What r your thoughts???

[c_law23]

I agree that the violation system is random and out of your control but isn't that how it is in real life? Do you think Chip Kelly knew Blount was going to start attacking Boise State players or that Masoli loved the smell of stolen computers? These actions are random because you don't know what an 18-22 year old is going to do. That being said there should be some sort of character barometer while recruiting. That would really make things realistic as you sacrifice the integrity of your program for a super talent or you don't.

Also I wished that grades had a bigger impact on programs. Like the kid that RichRod was trying to get into michigan that was ultimately denied.

[plrichard]

Quote: Originally Posted by Lynx34

Here's what needs to happen. There needs to be a significant difference in how players with playing time progress with those that don't get playing time. The game should keep track of how many snaps each player plays in and the higher the number the more likely they are to progress faster. I think this would help quite a bit. That way, there should be some drop-off after a title campaign. Or at least there would be more likely to be a drop-off.

The only problem I have with that is that there doesn't seem to be a very good rotation system in NCAA. So basically all the starters would progress rapidly whereas the second stringers wouldn't even if in real life the first and second strings are pretty much indistinguishable with the exception of a couple of guys.

[Oregon23]

Quote:

Maybe they could have a system like in Blitz the league, you can spend money on building a new stadium or giving the new freshmen his own apartment and an SUV. The points could add up, say you want his playbook knowledge to increase but his awareness is only 35 (he can't learn school & his routes at the same time, pick one) so you pay off his teachers so he can improve faster. You could pay for your offensive line to have a summer abroad in Europe where they come pack with an extra 20 lbs of muscle.

no way they would so something like that. it would make college football look bad and EA for putting it in there.. it dose sound kinda cool tho haha

[Lynx34]

Quote: Originally Posted by plrichard

The only problem I have with that is that there doesn't seem to be a very good rotation system in NCAA. So basically all the starters would progress rapidly whereas the second stringers wouldn't even if in real life the first and second strings are pretty much indistinguishable with the exception of a couple of guys.

Notice how I said that players with more snaps would be more likely to progress faster. Not they be guaranteed to. And everyone still progresses. Let me put up a scenario for you.

Player A is a starter, and he has played 80% of the snaps at his position. We'll say he's a running back. Player B is his backup and played 20% of the snaps. (I know 3+ player rotations at RB are fairly common, I'm just making this easy).

Now the computer would calculate "base progression" which would basically be a toned down version of what they have now. We'll say that the computer determines that Player A gains 2 points overall and Player B gains 3 points overall.

Now the playing time points come into play. Here, the computer "rolls the dice" to determine if they get more points. Let's say the computer calculates that 7 more points will be given out to this position. For each point, we'll say that there is a 70% chance that the point will go to a player that got snaps. Within that 70% chance, there is an 80% chance that Player A will get it, and a 20% chance that Player B will get it (according to their snap count percentages). This way, it is not guaranteed, but Player A is simply more likely to get more points.

I know I'm over-simplifying this using OVR, but because I don't know exactly how it's calculated for any postion, I'm dumbing it down slightly. I'm confident I can be applied with more complex equations though by the programmers that know exactly how progression works now. There would also have to be some kind of plateauing or "diminishing returns" so that higher rated players progress less than lower rated players. There'd have to be some nice magical equation that goes through lots of testing. I'm just giving a base framework for how it could work.

[TripleCrown9]

SoCal says violations are a bad idea.