who is at the great passing level. If Vick focuses more on passing than that will be a scary team but I just feel that the Panthers are a better all around team.

[BstnRdSx]

freak93 said:

I agree some of these ratings are bad, but something like the Panthers better than the Falcons is very true. I am not trying to offend anyone but the Falcons are one dimensional on offense if you ask me. Yeah you can run, but than you get someone who shuts down your quarterback and such than what do you do? You do not have a quarterback who is at the great passing level. If Vick focuses more on passing than that will be a scary team but I just feel that the Panthers are a better all around team.

Throw to teh Crumpler111!!!

[Leak2Troupe03]

jami3406 said:

I don't think the additions of Darren Sharper, Fred Smoot, and Pat Williams will cause the Vikings to have a 92-rated defense. That's completely out of whack.

I also dont think that makes their defense rated better than the Ravens who have proven their defense over the years, and added another great corner in Samari Rolle, and a linebacker who fits suit Tommy Polley. I agree with AJ Rancid about Denver, I think they got disrespected on the ratings.

Look at Washington, rating that defense a 74?! They lost Fred Smoot yeah, but any linebacker core consisting of Lavar Arrington and Marcus Washington who is another impressive talent does not desere a rating that low.

My final rant, I know Arizona might have a shot at being good and I like the players their drafting and such. But realize that before even proving themselves, their rated better than 11 teams and the same as two, those teams being Detroit (the same goes for them here) and Buffalo.

Either way, it shouldnt make that big of an affect unless you play against people alot, than I consider finding the team your best with, because everyone will use teams like New England, Pittsburgh, and Philly.

In franchise mode, or superstar mode. Wont make a difference, only more building and fun to do if your team is rated lower than others.

[Cubbyfan99]

The Bear's defence rating is pretty bad.Considering that was where it all came through.And with the addition of Mushin Muhhamad, they are lower then last year?Well regardless, remember the Krenzel run when the Bear's D came through.I swear EA has a grudge on every Chicago team.

[Freak93]

I am glad to see the Eagles defense a 94. I just hope they make the secondary good. I have noticed that Michael Lewis has played great in real life but they make him not bad but not all that great. Maybe since he has finally made it to the pro bowl that he will be better in the game.

[JacktheRipper]

chicagopax said:

The Bear's defence rating is pretty bad.Considering that was where it all came through.And with the addition of Mushin Muhhamad, they are lower then last year?Well regardless, remember the Krenzel run when the Bear's D came through.I swear EA has a grudge on every Chicago team.

I've come to the conclusion that these ratings just can't be right. I have seen nothing on them anywhere else and really they have to be fake. All the glaring errors we have picked up added to the fact there is a huge differance in ratings that Madden has never had. Really I just think these are a joke personally.

[Freak93]

Hey Jami, where did you get these ratings?

[Jami]

I'm not sure...I followed a link on the IGN Boards. Give me a few minutes and I might be able to find it.

Edit: psxsports.com..formerly ps2rosters.com: www.psxsports.com/

Direct link: www.psxsports.com/news5.html

They can't be right...they're too screwed up to be right. If they are, some major editing needs to be done once the game comes out.

[Loki]

I do believe those are the same ratings on maddennation.com

[Buzz Killington]

Those things are messed up. I agree with my fellow Packers fan that someone was on crack when they did these ratings, because they are the worst I have ever seen. Is the Packers defense THAT bad?

[kgcassellspree]

The Packers defense IS NOT better than the Vikings, I guarentee 100% that we will finish with a better ranking in all the major defensive categories.

[sep]

kgcassellspree said:

The Packers defense IS NOT better than the Vikings, I guarentee 100% that we will finish with a better ranking in all the major defensive categories.

Ditto...the Vikes D will be impressive this year, a heck of a lot better than the packers.

[Buzz Killington]

Did I ever say the Packers defense is better than the Vikings? No, I just said that it's not the worst in the NFL.

[sep]

usmaman said:

Did I ever say the Packers defense is better than the Vikings? No, I just said that it's not the worst in the NFL.

You gotta admit its pretty bad though.