NCAA Football 12: BCS Bowl Game Simulations

Feature Article

Submitted on: 12/21/2011 by Bo McCready

Now that bowl season is in full swing, it's time to look ahead to this year's crop of BCS games. For this article, I watched the CPU play all five BCS bowls, which resulted in some nail biters, and a couple of surprise blowouts.

Sugar Bowl
Michigan 31, Virginia Tech 24

At the half, Virginia Tech led 17-10. Each team had scored only three points on offense, trading defensive touchdowns. The score remained at 17-10 until the fourth quarter, when Vincent Smith and David Wilson scored rushing touchdowns for Michigan and VT, respectively. VT led 24-17, but Michigan scored 14 unanswered points and left Virginia Tech with 1:16 to score the game-tying touchdown. After a sack, Tech faced a 4th-and-18 to keep their hopes alive, but Michigan’s Ryan Van Bergen burst through the middle of the line to sack Thomas, clinching a Michigan victory. This incredibly sloppy game featured seven conventional turnovers, five turnovers on downs and 13 punts.

Statistical Leaders
Passing:
Michigan – Robinson, 28-50, 326 yards, 1 INT
VT – Thomas 18-42, 140 yards, 4 INT

Rushing:
Michigan – Toussaint, 14 carries, 31 yards, 1 TD
VT – Wilson, 17 carries, 102 yards, 1 TD

Receiving:
Michigan – Roundtree, 6 rec, 94 yards
VT – Coale, 4 rec, 47 yards

Defensive:
Michigan – Martin, 6 tackles, 2.5 sacks
VT – Gouveia, 15 tackles

Orange Bowl
Clemson 38, West Virginia 36

West Virginia jumped out to an early lead after a Tahj Boyd fumble and a Geno Smith touchdown pass. Clemson answered with a Boyd touchdown run and scoring pass to Marquan Jones. Neither offense had much trouble moving the ball, and at halftime, Clemson led 28-20. With just over a minute left in the game, West Virginia took over down 38-30 at their own 39-yard-line. That was plenty of time, as Smith found Thomas Sims for a touchdown to make it 38-36. But the Mountaineers failed on their two-point conversion attempt, and the Tigers took a knee to close out a win.

Statistical Leaders
Passing:
West Virginia – Smith, 36-55, 384 yards, 4 TD, 1 INT
Clemson – Boyd, 15-26, 205 yards, 3 TD

Rushing:
West Virginia – Alston, 12 carries, 26 yards
Clemson – Ellington, 15 carries, 106 yards

Receiving:
West Virginia – Woods, 7 rec, 109 yards, 1 TD
Clemson – Jones, 4 rec, 92 yards, 1 TD

Defensive:
West Virginia – Miller, 8 tackles, 1 sack, 1 forced fumble
Clemson – Goodman, 3 tackles, 2 sacks

Fiesta Bowl
Stanford 14, Oklahoma St. 6

Oklahoma State broke the ice with a 54-yard field goal from Quinn Sharp, however, the Cowboys' offense sputtered for the rest of the half as Stanford scored 14 unanswered to take a 14-3 lead into the break. Neither offense did much the rest of the way. With Stanford leading 14-6 and a minute remaining, Brandon Weeden led Oklahoma State down to Stanford’s 25 yard line before fumbling the ball away, allowing Andrew Luck to take a knee to clinch a Stanford win. Neither team broke 200 yards of total offense in this one.

Statistical Leaders
Passing:
Stanford – Luck, 7-13, 82 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT
Oklahoma State – Weeden, 15-29, 188 yards, 1 INT

Rushing:
Stanford – Taylor, 16 carries, 65 yards
Oklahoma State – Randle, 11 carries, 30 yards

Receiving:
Stanford – Owusu, 1 rec, 26 yards, 1 TD
Oklahoma State – Anyiam, 4 rec, 67 yards

Defensive:
Stanford – Lueders, 9 tackles, 2 sacks, 1 INT (returned for touchdown)
Oklahoma State – Blatnick, 4 tackles, 2 sacks

Rose Bowl
Wisconsin 28, Oregon 16

Wisconsin was in complete control throughout this game, taking a 21-3 lead into the fourth quarter. From there, LaMichael James scored to pull Oregon within 12 points, but Wisconsin’s Montee Ball closed out the game with a long series of short runs, culminating in a touchdown. Oregon scored with 15 seconds left to make the final outcome a bit more respectable, but from there, Russell Wilson took a knee and closed out a convincing win for the Badgers.

Statistical Leaders
Passing:
Wisconsin – Wilson, 15-25, 149 yards, 2 TD
Oregon – Thomas, 19-33, 239 yards, 1 TD, 1 INT

Rushing:
Wisconsin – Ball, 32 carries, 130 yards, 2 TD
Oregon – James, 5 carries, 27 yards, 1 TD (injured)

Receiving:
Wisconsin – Abbrederis, 5 rec, 67 yards, 1 TD
Oregon – James, 2 rec, 14 yards, 1 TD

Defensive:
Wisconsin – Taylor, 7 tackles, 1 forced fumble, one recovered fumble
Oregon – Clay, 12 tackles

BCS National Championship Game
Alabama 42, LSU 21

The Alabama-LSU rematch couldn’t have looked any less like their regular-season matchup. LSU jumped out to a 21-0 lead early in the second quarter, but from there, it was Roll Tide. Marquis Maze caught three touchdown passes and Trent Richardson added two more on the ground as Alabama annihilated LSU. It was a turnover-free game for LSU, but their defense allowed more than 500 yards.

Statistical Leaders
Passing:
Alabama – McCarron, 23-31, 343 yards, 4 TD
LSU – Jefferson, 14-25, 155 yards, 1 TD

Rushing:
Alabama – Richardson, 34 carries, 149 yards, 2 TD
LSU – Ford, 12 carries, 90 yards, 2 TD

Receiving:
Alabama – Maze, 6 rec, 130 yards, 3 TD
LSU – Tolliver, 3 rec, 41 yards, 1 TD

Defensive:
Alabama – Hightower, 3 tackles, 1 pass deflected
LSU – Barrow, 1 forced fumble, 1 recovered fumble, blocked FG

NCAA Football 12 Videos

Member Comments

# 1 crques @ 12/21/11 01:04 PM

Who the heck is Thomas Sims for WVU?

# 2 SilentSanta @ 12/21/11 03:35 PM

I doubt the National Championship will be that high scoring. Probably another game like the one we already saw earlier this year.

# 3 Kcordloh @ 12/21/11 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SilentSanta


	I doubt the National Championship will be that high scoring. Probably another game like the one we already saw earlier this year.

I doubt it will be 9-6, but I doubt we see either team top 21 pts.
I personally am not watching it, I want to but I said I wouldn't if it was BCS/Alabama, not after Sabin said what he did about not winning your conference back in 2003.

Looking forward to the Fiesta though!

# 4 Jadakiss88 @ 12/21/11 04:35 PM

Now if the Fiesta produces that low score there is truly NO argument that Bama doesn't deserve a rematch. And the NCG game will be 14-28 Bama. That's only if Saban doesn't pull up in the 3rd if he has the lead.

# 5 Pandetta @ 12/21/11 07:05 PM

Honestly the sims are going to be a bit off since the ratings were determined before the season and some teams (LSU anyone) have proven themselves much better than initial impressions. I really doubt Alabama crushes LSU.

# 6 shadia147 @ 12/21/11 08:00 PM

Great to see Bama won the Sim. But I think LSU was at a disadvantage because the CPU probably didnt exercise LSU's depth . And Alabama having more stars in their starting lineup would have the edge.

# 7 bomccready @ 12/21/11 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pandetta


	Honestly the sims are going to be a bit off since the ratings were determined before the season and some teams (LSU anyone) have proven themselves much better than initial impressions. I really doubt Alabama crushes LSU.

Pandetta and shadia147, I agree about the ratings and the CPU's use of players. I made some minor adjustments to make these teams play closer to their real-life counterparts (updated depth charts, moved Russell Wilson from NC State to Wisconsin, gave Michigan a playbook full of QB runs). But when you leave the CPU in control, as I did for these games, you definitely get mixed results. I mean, Denard Robinson threw 50 passes and ran 12 times in the sim I watched.

Watching a series of CPU-CPU sims makes some of the game's AI weaknesses really obvious. For example, the number of fake punts in these games was absolutely incredible. Also, although EA has improved the simulated stats of scrambling quarterbacks, watching the AI control a scrambler is a different animal entirely - none of the running quarterbacks in these games could do anything on the ground.

# 8 alphaguy5 @ 12/21/11 09:38 PM

I really like how Logan Thomas threw 4!!!!! picks. Michigan's secondary is not that good and LT3 isn't bad at all.

And I like how the player they had making the most tackles for VT has been out for weeks with a season ending injury.

# 9 crques @ 12/22/11 09:35 AM

Is it me or does the color scheme on this game resemble those water color paints that I used as a kid? The colors are dull and boring.

# 10 Pandetta @ 12/22/11 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bomccready


	Pandetta and shadia147, I agree about the ratings and the CPU's use of players. I made some minor adjustments to make these teams play closer to their real-life counterparts (updated depth charts, moved Russell Wilson from NC State to Wisconsin, gave Michigan a playbook full of QB runs). But when you leave the CPU in control, as I did for these games, you definitely get mixed results. I mean, Denard Robinson threw 50 passes and ran 12 times in the sim I watched. Watching a series of CPU-CPU sims makes some of the game's AI weaknesses really obvious. For example, the number of fake punts in these games was absolutely incredible. Also, although EA has improved the simulated stats of scrambling quarterbacks, watching the AI control a scrambler is a different animal entirely - none of the running quarterbacks in these games could do anything on the ground.

That is cool to hear. I know there are sliders that help that situation but there is only so much you can do of course. The Denard Robinson stat is pretty hysterical :P

# 11 Gotmadskillzson @ 12/22/11 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crques


	Is it me or does the color scheme on this game resemble those water color paints that I used as a kid? The colors are dull and boring.

It's not you.......The graphics this year is just faded like it was dipped in a bucket of bleach. Game only looks good zoomed in on pictures and during replays.

But as you are playing, it is faded city.

# 12 xxSTEELCITYDxx @ 12/26/11 02:57 AM

will there be updated rosters now that the season is over?

More Links