Talk:Madden NFL/Archive 1

Archive 1

2009 Curse

Should it be cited that Green Bay also suffered? They did not have a winning record one year after being a play away from the super bowl. They also got rid of a HoF QB. —Precedingunsigned comment added by 146.186.44.207 (talk) 21:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Missing Year?

There was a year that the game was not produced. I'm almost certain it was the year that the original PlayStation was released. They had difficulty setting up the 3D graphics and missed the deadline. It resulted in everyone being fired and nearly ended the franchise. Does anyone know what year this was? It may have been 1991.

1991 was the year before Madden was even released for Sega. 1996 is the year you are thinking of. I actually however have the Super Nintendo version of this game, it wasn't released on Playstation.Vinnyxvincent 21:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Where are the sales figures?

An article of this length, on the biggest games franchise around, and there are no sales figures? Good grief people! Get to work! - Posted by Anon

I wanted to say that actually the Madden series has been a yearly thing since 1992 not 1997 as noted on the article here.

There was never a missing year. it ha been released every year since 1989. The orignial games were exclusive to PC. Just because it didnot come out for the PS1 does not mean it did not get made, it did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by146.126.61.241 (talk) 03:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Madden NFL Curse section is plain sad

--So you argue, despite the fact that ray lewis did get hurt and the curse has held true more times than not, that It can't be valid. Go back and look at all the covers again... Eddie George was a joke for the rest of his career after his madden cover, constantly getting injured year after year. The rest speak for themselves.. __________

That section is just a joke. This year pretty much confirms that there isn't a "curse." A couple of months ago, a contributor added was trying to find a way to make the "curse" still alive by saying Ray Lewis had a bad year which isn't true because he had a minor injury near the end of the season. I removed it. Ray Lewis had a "decent" year for himself stat-wise.

The last contributionthat I just deleted said that the Ravens were cursed because they weren't in the playoffs. The AFC was competitive that year so it would be hard to be in the playoffs. However, the Ravens were in contention during final games of the regular season despite having no offense. They lost their top 2003 wide reciever to free agency (Marcus Robinson) and still were in playoff contention. I consider that no curse. --Anonymous Cow 02:53, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Amen to that! ---

In response to that^, the article was written to inform. The reader has to know the facts, and they can decide whether the curse lives or not. Ray Lewis got hurt during the Colts game. If you saw the game you would know he was kept going to the sidelines. They ended up losing that game, and the next, and that took them out of their run for the playoffs. Ray Lewis was a big factor, as he always is. His wrist caused them to miss the playoffs. The reader must decide if the curse caused this, not you. -MaddenDude

--- The curse is still on: Ray Lewis was injured, along with before that not playing anywhere near up to his old calibre of football, being pushed around by blockers left and right.

Don't be fooled by his jumping and jawing-- while still in the upper echelon of MLBs, Lewis wasn't half the player he used to be, last year. -FYI

Hey man, Try to not get pushed over left or right by a 300 lb OL...and being 245, hey he just needed a defensive tackle who took care of atleast one blocker and Haloti Ngata did it and in 2006 he had 164 tckls and 2 ints...say not too many ints but stopping a ball carrier cold 164 times in 16 games is great for any defender

lol, guys, its something to joke about. No one truly believes in the Madden curse, its just kinda curious to see if it keeps happening. Who is going to be the first to break it? And yes, Ray Lewis had a bad year after the Madden cover.

some speculate that due to Terrell Owens performing the Ray Lewis dance, the curse became confused and Roy Williams was the vessel through which the curse's might was exacted. This, of course, refers to the 2005 cover. -Nod 02:51, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Adding arguements against the curse should be considered. For example: In order to be on the cover, a player must have had a "successful" season, often based on statistics. So if the his'/his' teams statistics are high, there is less room for statistical improvement and more room for statistical failure. Therefore it is likely he will have a "bad" or "jinxed" season and this phenomenom will be attributed to the Madden curse. MafiaCapo 20:57, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

MafiaCapo - excellent point. Perhaps we may want to point out that it's only the 3 QBs (Culpepper, Vick, and McNabb) who have all seen major injuries in the season in which they were the cover athlete. The "regression to the mean" idea is a good one, combined with the "unlucky QB injury" effect. The most striking thing may actually be the lack of team success in the cover year, which is universal (every team did worse in the cover year than the year before). Again, regression to the mean, but it's so consistent that it may be worth pointing out. Thoughts? Thesurfshop19 13:58, 17 May 2006

Wait, are you trying to imply that sports players and/or fans AREN'T superstitious?? What planet are you from?? Seriously, yeah it's a joke, but with sports people being more than normally interested in that kind of thing, it makes perfect sense to leave the section in about "The Madden Curse" completely aside from the fact that it's a pretty well-known phenomenon. You can argue all day long about whether it's "true" or not, but the fact is, it's a piece of folklore that has now been tied to the Madden football video game so we might as well at least document the details. 71.251.91.27 23:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It's being reported that Shaun Alexander has a broken foot and is out indefinitely, should this be added to the curse section?--67.165.6.76 21:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

NO, he is only out for a few weeks, which may not put a damper on his or the team's season, and until it does, it should be left off, as the injury is minor, and the team is still playing very very well without as much help from him.--Indiearmy 17:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't bother editing into this if your not going to be mature enough to sign your additions--Indiearmy 12:10, 10 October 2006 (UTC) Shaun Alexander continues the curse

Alexander definetely continues the curse, last year he set a record with 27 touchdowns... How many does he have this year? Look at his yards. In Fantasy Football getting Shaun Alexander screwed nearly every owner. Whether you believe in curses or not this is valid information to have on this site.

The Curse never started Eddie George had a the best year of his life when he was on the cover. With carrer highs in rushing yards. And as far as him being injury plagued, he did miss a start until 2004.

Also, Marshall Faulk really slowed down after he was on the cover. And the year that McNabb got on the cover he got hurt and the team went 6-10 because of his injury. Mcjrb 23:23, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

What about Favre? I mean, after 17 years and last years play-off run, you gotta think he would be prime time for the curse. But he's on the Jets now so its basically like they drafted him again, because there's so much to learn on a new team, like there always is. My predictions for this year: Favre will lead his Jets to a playoff run, especially since Tom Brady who's team is in the Jet's division, is injured. ````User:Alethiometryst 05:50, 19 September 2008

Jets missing the playoffs is clearly because of the curse, just accept it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.134.88.5(talk) 13:21, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Barry Sanders on the '00 Cover?

I remember having my N64 copy of the game and I see John Madden and no one else on the cover. Is there any truth of this or are my eyes pretty bad?

I have the Macintosh version and Barry is indeed on the cover, though behind Madden. SonicAD 21:27, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Behind Madden? I'd bet a million dollars that move was made because Sanders abruptly retired and Madden didn't want to be caught between a rock and a hard place (Having a player on the cover who doesn't play for a team is just crazy, and if Barry decided to return, they could always argue that Barry was still their cover player) JurgenHadley 22:16, 28 September 2005 (UTC)JurgenHadley

Can someone please upload the one with Barry Sanders on the cover? Thanks. --Josh 03:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Criticism POV?

The criticism section is basically a rant against the Madden games and would be better off deleted. John 00:48, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

it's not all that POV. There are definitely some legit gripes in there. I don't think a wholesale removal is called for.--Alhutch 02:52, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Maybe not ALL POV, but about 90% is... i would say it needs to be cleaned up. Newper

you're welcome to clean it up.--Alhutch 03:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

It does seem to be a lot of ranting, and there are as many opinions as facts in there. Hardly objective. Xeller

I'm not as familiar with editing to ensure NPOV, but my opinion is that anything regarding non-realistic aspects of the game should be kept in (my edit, a few others). The article presents the game as (implicitly) as some sort of bastion of realism and I think the gameplay features that are not realistic should be mentioned (special teams flaws, etc). Things like the lack of some features such as Build-a-stadium in some versions of the game and EA's monopolization of the football game market should be kept out, IMHO -VetteDude 15:25, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Guys, we at least have to admit that the engine has been reused, well, maybe a couple thousand of millions of times. Either the series starts selling for $10 on release, every new release starts being distributed as abandonware or EA writes a new Football engine. Sometimes I even wonder if there's still Sega Genesis code in the XBOX Madden games. I bet you could run Madden 2006 using Kega and get some sort of message like "the prettier graphics require a new machine" or something. I know new machines can do more than what madden games do. It's just a matter of EA wanting to do something that doesn't appeal only to the Wal-Marters.

But some of the information is just wrong. There is a career records section. Anyone who can proof of this (I know it's true, I have the game, but I haven't found any place that verifies it) please do. John 17:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia isnt the Soviet Union; there many, many legit complaints you can file against the series. -Oyeah

There are legitimate complaints to be made, especially since EA has bought exclusive license for NFL games, but I agree that the section is not as NPOV as it could be. There are specific instances of blatant serious bugs in various platforms over the last couple of years (2006 PSP version had a season-ending save-game bug, and 2007 Xbox 360 version has serious QB bugs when playing in Superstar mode) that could be pointed out as shoddy QA from a company that perhaps doesn't care as much as they could if they had competition. 71.251.91.27 23:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I think this phrase needs to be changed "The NFL has similar exclusivity deals concerning virtually all of its licensing (DirecTV, Reebok, CBS, Fox, etc.)" It doesn't make sense seeing as the presence of both CBS and Fox means that there is no exclusivity on the TV market.

CBS has exclusive rights to show the game when the away team is AFC, and Fox has rights to show away NFC games.TVRJomar 14:04, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Bill Belichick?

Is the reason Belichick is not featured in the game ('NE Coach' instead) the same reason as Parcells'? Haven't been able to find any info on it... -VetteDude 18:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

He's not apart of the NFL coach assocation which is the reason why he isn't featured I believe.

Number of Madden games

How many Madden games has there been? From the first paragraph it sounds like there has been about 15. 1 in 1989 and then one a year since 1992. Is that right? -- OoberMick 12:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, that's correct. I remember hearing that at least 1 had been skipped since the game's inception (perhaps 1990 + 1991 is what I'm thinking of...) -VetteDude 22:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The game has been released continuosly since 1989. It has not always made it to every system, the first few years Madden was a PC game, but it has been made every year without interruption. —Precedingunsigned comment added by 146.126.61.241 (talk) 03:16, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by72.24.207.77 (talk) 09:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Curse section incomplete and faulty

Before Eddie George in Madden 2001, there were two more cursed items :

-- Garrison Hearst in Madden 99 (appears on PAL Playstation cover), who promptly barely survived a heavy car crash. -- Dorsey Levens in Madden 00, who quickly got from All-Pro to a journeyman backup.

I got photos of both somewhere if proof is needed.

"After regularly averaging nearly 4 yards per carry in his first five seasons and rushing for over 1,300 yards in each one, he averaged only 3 yards per carry and rushed for career lows of 939 yards and 5 touchdowns in the 2001 season." That sentence is quite misleading. Can somebody edit it please. Also he only had 12 TDs in 2002, not 14 as the paragraph would suggest.RealFerrari 22:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Criticism?

Why is there a section bashing Madden here? One of the criticisms, that the game lackd career records, is false; the career records function has been added for Madden 06 on Xbox 360. I own the game and I have seen the career records. Overall, this section is irrelevant and should be deleted. John 01:27, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

No way, the comments about late-game comebacks and the CPU teams becoming unstoppable within the 2 minute warning is definately noteworthy. I can't tell you how many times over the years i've been playing Madden that a running back/receiver has suddenly become superman and broken 8 tackles on his way to the end-zone. Not to mention terrible quaterbacks morphing into Joe Montana.

Maybe you just need to improve your skills. I can't tell you how many times i've been in a game that got worse for the CPU over the last two minutes. I mean, there is a difference in that the CPU is going to strike for the win by throwing touchdown bombs instead of running it up the gut, but I don't beleive that there are any significant AI changes.

Anecdotes aren't reputable sources. 72.200.135.229 20:56, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

agreeed I got rid of that 2 min "catch up AI" section and unless crediable sources are cited i suggrest it stay gone

I don't believe that it is a joke at all. On All Madden and even All Pro somewhat, things happen, like LT suddenly fumbles the ball 3 times on three consecutive drives when I am up by 14, and they come back and win. Coachb05 00:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Stormfront

shouldnt it be noted, that Stormfront previously had the license?

History section is woefully short

Currently, there about 50% space in this article dedicated to the supposed Madden curse than to the history of the franchise, which I would think would be the most important thing for the article to cover. A lot of stuff in the section isn't specifically history. It covers the business side okay, but has almost no info on how the game itself has evolved. I'm going to make a chart of all the games so far and which systems they were on, but if someone more knowledgeable could include information about when key features were introduced and its rivalry with other NFL titles, that would greatly imrove the article. Ace of Sevens 07:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Removed from article

many believe that it was done in order to prevent their main competition, SEGA and Take-Two Interactive/2K SportsESPN NFL 2K series from making another game. When the NFLPA/EA Sports contract expires in the 2009-2010 season, unless prevented by a contract extension between EA and the NFL/NFLPA, the series will be known as 'NFL 2K--', due to EA's purchase of ESPN rights in the series.

• I removed this because it's unreferenced and the claim is dubious. The 2K name is not part of the ESPN brand. The 2K sports titles were known as such before the ESPN license and continue to be known as such now that they no longer have it. Ace of Sevens 02:44, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

References?

This article has 3 references. Also known as pitiful. Thanks for your attention. Axem Titanium 22:11, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, look! It's been 5 months and the number of references has actually decreased. Axem Titanium 01:58, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop adding shaun to the madden curse chart

missing a few weeks in not severe enough to be classified as "the madden curse"—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Indiearmy (talk •contribs) 08:16, 26 September 2006 (UTC).

If ESPN and other major sports media brings the subject of the "Madden Curse" regarding news about Alexender's injury, Wikipedia has an argument of placing the probably non-season injury in the article.[1]--Oskar Mayer Nguyener 15:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

A 2-3 week ingury is minor compared to the others, and may not be much of a damper on his or the teams season, so until it is, it should be left off.--Indiearmy 17:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

He should be added,he has a broken foot! Out for 2-3 weeks, hes not going to be the same after. This article has Eddie George as being cursed, even though he had no injury at all, infact he had career high rushing yards. So this injury dosn't 'qualify' but Eddie George not getting injured does? Coasttocoast 22:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

how should i know, i just know that shaun's injury isn't enough to qualify as the curse, as he wont be out for a long period of time, and it probably wont hinder his performace, or the performance of the team, when he returns. you can edit whatever you want with the other coverplayers, i'm just editing what isnt true, and that is that shauns injury is enough to be the curse--Indiearmy 06:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Umm.. so he is out from a range of "indefinitely" and "1 game", can you guys please just use something vague and stop changing it until he gets his next CT scan?

which is why i suggest leaving it off altogether until we know for sure its severe enough to be classified as the curse.--Indiearmy 06:53, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

"Coming off a record-season, Alexander had gotten off to a slow start in 2006, failing to reach 100 yards in any of his three games. He has rushed for 187 yards on 65 attempts (a 2.9 average) and two touchdowns. " Quoted From Yahoo Sports. If last season's mvp only has 2.9 avg on a loosing team then I think we can fairly say he IS important to the Seahawks and he IS injured. By the way, injury keeps him out till Oct 22nd game. That's more than 2-3 weeks!

Thats not more than 2-3 weeks, the hawks have a bye this week, so he will have missed 3 games, which when talking about weeks in football terms, is 3 weeks.

He is coming back to play against the Vikings on 10-22. By then, he will have only missed two games (Bears and Ramms), since week 5 is a bye. However, Yahoo! Sports claims Alexander will possibly undergo an MRI scan on 10-9, so we may as well wait till then for an update. --ShadowJester07 13:58, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Alexander should be on the curse list, and if you have to, include "it is speculated" at least. A 2.9 average yard per rush is horrible for the mvp and it is obvious that he has been hurt since the begining. We'll have to see until afterwards, but until then, add him, and show that it's just speculation.Jemijohn 18:05, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Shaun absolutely needs to be on the Curse List. Whether he misses 1 week or 16, an injury is an injury, and it occured after being on the cover of Madden. User:Minizilla 14:00 14 October 2006 (EST)

thats the point, the curse isn't just about an injury, which is why he should be left off for now, because so far, it is just an injury. we wont be able to see if his or the teams season was ruined by it until the season is over, but even then, the hawks are still ahead in their devision, and obviously didn't miss a beat without shaun, only losing to the undefeated bears while he was gone.--Indiearmy 08:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Indiearmy, please stop. It is obvious that Shaun has an extensive broken foot injury. He is once again out for another week. 1- 2 months is a significant injury. Let it be known that Vick came back after his broken leg also. Yea, Shaun will come back, but he wont be the same. And a bye week does count as a week in your so called 'football terms'.

If he isn't considered "cursed" like the others, Indiearmy, then what can you call this? Currently it is November 20 and Alexander still hasn't returned, not to metion that the Seahawks quaterback, Matt Hassellbeck, is injured and has missed the past few weeks as well. And one more thing, pre-Madden Alexander missed a total of 0 games in his 6-year career. Post-Madden he has missed already 6 games. So if this series of events can't be considered to be a part of this supposed "curse", then I have no idea how to classify it.

No kidding look at his stats last year and then look at him this year... Alexander was the biggest bust in Fantasy Football this year. People take Fantasy Football very seriously as usually there is quite a large stake of money to be had, and I for one will not draft anyone from the Madden Cover and I am not alone. You must be crazy to not think Alexander is not carrying on the curse. Tyler

He missed 6 games, and played 3 with an injury, and still almost got 1000 yards....which most RB's don't do playing every game, and you're trying to tell me he was cursed? 24.17.186.152 04:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

It was easily the worst statistical year of his entire 7-year career (doesn't matter if he finished up strong at the very end), and the first and only time in his entire career in which he's had to miss any time because of injury (prior to his "madden year" he was well known as an iron-man. Now that's out-the-window). Anyone who says he doesn't belong on the list is either clueless or employed by EA Sports.

QB Vision

Whats the status of the QB Vision on all consoles. It is on or off? I have the PC version where it is on.

I don't think the "QB Vision" section in the criticism makes any sense whatsoever.

On PS 2 the QB Vison Cone is optional, that is untill you decide to go All Madden and then it is on default (Must use). I agree with the cirticism on the QB vision cone. In the manual (purchased at $16.99) it refers to an (optional) trigger to control the vision cone. I use the standard PS 2 hand held which does not have a trigger or if does, the writer was refering to something else as a trigger which was not made clear to users (Is there another type of controller that has a trigger?). I would like for someone with experience to provide an explanation as to what was ment to be the trigger on the hand held controller, how best to use it or other tips in being able to best use the vision cone to throw passes before being sacked on every pass play. Not being able to pass because of the vision cone makes the game useless to many that want to play at the All Madden level because you are going to lose to the computer which does not have a humans problem in using the vision cone. What about it? Anyone got an answer?

For Madden 2006, the default is set to on, but you can turn it off. For All-Madden, it is set to on and cannot be toggled off. For Madden 2007, the default is optional (it stays off unless you move the right analog stick, and then it turns on). And like the year before, for All-Madden, it is set to on and cannot be toggled off. Coachb05 00:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Screenshots of Every Madden Game Here

Here's a link I found that shows a couple screens from every Madden game. Please use this link to embed pictures in each section of the new Madden Sections of Wikipedia. Thanks!

http://www.consoleclassix.com/gameinfo_johnmaddenfootball_gen.html

Player on the Cover

How do they decide who goes on the cover of the game each year?--Martin925 02:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

The same way they decide who succeeds the Pope. Except without the white and black smoke. :-p

On a more serious note, I guess they just examine a certain player's statistics, popularity, and achievements, and base a decision on that. -- ShadowJester07  ►Talk  02:19, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

From what I have found out, stats play a role, but it depends highly also on any significant changes made to game play. Marshall Faulk was on 2004 because they made major improvements on all of offensive (and he could both catch and run). Ray Lewis was on the 2005 cover because of the hit stick, Donovan McNabb was on the 2006 cover because of QB Vision and going to the Super Bowl, and Shawn Alexander was on the recent 2007 cover because of the new blocking scheme, helping out runners. Coachb0505:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Marshall Faulk was on the 2003 cover.

madden 93

i have created an article for madden '93. i am wondering if either a. it will be deleted and if it is can i post it on madden nfl. or if it can stay a seperate article.Mstare88 16:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Deleted Section

Please note, I am not trying to vandelize this page. I felt that the section I deleted was completely irrelevent in an article about the Madden NFL series. Why was there even a criticism section here at all? Everybody has problems with how video games are made and marketed, but no video game article I've seen other than this one has a criticism section in it. If you don't like Madden NFL, THEN DON"T BUY IT!!!!!!!!! If you want to complain about it. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A CHAT ROOM!!!! 72.28.56.8300:53, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored; a criticism section is relevant as long as the section is verifiable, well-written, and neutral. The only real legitimate argument for deleting the section is on the grounds of its lack of sources. See WP:ATT or WP:NOR --  ShadowJester07  ►Talk  03:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Madden90.jpg

Image:Madden90.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used underfair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

No Curse Reference???

Guys, I understand that the highly subjective nature of the curse makes its very documentation difficult. But the complete lack of some text connecting the curse to this game misses a major part of the cultural discussion surrounding this game. A major section should be included that references the dedicated topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by75.17.112.14 (talk) 07:22, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Madden06Screen.jpg

Image:Madden06Screen.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described oncriteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Original game

Any one can make an article or include any information about the first madden game? Funny how the images are of 2001 and 2006 (xbox 360) but none for Nes or super nintendo. —Preceding unsigned comment added byFlushinQwnzNyc (talk • contribs) 12:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The original game was rleased in 1989 for the PC. Nintendo never had a game, it first appeared on SNES for the Nintendo brnad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by146.126.61.241 (talk) 03:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Latest curse effect

I just added the Favre saga to the curse section. While is nmot an injury or something like that, i think is important the fact that even retired players get affected.Zidane tribal (talk) 18:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Look over the merge proposition/discussion on [2]You claim has already been addressed, in a relative way of speaking.--  StarScream1007  ►Talk  18:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Madden Curse Article Deleted?

That's flat out bullshit. I found the list of players and how they were affected very interesting. Somebody, get your ass on this, we need that article back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by24.46.46.131 (talk) 01:59, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

yeah, you're right, it's pretty dumb to delete that...I DO NOT believe the curse for Favre is his Packers situation. I'm still banking on the loser to get in a horrifying car accident. —Preceding unsigned comment added byRorytmeadows (talk • contribs) 00:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

That is horrible to say, and I reckon that comments like that were what got the section deleted in the first place. However, since Vince Young lost his starting job, we have more support for the curse and its existence as a cultural reference, and regardless of whether or not you believe it (which I believe very few people do), it was the most convenient way of realizing the various effects of the so-called curse. Considering that there is a blurb in the Madden NFL article AND four or five blurbs in the discussion page, I believe the Madden Curse page should be fully restored. Let's just regulate ignorant comments like the above poster's. ShinyHubCaps (talk) 05:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree--it is stupid and pointless to debate that the curse is "real". Some folks need to get out of the cave and stop being afraid of the dark already. Sports Illustrated Cover Jinx is not real, but very similar in pop culture relevance, and has its own page. Bring back the old Madden Curse page. NOW. —Preceding unsigned comment added byToddgee (talk • contribs) 19:22, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The Madden "Curse" is real, and it is mathematically proven: it's called regression to the mean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by129.65.177.23 (talk) 19:32, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually I like what was done here. Instead of working on improving the language so that the information presented there is neutral to existence of a curse, it was just removed. There are plenty of other places on the internet to get similar information, so it shouldn't be presented here in an easy to read format. Similar logic should immediately be applied toInternational_recognition_of_Abkhazia_and_South_Ossetia --12.47.208.34 (talk) 16:36, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I added the list of players year by year and included their injuries. This may be a good compromise without re-creating the whole article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by24.17.234.90 (talk) 22:44, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

No. That does not accomplish anything, but merely add another section that's composed of synthetic claims. The main argument for the redirection of the Madden Curse article was that it used a series of events to advance a claim - ex that the players who appaer on the cover will have something bad happen to them. The list affirms the position that the curse does in fact exist, rather than simply reporting the impact and influence of the curse of within the media. The Merger Discussion about the Madden Curse can be found here. -- StarScream1007  ►Talk  00:13, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

I understand your point, but I don't like to get all caught up in theory and procedure - I just want to make the article better.

I think the section as it was was... incomplete. It did include two examples of Michael Vick and Shaun Alexander, but why not include all the 'examples'? Remember, one of the remarkable aspects of the 'curse' is that it (supposedly) happens year after year without fail - that's why I included the list.

Having said that, I do understand if my prose is not as eloquent or concise as it should be. Also, some re-wording may be necessary to avoid the appearance of Synthesis like you said - I'm ok with a re-write, but I think the section needs to include the players on the cover and their injuries - lets make this complete :-)

There is no reason to document all the 'examples' of the curse as a person can list several bad things that happened to a cover athlete, even outside of the field - which was generally the reason to why the editors who opted to merge the Madden Curse article choose to redirect it here. Second, this article should neither affirm or deny that the curse actually exists, but rather offer an overview on the Madden Curse and its place within the media (WP:NPOV). Two examples were kept to give the reader a general idea about the Madden Curse, while the supplementary links within the section provide in-dept and chronological details about the curse.-- StarScream1007  ►Talk  02:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep - the section Definately needs a re-write, for example the sentance "because of his retirment, Barry Sanders is the only player to avoid the curse" is totally inapropriate. But the list should absolutely stay, like the guy said above, without it, it's incomplete.

I reiterate the fact that the list does not need to be complete; the two examples are provided simply just to give the user a general example. A similar article, Sports Illustrate Cover Jinx, only lists a few examples. It was also nearly deleted for not having originally listing several examples of alleged curse victims. It is very easy to look at all the Madden Cover Athletes and name one or two things that went wrong after they appeared on the cover. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  23:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep, but with a re-write. Smackalot (talk) 18:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I re-worded the section a little and took out the Barry Sanders part about him not being injured. —Preceding unsigned comment added by24.17.234.90 (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Commentators?

I must be missing something, because the section for the in-game commentators is awful. Al Michaels was not in Madden NFL 08, so why is he credited as being "play-by-play commentator"? It seems as if other voice actors are also wrongfully listed. Why does this section exist? Can somebody fix it or, better yet, can it? ShinyHubCaps (talk) 05:11, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Curse Neutrality

I'm not seeing where this was discussed. I'm thinking it should be taken off, as well as having Dorsey Levens added to the list for the 2000 Madden Curse. Any thoughts? Infero Veritas (talk) 21:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The issue was being discussed in the section, "Madden Curse article deleted?". Technically, the discusion is still going on...-- StarScream1007  ►Talk  21:44, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

The discussion you referenced seems to have ended a month ago. However, it also seems that people are starting to make edits to the section without discussing them. With regard to that, please see the message I left you on your personal talk page. Obviously the neutrality is an issue, so lets discuss Dorsey Levens and the year 2000. Is it acceptable, based on the current, as is, format...to add the year 2000 and Dorsey Levens to the page? Infero Veritas (talk) 14:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Curse again

I just want to make it known I attempted to expand the curse section a little more using dates and references to the extreme. I gather there is a minority opinion here that this info should be excluded or shortened but I feel from the consensus of this talk page that users find the information interesting and notable. I also would like to include that the curse is not "My Original Research" I didn't make it up, and simple search engine search will indicate that many news outlets recognize the "madden curse". So enjoy —ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS 16:29, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

In support of this, I expounded a bit on the latest information on Troy Polamalu, including a ref from a news outlet (USAToday big enough for everyone?)citing the curse. StryyderG (talk) 20:04, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, I would appreciate anyone else who supports this part of the article to sound off, because we're having trouble keeping this notable trivia in the article because of a loud minority. —ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS 20:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Aspensti, you seem to be ignoring the specific policies arguments that I have cited in this case. This article was specifically redirected here to avoid editors from creating a documentation of players that have been hurt as a result of players that have been hurt as a result of their cover appearance. The original Madden Curse article ''was not merged here, but rather completely rewritten and redirected to this article to specifically AVOID listing various players. The examples listed in the previous revision of this article serve to only give the average reader a general example of the curse. What does the repeatedly giving examples of the same incident accomplish? Listing multiple examples of the curses implies that there is a correlation between cover appearances and injuries, violating Wikiedia's Synthesis policy (WP:SYN). We live in the 21st Century, there are hundreds of sources that verify Polamalu's injury. This is not a matter of verifiability, but rather an issue of placing various claims together to advance a major claim. The examples do not specially benefit the article, but rather express an non-neutral point of view that the curse actually exists based on a string of incidents (WP:NPOV).

And by the way, if you feel you are the so called majority in this debate based on year-old remarks by anons, please feel free to address this issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Football League, for a more comprehensive exchange. -- StarScream1007  ►Talk  07:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the use of the word "Curse" is what makes this subject matter appear more hokus-pokus rather than notable information. Let me pose this, if you didn't refer to it as the "Madden Curse" and merely mentioned that coincidentally year after year, the player featured on the cover of the madden video game sustains an injury and then listed examples, how can anyone say that thats original research, synthesized facts or no neutral point of view? Its a PROVEN FACT and has been shown without incident that year after year the cover player is injured. So if you didn't use the mythological term "Curse" and you merely made that statement, where is the harm and what policy is being broken? As an example, what if I said Every 12 months that pass the month of January happens each time? Would you find that information useless in the article about the month of January? Synthesized? or no neutral point of view? I would be fine with changing the section title to remove the "Curse" term to make it more realistic, but unfortunately, the term "Madden Curse" has been coined because of its yearly reoccurrence. Furthermore, allowing 2 examples in the article paves the way to allow as many as there is legitimate citations for. As I type this other editors are making suggestions to help expand the "Curse" section. I would personally say, the curse section is one of the more interesting sections of the article. With saying that, there are lists and other articles that are FAR more useless that still exist. If anyone else has anything to say about it, I would hope they speak up, because I think you're in the minority on this issue and that most editors find the information useful. —ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS 17:09, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

For one, it's not a proven fact that people who appear on the cover of Madden games get injured. Neither Eddie George, Barry Sanders, nor Dorsey Levens sustained major injuries during their cover year. Furthermore, almost all NFL players get injured to some extent at one point in their career – its a matter of time. But, you are inferring that appearing on the cover will spontaneously cause a player to have an injury the next season? Please, tell me how such wonders of nature and science are possible.

There is a difference between drawing conclusions based on events on proven and documented things (the passage of time), and events based on almost supernatural occurrences, like “curses” . Let's walk though a logical example. If we use a normal Gregorian calender, we can assume that if twelve months pass from January, then we are going to be in January of the next year. Further, If twelve months do not pass from January, then we are not going to be in January of the next year. If we assume, that if a player appears on the cover, and gets injured, then he is a victim of the Madden Curse. What happens if a player appears on the cover and does not get hurt (Sanders and George)? What happens if a player gets hurt, but was not on the cover of the game? What happens if a player does not get hurt, but was not on the cover of the game? You cannot claim that there is a proven link between appearing on the cover of Madden and injuries. Are there reliable sources to claim that there is in fact a PROVEN and FACTUAL link that is COMPLETELY CONSISTENT with ALL cover athletes? Until this link is well established, there is no reason to create lists of players who were injured so the article can claim that the curse exists. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  18:33, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Curse Section getting a table?

The section as-is is extremely difficult and confusing to read. Dates and Players are scattered about without any continuity. I figure given past debates is that a table-type of formatting should be done. By using a table, info can be contained into several specific parameters and can also help make the article semi-readable as well.

Example is below using the first three "Madden Curse victims"

Game Edition	Player	"Curse Effect"
Madden 2002	Daunte Culpepper	Missed five games.
Madden 2003	Marshall Faulk	Out for six games.
Madden 2004	Michael Vick	Injured for 11 games due to broken leg; subsequently convicted of Dog fighting charges.

I figure it's an idea that's time has come. And needs to be implemented.--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 07:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I say you could do this if you like. Currently only a handful of people are mentioned however they are all in chronological order. There are some other editors who are against the curse section all together. But I support you if you want to make a table out of it. Just make sure everything is cited, especially the incident to the player. —ASPENSTI—TALK—CONTRIBUTIONS 17:12, 12 September 2009 (UTC)