Not about if the ratings are accurate or not.
I was playing the FM 09 Demo and I noticed something while looking at players. It seems like in a lot of cases, a player's overall rating isn't quite reflected by his ratings at specific things.
Two examples:
DeMarcus Ware- Overall/Peak: 96/96, Specific Ratings: 81, 95, 76, 68
Shawne Merriman- Overall/Peak: 92/93, Specific Ratings: 87, 99, 76, 68
Larry Fitzgerald- Overall/Peak: 87/91, Specific Ratings: 60, 93, 82, 63, 89
Andre Johnson- Overall/Peak: 81/83, Specific Ratings: 62, 96, 87, 63, 91
So, in both cases, a player with a lower peak by at least a fair bit beats or ties the player with a higher peak in every specific rating.
This is without Commissioner Mode, obviously, as I only have the demo. Was wondering if maybe the inaccuracies of scouting might be the cause, though you'd think that the supposed overall would be gotten from the supposed specific ratings, thus if a scout thought he was great at everything, he'd rate him great. Or does the overall try to take into account the stuff (I remember seeing Maturity and Longevity and some others mentioned) you can't see normally?
Searched the General Discussion forum, but closest thing to this I could find was: http://sportsmogul.com/vbulletin2/sh...d.php?t=164306



Reply With Quote
