Madden 2010 News Post

Madden NFL 10 Ratings: Top 10 by Position (ESPN Videogames)

06:32 PM - May 26, 2009 by iamemmittsmith

ESPN Videogames have posted the top 10 players by position in Madden NFL 10.

Game: Madden NFL 10Reader Score: 7.5/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Wii / Xbox 360Votes for game: 76 - View All

Madden NFL 10 Videos

Member Comments

# 81 SoxFan01605 @ 05/26/09 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by droopizzle34


	i don't get the flak, White is a good WR(why didn't he catch all of Mike Vick's passes!!!! ),but I mean why would you compare his numbers to an over the hill T.O's numbers? I'll take T.O in his prime over White any day.

That's not the issue though. I thought it was who should be better now...in terms of ratings.

# 82 larryfoot5050 @ 05/26/09 10:44 PM

No Defensive MVP? James Harrison got robbed

# 83 droopizzle34 @ 05/26/09 10:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SoxFan01605


	That's not the issue though. I thought it was who should be better now...in terms of ratings.

good point,i stand corrected.

# 84 edwing @ 05/26/09 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glorious Arc


	How many times during Brady's record breaking season did we see him passing the ball when they were up by 30+ points?

True, but it was fun to watch.

As for Brady's ratings, i would go 89 power, 96 short, 93 medium, 90 deep, and his speed could go down by about 3-4 points.

# 85 WFColonel56 @ 05/26/09 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by droopizzle34


	somebody go to the game tape and tell me how many double teams Roddy White had to face while he caught those passes. Man you guys crack me up. Numbers aren't everything...if thats the case, like someone SAID on another post, Charlie Batch should be in the HOF over Drew Brees and D-Mac: numbers-----Batch 2 rings, Brees and DMac 0. He's better right? LMAO

OK, DAL had 2 number 1 WRs..(some say, not me ).....and a lights out number 3 WR....and an ok running game....(and defenses sometimes had to spy ROMO with LBS)

VS

ATL
Roddy white and nobody else.....and a very good run game....Plus White was coming off a good year so teams knew what they were facing.

lets see who got doubled more hmmmmmmmmm....... RODDY WHITE.......And no i dont have the game tape but common sense should lead you to the right direction.

Thats the main reason that brought up average yards per catch.......

# 86 Hova57 @ 05/26/09 10:50 PM

I just wished that bcv would carry more weight. if your running back doesn't have high rating he should have hard time with cutback lanes. same for punt and kick returners, wr ,te and some safeties.

as far as westbrook speed goes when he's not hurt their is dbs that can't cover him please. don't hate

# 87 K_GUN @ 05/26/09 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nepatriotsfan


	dont forget that manning had marvin harrison his entire career

and jeff saturday

# 88 K_GUN @ 05/26/09 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Glorious Arc


	A fairly valid point. Cassell put up numbers comparable to Brady before Moss. Brady is a good QB and when he got his new toy aka Moss he put up better numbers then before. Would Brady/Manning be better on another team IDK. No one does. My only beef is that Brady's arm strength currently overrated. It needs to be lowered to 90-92. Another thing I would like to add right now is Manning could have put up better numbers during his record breaking season. There were several games that they were called off and stopped throwing the ball. How many times during Brady's record breaking season did we see him passing the ball when they were up by 30+ points?

i was able to watch cassel in person a lot last year...dude can't throw a deep/accurate ball like brady can.

just
can't
do it

# 89 WFColonel56 @ 05/26/09 10:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by droopizzle34


	i don't get the flak, White is a good WR(why didn't he catch all of Mike Vick's passes!!!! ), .

becuz he was a rookie or in his 2nd year in vicks last year playing....... also bcuz he was a #3 or #4 WR.......hell he was a #3 WR when madden 08 came out.....He didnt get on the field that much....The falcons were a running team that didnt come out in alot of 3-4 WR sets

# 90 Glorious Arc @ 05/26/09 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamaballa


	True, but it was fun to watch. As for Brady's ratings, i would go 89 power, 96 short, 93 medium, 90 deep, and his speed could go down by about 3-4 points.

I could more then live with that. I was thinking that his stats would see a rebound if he plays well after being hurt and would look something like that. Although I think his speed is fine. If they lowered it then they would need to lower Manning and other QBs. Brady is about 63 speed IMO...Then again after being hurt its anybodies guess.

# 91 tennesseetitans @ 05/26/09 10:59 PM

This whole debate reminds me of a quote about John Unitas. "Alot of quarterbacks can throw deep. Unitas could pass deep." I think that quote could be applicable to Brady as well as Manning. I'd rather see both of them with lower arm strength ratings (especially Brady, whose arm strength isn't great, but whose decision making and accuracy are), but greater deep accuracy ratings.

So maybe Brady couldn't launch the ball 60 yards to Moss every play (in Madden terms), but maybe he could put the ball on the money 40-50 yards down field. Seems like a pretty good trade off to me.

# 92 steelers1 @ 05/26/09 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stux


	Big Ben's regular season wasn't stellar. Yeah his team won the super bowl but he had less post season attempts the McNabb who didn't even make it that far. I think the guy is a average QB on a great team. VD hasn't proven he is anything more then a great combine athlete yet. Frank Gore barely broke 1k yards and yeah he was injured but staying healthy is part of the game.

Ben and McNabb played in the same number of games last year. And maybe the reason for more completions is because McNabb plays for Andy Reid who has always been a pass first coach... McNabb had a good post season, no doubt, but he threw 4 picks in 3 games and his team lost.

I'm a Steelers fan, so I'm biased, but I would take Roethlisberger over any QB in the league for the Steelers. I don't think any other QB is as clutch or could perform as well as he has given the offensive line he's had for the past couple years. Last year he didn't have great stats, but he played the best defenses in the NFL week in and week out. The year before with a much easier schedule he had 32 TDs 11 INTs and completed 65% of his passes. He's got another pretty easy schedule next year, so I'm not saying he'll get 30+ TDs, but he'll put up good numbers.

He's proved he's not just a game manager. Game managers dont win 50+ games, lead 18 4th qtr/OT game winning drives, or win 2 Super Bowls in their first 5 years. And to say his defense won those games is ridiculous, since Brady had great defenses for the majority of his career (including the super bowls). Bottom line is that Roethlisberger is the clutchest QB in the NFL. He may only be decent for the first 3 quarters, but there's no one better when the game's on the line.

# 93 iBlievN5 @ 05/26/09 11:07 PM

quick opinions. Brady thp> mcnabb. That's ridiculous, Brady's arm is only a 94 if you reeeally want to stretch it. Also mcnabb has been one of the best deep ballers in the league, a 77 is a bit low 88 at least, drop the TAS more if it's problematic. Westbrook is one of the least fumbling backs in the league while brandon Jacobs has almost made it an art form. And westy's speed is perfect, not elite but still pretty dangerous.

I find roethlisberger to be very average. Low pass attempts and receivers an are great at RAC. See: SB drive.

# 94 Glorious Arc @ 05/26/09 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steelers1


	Ben and McNabb played in the same number of games last year. And maybe the reason for more completions is because McNabb plays for Andy Reid who has always been a pass first coach... McNabb had a good post season, no doubt, but he threw 4 picks in 3 games and his team lost. I'm a Steelers fan, so I'm biased, but I would take Roethlisberger over any QB in the league for the Steelers. I don't think any other QB is as clutch or could perform as well as he has given the offensive line he's had for the past couple years. Last year he didn't have great stats, but he played the best defenses in the NFL week in and week out. The year before with a much easier schedule he had 32 TDs 11 INTs and completed 65% of his passes. He's got another pretty easy schedule next year, so I'm not saying he'll get 30+ TDs, but he'll put up good numbers. He's proved he's not just a game manager. Game managers dont win 50+ games, lead 18 4th qtr/OT game winning drives, or win 2 Super Bowls in their first 5 years. And to say his defense won those games is ridiculous, since Brady had great defenses for the majority of his career (including the super bowls). Bottom line is that Roethlisberger is the clutchest QB in the NFL. He may only be decent for the first 3 quarters, but there's no one better when the game's on the line.

I dont think you are being that biased. The steelers had no rushing attack and no offensive line. Ben not only played top defenses but he was the offense. He is tough, solid passer, elusive, and clutch. All great attributes for a QB. Im not sure I would want him out of all the QBs BUT he is great.

# 95 kjcheezhead @ 05/26/09 11:22 PM

Sorrry, I gotta disagree with Big Ben, he threw 17 tds to 15 ints last year medicore to the core. He is also the perfect example of his defense winning. Yes he had a decent game in the Super Bowl but again the d bailed him out with a 99 yrd int right at the half so that he even had a chance for a final drive. Also look at the Seattle Super Bowl. Big Ben gets the honor of having the worst rating ever for a winning qb.

Even with Pitt being a run first team there is no excuse to throw as many picks as tds as be a top 5 qb. Then they go and totally leave Aaron Rodgers out even though he was top 5 in almost every passing category?

# 96 SoxFan01605 @ 05/26/09 11:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shotgun styles


	Please, please don't. Unitas finished his career with nearly 1800 rushing yards and played both ways in college (linebacker and safety on defense). Today's QBs are a laughable joke in terms of athleticism. There is no comparison. Brady and Manning could not run out of a wet paper bag, an even in college could not have played any other position BUT quarterback. Back then QBs were not pampered, did not wear pink jerseys in practice, and weren't allowed to cheat by throwing the ball away.

lol...kinda going off the deep end aren't ya.

Re-read the quote he posted. What he was doing was simply making the comparison from the quote...Brady and Manning both throw a good deep ball, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have big arms. In other words (again, like the quote "they pass deep...not just throw deep").

I don't think it was a statement on modern day QB athletecism...lol.

# 97 Glorious Arc @ 05/26/09 11:30 PM

Steelers played 8 games against the top ten leagues defenses that let offenses score the least.(not including post season)

They played 8 of their games against the top ten defenses against the pass.

Just saying.

EDIT:
I dont know the exact number but the packers did play against so of the worst pass defenses last year. Just figure they played the Lions and Bears twice last year both of which are in the bottom ten pass defenses for yards allowed.

# 98 SoxFan01605 @ 05/26/09 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shotgun styles


	I am of the opinion that the pre-1978 QBs should never be compared to today's system-babies. YOU could play QB in the NFL right now. There is very little actual talent involved. It's kind of sad. A whole field of world class athletes, and one grocery bagger who gets all the credit when the team wins.

That's entirely exaggerated...lol. I would agree you can't compare the two eras, but more in terms of the difference in the way the game was played than perceived talent level. That's all beside the point though...

I was just curious as to how you got to that from a comment that had nothing to do with comparing Brady and Manning to Unitas directly. Two separate topics is all. Your passion is noted though.

# 99 Glorious Arc @ 05/26/09 11:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shotgun styles


	I am of the opinion that the pre-1978 QBs should never be compared to today's system-babies.

Why? Because everyone in the pre-1978 era was on roids

# 100 KensaiKatai @ 05/26/09 11:37 PM

These ratings are all around horrible..99 ovrs should only occur with two conditions (guaranteed hall of fame induction AND great previous year)

i was expecting a lot more realism this year with the ratings (i've been saying for years that players are way too overrated and i thought they were on the right track with the greater disparity between player ratings this year), guess i was mistaken, but i'll wait to see how the game plays before i make my last judgement but as it stands i'm very skeptical and this could have an incredible effect on how realistic the gameplay truly is..

97 thp for brady lol..whatever, i urge EA to reconsider a lot of these ratings and to study some more film. i don't have time to sit here and break every player down that i have a problem with (yes there's that many!) unless they plan on hiring me or requesting it from me personally because i don't care what the people who buy this game think and who knows if my comment here will ever get read by the people who make the changes.. but these were about 90% wrong IMO. Thanks for the sneak peek though.

« Previous 1 2 3 456 7 8 9…16 17 Next »

More Links

Madden NFL 10 Ratings: Top 10 by Position (ESPN Videogames)