NCAA Football 12 Team Ratings and Prestige Revealed (Tradition Sports Online)

[RebelHog]

Quote: Originally Posted by Noble Evildoer

Arkansas State got a D- for special teams so it's not all inaccurate.

Hugh Freeze offense should be fun to run on this game though. Can't wait to watch Stephen Hogan tear up the Sun Belt Secondary!

[xcrushx]

Very generous ratings to Virginia. I'm surprised to get a B overall. I was figuring a C+. B is very generous.

UCLA is really a 2* prestige? Wow! I have a hard time comparing UCLA to some of the other 2* prestige teams. I know they have struggled but still.

Looks like I'll use Akron again as my team to build up.

Why is Michigan still 5*? After their struggles with Rich Rod. They should have dropped to a 4*. It's a good job but realistically Michigan isn't the school or job it was before Rich Rod. Michigan didn't have their pick to anyone they wanted. I think their prestige has really fallen.

USC should be 5* max, possibly even 4*. They have struggled the past couple years and with all the NCAA penalties they aren't the superpower they were a few years ago. I understand USC is still a big name but they haven't had the success to be a 6*.

Florida State should be 4*. They've improved this past year but they've had so many mediocre seasons that they don't deserve that 5* rating.

Virginia should possibly be a 2* considering they have had 4 losing seasons in the past 5 seasons. It's pretty hard for me to argue for them to still be a 3*.

Miami should be 4* at the most. Just like Florida State they have struggled much too much to have them at 5* prestige.

Iowa 5*? Not sure what they've done to deserve that. Yes, they have had good seasons but I wouldn't think they have deserved to be given 5*.

The ratings seem slightly high for all teams. I'm not expecting any teams to be very dominate this year. I personally don't feel any of this year's teams deserve an A+ rating. It should be reserved for the best of the best teams.

[Bullet Sponge]

I usually just use a roster file that puts the actual names on players (FairdaleKings usually) but this year I might actually wait for one where the players are all rerated to more realistic levels.

[ActLikeYouCrow]

i agree with the sentiment that noone should be an A+, but the team ratings/grades dont necessarily make sense in comparision with the individual player ratings. i dont know about boise being one of the top 5 offenses from a rating perspective after losing their two starting wr's. miami still has talent, but lost some guys to the draft. hard to justify an A- on offense when you dont have a skill player back who was all conference.

seems odd that the 4 teams with at least A- on offense and defense are ranked no.1, no.2, no.28 and no.34

[SlickRick11]

Quote: Originally Posted by jaredlib

My theory is this.... EA obviously can't recreate the actual rosters since, well, they get freaking sued. I think they just throw rosters together, focus on the key players, and fill in the blanks around them based on the school. Michigan is still a big name. Their D should be a C or C+ at the best but that just won't happen without custom rosters

exactly right.....what is it 70 man rosters 120 different teams? there's a lot of filling in blanks whenever they're doing the rosters

[volstopfan14]

Why is Tennessee a 4 star? I honestly don't care about team ratings, but the prestige is very important. Tennessee should be a 5 star.

[Xero Theory 42]

I like the generous B+ rating for Uconn, but thats what it is. Uconn's offense has no QB barely any WR's and Todman and Frey are gone. But hey, i dont mind

[TN_Mike]

Dang Tennessee is not getting any love! 4 star prestige? The same as Iowa and Utah! Crazy!