Average skill ratings per position

[jose21crisis]

I've been diving into M08's files ,mostly the StreamedData.db and DBTemplates files, and I've found some useful information, as one of my other posts can prove. Now, for this one I'm focusing on some specific ratings for players. Specifically, what would be the average you should see for ratings on some positions, according to EA. I get all of this information out of the SNOT table on the StreamedData.db file. SNOT stands for "Scouting Notes", which were used in the earlier Maddens (Think 04) for the scouting of rookies before 08 (Maybe 07?) implemented the "Scout 8 guys" method (Let me say that it would be amazing to have small scouting reports on MaddenAMP's Draft utility). Do note, in the notes, some ratings can be considered "good" despite being low. Say, a QB with 60 AWR will be considered good despite 60 AWR being considered fairly low for a starting QB. Similarly, a rookie LB with 70-80 TAK will be considered good, despite that being somewhat low. Here's what I've been able to find.

All Positions

• AWR: I wanted to talk a bit about this one. According to most what I'm seeing here, the average range for ROOKIES is the 50 to 70 range. Below that (Or even in the 50 to 60 range), the scouting report mentions stuff like off-field issues, or the guy being tough to coach, or being easily distracted and forgetting his assignment. I will talk a bit more about AWR in some player specific sections.
• INJ: The average range for this stat for MOST positions is the 70 to 80 range. The exception to the rule is Offensive Linemen, whose range is more like 60 to 80. Now, we definitely know injuries are a bit F'd up here, with QBs going down because someone sneezed at them, while O-Linemen are nigh-invulnerable. I'd imagine that a 75 INJ QB would need to have a solid #2 behind him, while a 65 INJ LT would start every single game unless RNG really hates that guy. Of course, I could be wrong. I haven't played with QBs or Linemen under 85 INJ.

QB Specific

• CAR: The only serious ratings I can get out of QBs is the CAR rating. Apparently the average CAR would be the 60 to 70 range, which seems understandable.

HB Specific

• BTK: At least for rookies, the average range seems to be 60 to 80s. Although in the 60s there are a few positive comments ("Runs with authority and he displays above-average power in his game."), there's also some criticism ("Has trouble trying to create a surge to move the pile.")
• PBK: The best range is 40 to 50, with nothing but praise. And right ABOVE that (50 to 99), they are comparing him to a fullback ... despite that most HBs having 50+ PBK (Or at least most of the guys I've played with).
• CAT: 60 to 70 seems the good range, with 80+ being amazing. I don't think the M19 roster has any RB with 80+ CAT anyway.

FB Specific

• BTK: This is similar to the HB's BTK, except the range is a bit wider at 50 to 80s.
• RBK: The average range seems to be 50 to 70s.
• PBK: Here, the range is 50 to 60s.
• CAT: 60 to 70 is, once again, the ideal range. 80+ is still amazing. You could getting by converting a WR to HB or TE to FB ... if you could work on his carrying (Although the average range for FBs is the 60s).
• STR: The 60 to 70s range seems good enough. Higher and the report starts asking if he's a fullback.

WR Specific:

• BTK: The average range SEEMS to be 40 to 60s. 70 and higher is impressive.
• CAR: Similar to Fullbacks, 60s is the average for WRs.
• AWR: This one does give me just a tiny bit more evidence that AWR could affect route running ability. I still wonder HOW exactly, but I maintain that this is what it does.
• STR: Seems like the average is 40 to 50. In the 60s the report mentions that the receiver "Has the strength to escape press coverage." Higher and they outright compare his strength to O-Linemen.
• JMP: Seems like the average is the 70s range. I have more on this, but I'll save it for later.

TE Specific:

• BTK: The range is a bit tighter for TEs compared to WRs, 50 to 60.
• RBK: The requirement is a bit lower than FBs, 40 to 60.
• PBK: A bit tighter than RBK, 50 to 60.
• CAR: Similar to WRs, 60s.
• AWR: Could this be the ability to pinpoint the ball's location? Also, more route running evidence. This seems to also be the "Clutch" rating (More on the Kicker section)
• STR: The average is the 60s range, which looks decent.
• JMP: Interestingly enough, the average range of TEs is 50 to 60s. Which is interesting.

OL Specifc:

• AWR: This again? Well, apparently this one could determine the ability to properly locate additional rushers, and COULD determine the consistency of the player.
• SPD: Well, look at this. The average seems to be the 40s range ... and I don't think any M19 OL is that slow.
• ACC: Seems like the average is 50 to 60. And apparently, according to what I'm reading, ACC controls how much initial push a lineman can get right after the snap.
• AGI: The 40s range look like the average. Just like SPD, and like SPD I don't think M19 O-Linemen are that sluggish.

DE Specific:

• AWR: More evidence that low AWR could mean that the player does not give the full effort on every play.
• ACC: Seems like the average is 50 to 70. Although a bit higher would be good for pass rushing.
• AGI: The 60s seems the average, but something mentioned in the 80s ("Shows good rip moves and lateral agility to work his way down the line." and, in the 40s range, "Needs to develop more pass rush moves (his swim move is pathetic).") could mean that AGI is the "Finesse Move" rating, WAAAAY before EA actually called it that way.

DT Specific:

• ACC: Once again, 50 to 70. Higher is better for pass rushing.
• AGI: 50 to 60 seems good, and higher than that makes the report question if he is a DT.

LB Specific:

• CAT: The original reason I made this list. The average is the 50s range.
• STR: Average appears to be in the 60s range, at least for OLBs. For MLBs, it would be 70s.

CB Specific:

• TAK: The average is the 50s range, but the game doesn't complain too much with lower TAK.
• CAT: Once again, the average is the 50s.
• JMP: This one is very interesting. From what I'm reading right here ("He has decent leaping ability, but his timing is a bit off." and "Shows good timing going for the ball, using his leaping ability well."), JMP could not necessarily be the ability to pull off a super high jump, but the ability to properly time the jump to high point the ball, catch it at the highest point instead of jumping too early or too late.
• STR: This one is notable, because it isn't mentioned. Which makes me question, what represents a CB's ability to press a receiver?

S Specific:

• CAT: Exactly that same as LBs and CBs, 50s.
• STR: Average is the 50s range.

K and P Specific:

• TAK: The game recommends AT LEAST 30 for kickoff specialists and punters.
• AWR: All right. The average is still 50 to 70, but the interesting is the comments on most of the ranges. On the 40s range "Struggles when placed in pressure situations. Makes only the easy kicks.", "Fails to keep his poise under pressure.", "Does not kick well when pressured - shanks the ball." On the 50s "Seems best kicking in a dome - struggles in poor conditions.", "Has confidence issues that cause him to miss game winning kicks.", "Two-and-a-half step punter with marginal touch-to-toe mechanics." On the 60s "Has a hard time blocking out distractions with the game on the line.", "Shows a keen knack for downing punts inside the 20-yard line." And on the 70s "Displays good snap-to-toe timing.", "Poised athlete who has no problems getting the ball off." So, yeah, AWR is definitely the clutch factor for specialists, as well as the ability to deal with inclement weather. You could probably could use a low AWR kicker or punter in a dome, but on something like Heinz Field to Levi's Stadium, that is not going to work too well.