Why Not Having 85 Man Rosters Severely Hinders the Realism of NCAA Football

[silver281gt]

Quote: Originally Posted by PowerofRed25

Until depth charts are updated to more properly reflect the offense and defense you use and until there is more variety in individual player ratings, 85 man rosters are not necessary. It is hard enough to get 2nd and 3rd string guys in the game, especially at defense. What good will being able to have a couple more WR's and a couple more LB's/DB's do when the depth chart is designed in a way that you just can't get these guys in. Not only that but when there is no variety in recruits and player skill set, what's the point? Maybe if height/weight mattered or certain skill sets were more useful in certain formations/game situations, having 85 guys would be nice. But right now, I already have more guys than I use and end up with people buried in the depth chart for years. What would be nice though is being able to offer certain recruits a preferred walk on role that doesn't apply to the 70 scholarship limit. So if you are a 6* school but see a 3* guy that you might want on your team but don't want to waste an offer/scholarship limit on you could offer him a preferred walk on spot to him.

Its pretty easy for me to get my Defensive players in and out, even the oline players. I put my entire Def and O-Line injury sliders on 0.

On Def i have guys going in and out all the time. Just like my Real life Huskers. Some of them even disappear like my real life huskers.

[Gap Integrity]

I think 85 man rosters are essential to the college experience. I agree with all the posts, If you have to oversign and cut players each year thats just dumb. Even if you have to redshirt over 25 guys a year. I'd like to see player development become more relevant in dynasty mode.

[Lodeus]

Quote: Originally Posted by Potatoes002

After playing Skyrim, I'm not buying the "lack of disc space" excuse.

Lol, indeed.

[mackattack14]

You don't really need an 85 man roster because you only play 25-27 players in a game at a time. No need for more benchwarmers.

[jarato]

Quote: Originally Posted by mackattack14

You don't really need an 85 man roster because you only play 25-27 players in a game at a time. No need for more benchwarmers.

Wow at that logic , wow.

[blkrptnt819]

Quote: Originally Posted by PowerofRed25

Except I don't necessarily find that to be the case. In OD's where I am building up, by the time that 68 rated true freshman is game ready, I am recruiting well enough where a younger guy is more capable to replace him. This year especially, I've had very few players develop from a mediocre freshman into a capable starter a few years later. With 70 player rosters, I have never felt compelled to cut players I knew would make a difference. Either I'm not a good enough team to overrecruit to the point where I have to cut or I'm a good enough team to reload every year and not worry about developing a high 60's type guy into a starter because I'll recruit a low 80's guy one of those years to replace him. Using my last season at Clemson as an example, which was 2015 and I developed them from a 3* starting 2012 (I took over end of 2011 when they had already gone 5-7). I eventually got them up to a 6* team and some of the guys I recruited those first two years ended up getting passed over by younger recruits. I ended up with FR and SO at all the key positions. The only recruit that I actually built up to become a starter was my QB, who came in at 68 and started as a JR over a better rated SO because he fit the offense better. I think the only way 85 man rosters make sense is if there is some sort of competition between experienced players and incoming youth. Or something that allows one player's skill set to stand out over another. That just doesn't exist now.

I think that when they do 85 man rosters they will have recruits progress at different rates. That way there are diamonds in the rough with lots of potential but not ready to play up front.

[blkrptnt819]

Quote:

You don't really need an 85 man roster because you only play 25-27 players in a game at a time. No need for more benchwarmers.

I honestly think the lack of bust, transfers and injuries all have to due with the lack of an 85 man roster. Ppl have to understand that were a small minority of fans. Most ppl dont want there star player to go down or their qb to be out a couple games.

[JerseySuave4]

85 man roster is one of the lowest things on my list for things this game needs. I don't cut players, there's no point to it and i already have enough players at each position, i can care less about having a 3rd string FS on the roster or a 8th string WR, 5th string RB, 5th string QB, etc. By the time those frosh would develop into someone worth playing i have new recruits i can use.