i want TOTW to go through the playoffs and include players from previous years that had insane playoff and regular season games too. i loved TOTW when you had the players in the league getting their deserved cards for a great performance and then a nice little flashback to another great performance from years ago. does anyone else agree?
EX from M21: https://www.mut.gg/players/10811-richard-sherman/21-14010811/
Flashbacks were fun, also I hope they bring back record breakers (the stupid kicker offers don’t count).
EpicDude28 said:Flashbacks were fun, also I hope they bring back record breakers (the stupid kicker offers don’t count).
agreed
RavensFlockLetsFly said:i want TOTW to go through the playoffs and include players from previous years that had insane playoff and regular season games too. i loved TOTW when you had the players in the league getting their deserved cards for a great performance and then a nice little flashback to another great performance from years ago. does anyone else agree?
EX from M21: https://www.mut.gg/players/10811-richard-sherman/21-14010811/
It would be nice to have a merit-based system for MUT players. If you have an awesome week in the league, you shouldn’t be overlooked on the TotW release because EA has prepared an item for you in a soon-to-be-released program.
In practice, the TotW releases would have to be larger. That doesn’t have to be a barrier. Set up a system where specific stat accumulations raise attributes and enable abilities according to an appropriate algorithm, and slap a TotW skin on the Core item artwork. We’d rather have a fluid, evolving system that reflects the league as it is, rather than small releases that may or may not have fire card art.
RavensFlockLetsFly said:i want TOTW to go through the playoffs and include players from previous years that had insane playoff and regular season games too. i loved TOTW when you had the players in the league getting their deserved cards for a great performance and then a nice little flashback to another great performance from years ago. does anyone else agree?
EX from M21: https://www.mut.gg/players/10811-richard-sherman/21-14010811/
Goodness gracious, i wish. Beyond tired of the constant copy/paste card selections. Talk about low effort, sheesh. Hadn't found my way back to Madden (yet) during M21 cycle, but I approve of you using 49ers legend, Sherm as your example. Bang bang.
my ideal TOTW is 22 champion level cards with the best player at each position each week. We would probably get repeats, but it would make TOTW feel like it mattered
peatrick said:Goodness gracious, i wish. Beyond tired of the constant copy/paste card selections. Talk about low effort, sheesh. Hadn't found my way back to Madden (yet) during M21 cycle, but I approve of you using 49ers legend, Sherm as your example. Bang bang.
yeah, its crazy
np lol
elmango30 said:my ideal TOTW is 22 champion level cards with the best player at each position each week. We would probably get repeats, but it would make TOTW feel like it mattered
i like that idea
elmango30 said:my ideal TOTW is 22 champion level cards with the best player at each position each week. We would probably get repeats, but it would make TOTW feel like it mattered
I second here. This, and a 23rd for Special Teams, including kick- and punt-returners, gunners, etc.
phatalerror said:I second here. This, and a 23rd for Special Teams, including kick- and punt-returners, gunners, etc.
probably something you could do with completion percentage and advanced stats to actually determine the ratings they had that day, so 2 different 93 ovr Staffords are actually slightly different, and if you just did it by an algorithm for each position it would be even less work for EA
elmango30 said:probably something you could do with completion percentage and advanced stats to actually determine the ratings they had that day, so 2 different 93 ovr Staffords are actually slightly different, and if you just did it by an algorithm for each position it would be even less work for EA
I'm not a fan of the AP system for determining Player-of-the-Anytime. I think most of them are trash at recognizing skill across a broad swathe of the NFL. I'm not asking for even that level of effort from EA. It's enough for an algorithm to weight yardage gains or tackles for loss within the context of wins and win probability shift at the time of a big play. Super-basic math stuff for someone with a background in statistics and some appreciation and knowledge about football.
If they lack a statistician, just apply the Stevie Johnson principle: If a receiver gaining more than 111 yards receiving is a significant predictor of an eventual loss, they're probably not a player that deserves weekly performance awards.
phatalerror said:I'm not a fan of the AP system for determining Player-of-the-Anytime. I think most of them are trash at recognizing skill across a broad swathe of the NFL. I'm not asking for even that level of effort from EA. It's enough for an algorithm to weight yardage gains or tackles for loss within the context of wins and win probability shift at the time of a big play. Super-basic math stuff for someone with a background in statistics and some appreciation and knowledge about football.
If they lack a statistician, just apply the Stevie Johnson principle: If a receiver gaining more than 111 yards receiving is a significant predictor of an eventual loss, they're probably not a player that deserves weekly performance awards.
I mean with the Stevie Johnson example you’re confusing correlation and causation
elmango30 said:I mean with the Stevie Johnson example you’re confusing correlation and causation
I can see why what I said could be interpreted that way, although I was actually trying to illustrate the point you just made: Statistical accumulations in themselves are not a primary predictor of a player's skill or their value-added contribution.
The statistical split I used was intentionally arbitrary, but there's a clear pattern showing that Stevie Johnson racked up a lot of empty yards over the years. That is precisely why I mentioned earlier that Win Probability Shifts on plays is a bigger indicator of a player's value to his team. If you take a sum of stats and dismiss its context, a lot of ordinary players could be wrongly considered "Player of the Week".
phatalerror said:I can see why what I said could be interpreted that way, although I was actually trying to illustrate the point you just made: Statistical accumulations in themselves are not a primary predictor of a player's skill or their value-added contribution.
The statistical split I used was intentionally arbitrary, but there's a clear pattern showing that Stevie Johnson racked up a lot of empty yards over the years. That is precisely why I mentioned earlier that Win Probability Shifts on plays is a bigger indicator of a player's value to his team. If you take a sum of stats and dismiss its context, a lot of ordinary players could be wrongly considered "Player of the Week".
Top 22 Win probability shift would make a good totw. Plus, if à receiver gets it their qb will have too
elmango30 said:Top 22 Win probability shift would make a good totw. Plus, if à receiver gets it their qb will have too
Interestingly, it might not work out that way. If one receiver is making a difference, but on the quarterback's passing attempts to other receivers there isn't a significant shift over an accumulation of targets, his average will be weighed down.
A qualifying number of snaps should be a factor too. If a player catches a couple of bombs for TD's and yet wasn't on the field for 80% of the plays, they're probably not the best candidate for an award.
