Player Ratings

[bmorse22]

So... instead of having players with high 90's ratings would it be a good idea to make everyone nfl accurate. and what i mean is the best players in the game (ncaa) are high 70s to low 80s overall. And just the average guys are 40-60's. So then you can get a real feel of the difference between the pro and college game ability wise. I think this would make the game more entertaining, and yeah. does anyone have an thoughts if i got my message across straight?

[RamblinWreck21]

I don't like this idea because there are tons of GREAT college players who have zero pro potential.

[Moojenowski]

Tebow?

I think they should be NCAA specific because this is NCAA Football...

Leave the NFL ratings for these players up to Madden when you import your draft class.

[KentuckyJared20]

Since the college football game is different than how the NFL is played, I think that NCAA should rate the players for how they are in NCAA. Tebow is the most commonly used example, but there are many more examples of a college player who didn't really fit in the NFL.

[jmbrew420]

I agree, to an extent, it would make more sense to do it that way. I always thought there were waaaaaaaay to many 95+ players. I would use the examples you used avg 60-75, good 75-80, great 80-85, NFL ready 86-90, and only elite potential 1st round draft picks 91+. This would better represent the talent level between the NFL ready and the avg college player. In college, the standouts, really stand out from the pack. Once your NFL.... not so much.

[Playmakers]

Quote: Originally Posted by Moojenowski

Tebow? I think they should be NCAA specific because this is NCAA Football... Leave the NFL ratings for these players up to Madden when you import your draft class.

The only problem with that is the best game play in NCAA you can get hands down on the field is by using the same ratings formula as Madden.

It's amazing how this game has played the last two years simply by using the Madden ratings instead of the default NCAA ratings on players.....I think that is because Madden focuses more on SIM style players and ratings while NCAA just throws ratings out there with a more casual approach.

So you don't really get to see the best game play on the field out of NCAA because they don't rate the players like they do in Madden

[burter]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmbrew420

I agree, to an extent, it would make more sense to do it that way. I always thought there were waaaaaaaay to many 95+ players. I would use the examples you used avg 60-75, good 75-80, great 80-85, NFL ready 86-90, and only elite potential 1st round draft picks 91+. This would better represent the talent level between the NFL ready and the avg college player. In college, the standouts, really stand out from the pack. Once your NFL.... not so much.

I like this idea. I think this would work pretty good with how the avg. is set up. Rather the best teams not have every starter be 90+ because not everyone is great, they just work great together.

[bmorse22]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmbrew420

I agree, to an extent, it would make more sense to do it that way. I always thought there were waaaaaaaay to many 95+ players. I would use the examples you used avg 60-75, good 75-80, great 80-85, NFL ready 86-90, and only elite potential 1st round draft picks 91+. This would better represent the talent level between the NFL ready and the avg college player. In college, the standouts, really stand out from the pack. Once your NFL.... not so much.

Yeah, but i mean the BEST in the game are mid 80's. not low 90's.