NCAA Football 13 News Post

NCAA Football 13 Will Not Include The University of South Alabama

10:41 AM - June 14, 2012 by Steve_OS

NCAA Football 13 will not include the University of South Alabama. Jags Jungle corresponded with EA Sports for the answer.

Quote:


	South Alabama was a provisional member of FBS last year and did not play a full FBS schedule. We did not receive confirmation that they were changing to a full FBS schedule this year until it was too late for inclusion in NCAA Football 13. South Alabama will be included in NCAA Football 14.

Sources - Jags Jungle, CBS - Eye on College Football

Game: NCAA Football 13Reader Score: 7/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Xbox 360Votes for game: 60 - View All

NCAA Football 13 Videos

Member Comments

# 101 N51_rob @ 06/16/12 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moylan


	even more proof that this had nothing to do with laziness or lack of effort on EA's part. Again give me one sound reason why they would put any effort at all into the other three school's and then just quit when it got to the Jags. so far in this thread I haven't heard one.

Lazy is just the word frustrated fans and consumer are rightly or wrongly using to voice frustration.

I think it goes to a lack of QA, which again isn't a lazy issues its just that a quality issue. Like the time EA shows us they fixed Iowa's fasemasks, then when the game is released they are wrong again NCAA 11 was the game I think. Just a lack of QA IMO.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

# 102 Ziza9Noles94 @ 06/16/12 03:21 PM

EA didn't mess up imo. From everything I have read, including this http://no2minutewarning.com/2012/04/...abama-jaguars/

South Alabama, while playing an fbs schedule sure, will not be eligible for a sun belt title or a bowl. So they aren't a truly full fledged fbs member yet. They are still transitioning until next year when they can compete for a conference title and try for a bowl bid. Going by that, they shouldn't be in the game until next year.

# 103 Orangemann @ 06/16/12 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziza9Noles94


	EA didn't mess up imo. From everything I have read, including this http://no2minutewarning.com/2012/04/...abama-jaguars/ South Alabama, while playing an fbs schedule sure, will not be eligible for a sun belt title or a bowl. So they aren't a truly full fledged fbs member yet. They are still transitioning until next year when they can compete for a conference title and try for a bowl bid. Going by that, they shouldn't be in the game until next year.

There's no room for your logic in this thread - you're in the middle of a bash-EA circlejerk. Just let them go...

# 104 TheRegan @ 06/16/12 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziza9Noles94


	EA didn't mess up imo. From everything I have read, including this http://no2minutewarning.com/2012/04/...abama-jaguars/ South Alabama, while playing an fbs schedule sure, will not be eligible for a sun belt title or a bowl. So they aren't a truly full fledged fbs member yet. They are still transitioning until next year when they can compete for a conference title and try for a bowl bid. Going by that, they shouldn't be in the game until next year.

But UMass, UTSA and Texas State are under the same conditions. I think we should all be mad at USA for not letting EA know soon enough.

# 105 Kaiser Wilhelm @ 06/16/12 05:05 PM

I am going to throw out this crazy idea. Maybe it is South Alabama's fault for not informing EA quick enough, but is it really beyond Tiburon to add in South Alabama? I just feel like we have known South Alabama would be in the FBS for long enough for a addition even if it is a release day, first month free DLC or at the very least priced just to cover the XBL/PS3 fees.

From my experience with PC gaming, it seems the worst enemy to console games right now is the consoles themselves.

# 106 Suntan Superman @ 06/16/12 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm


	I am going to throw out this crazy idea. Maybe it is South Alabama's fault for not informing EA quick enough, but is it really beyond Tiburon to add in South Alabama? I just feel like we have known South Alabama would be in the FBS for long enough for a addition even if it is a release day, first month free DLC or at the very least priced just to cover the XBL/PS3 fees. From my experience with PC gaming, it seems the worst enemy to console games right now is the consoles themselves.

It depends. If the game was already built for 123 teams, there would be a lot of programming involved to fix it to 124. Then its cost-to-profit ratio. Even with all the man hours put into to reprogramming them in, plus the cost of going through the networks will enough people WANT UoSA to pay say 320 MS points for it. If not, it doesn't make sense from a business standpoint.

As far as consoles holding consoles back, yup, you're right.

# 107 moylan1234 @ 06/16/12 05:28 PM

I understand this is a completely biased perspective, but I guess as a UMass fan I just have hard time feeling sorry for South Alabama and honestly also find it to be a little annoying that even UTSA made the cut. The Minutemen started playing football in 1879 and Texas State in 1904 while these other schools have only had programs for a couple of years, to me it won't kill them to wait another year. Again I know that's not rational or logical, but I just can't help feeling that way.

# 108 Armor and Sword @ 06/16/12 05:34 PM

The omission of South Alabama has inspired a 12 page thread so far.

Brilliant.

# 109 Twenty Four @ 06/16/12 05:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moylan


	I understand this is a completely biased perspective, but I guess as a UMass fan I just have hard time feeling sorry for South Alabama and honestly also find it to be a little annoying that even UTSA made the cut. The Minutemen started playing football in 1879 and Texas State in 1904 while these other schools have only had programs for a couple of years, to me it won't kill them to wait another year. Again I know that's not rational or logical, but I just can't help feeling that way.

Its just the level of talent down here. You see FIU & FAU already in D-1 now USA and Tje University of West Florida(D-2Baseballchamps) are starting a football team. But I do agree that its too soon for USA, even as a fan.

# 110 TDenverFan @ 06/16/12 11:08 PM

One thing people don't seem to get is EA does not have the rights to UoSA, thus they could get sued by putting them in.

One thing EA could have done is made a generic UoSA to put in. Woukd have looked odd, I'll admit, but it could easily be replaced by a TB team.

(Ex. Southern University Jaguars instead of UoSA Jaguars)

Edit: Well, ironically Southern University Jaguars are a real FCS team.... EA could have made a team like Mobile University Jaguars or Southeastern Alabama Jaguars or something like that. I think 2K did this with UC Calcutta in CH2k8.

# 111 PowerofRed25 @ 06/17/12 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TDenverFan


	One thing people don't seem to get is EA does not have the rights to UoSA, thus they could get sued by putting them in. One thing EA could have done is made a generic UoSA to put in. Woukd have looked odd, I'll admit, but it could easily be replaced by a TB team. (Ex. Southern University Jaguars instead of UoSA Jaguars) Edit: Well, ironically Southern University Jaguars are a real FCS team.... EA could have made a team like Mobile University Jaguars or Southeastern Alabama Jaguars or something like that. I think 2K did this with UC Calcutta in CH2k8.

That's actually a really cool idea. The game already has FCS West, East, etc. They could have just done something like FBS Southeast or FBS Gulf Coast with generic uniforms in a generic stadium. Then people could either play against them or replace them with USA.

# 112 SincerelYourz @ 06/18/12 11:44 AM

I didn't realize those other transitional teams made it into ncaa 13

# 113 coogrfan @ 06/18/12 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SincerelYourz


	I didn't realize those other transitional teams made it into ncaa 13

UTSA and TX State are both eligible to win the WAC title this year but cannot participate in the postseason. USA cannot compete for the Sun Belt title or participate in a bowl game until the 2013 season; UMASS is in the same boat in the MAC.

# 114 pjburrage @ 06/18/12 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suntan Superman


	It depends. If the game was already built for 123 teams, there would be a lot of programming involved to fix it to 124. Then its cost-to-profit ratio. Even with all the man hours put into to reprogramming them in, plus the cost of going through the networks will enough people WANT UoSA to pay say 320 MS points for it. If not, it doesn't make sense from a business standpoint. As far as consoles holding consoles back, yup, you're right.

This is the one aspect you can blame EA for. iirc there was a big statement about the scheduling logic some point last year or early this year, and how it had been reworked. I think they reworked it for 123 teams, but possibly didn't consider the future and plan ahead for 124+ teams (which is looking more and more likely in the future). If when they re-worked the scheduling logic, it could have been a great opportunity to implement the feature of adding teambuilder teams to the current NCAA teams rather than replacing them.

The fear is that when more teams move up to FBS/Div1-A they will have to re-work the scheduling logic each time.

# 115 nhill76 @ 06/19/12 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by eagskerfan


	This whole thing could have been avoided if we were allowed to add teambuilder teams without having to replace other teams.

True that, I'm going to download someone's South Alabama team from team builder and replace Univeristy of Louisiana Monroe.

# 116 MrOctober430 @ 06/19/12 03:28 PM

So only teams that made it in is UT-A, UT-SA and UMass?

# 117 Suntan Superman @ 06/19/12 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrOctober430


	So only teams that made it in is UT-A, UT-SA and UMass?

Correct. 10

# 118 TheLeviticalLawKid3 @ 06/19/12 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by coogrfan


	UTSA and TX State are both eligible to win the WAC title this year but cannot participate in the postseason. USA cannot compete for the Sun Belt title or participate in a bowl game until the 2013 season; UMASS is in the same boat in the MAC.

And here is your main reason why they aren't in this year.

# 119 coogrfan @ 06/19/12 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skull


	this is in fact not true, UMASS, UTSA and TSU are all ineligble to wint their conferences

UTSA and Texas State are eligible to win the WAC title this season.

2012 WAC Spring Football Preview

http://www.wacsports.com/pdf8/838677.pdf

WAC NEWS AND NOTES
CHANGES COMING � The WAC begins a new era this year with the additions
of Denver, Seattle, UT-Arlington, UTSA and Texas State with only the latter two
competing in football. The WAC will consist of a total of 10 schools for the 2012-13
season, but just seven will play football. Both UTSA and Texas State are eligible
to compete for the WAC championship, but neither are eligible for a postseason
bowl game in 2012 due to the two-year process of transitioning from FCS to FBS.
Texas State began the process last year and becomes eligible for bowl games
in 2013, while UTSA must wait until 2014 as it begins the transition process this
season. For their opponents, wins against Texas State this year count toward
bowl eligibility while those against UTSA do not.

# 120 TheLeviticalLawKid3 @ 06/20/12 01:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skull


	this is in fact not true, UMASS, UTSA and TSU are all ineligble to wint their conferences

It was stated in the post above mine and below yours. C'mon.

« Previous 1 2 3 4 567 Next »

More Links

NCAA Football 13 Will Not Include The University of South Alabama