The biggest beef I have with this game (once again)

[UnderRatedCoast]

Despite it's many flaws, some of which are understandable (hey, you try designing a videogame), this is still my very favorite game year in and year out. I believe much of hit has to do with the fact that I'm a die hard college football fan. Being thus, however, has it's drawbacks. Those drawbacks happen to be that I read every preseason college mag (Steele, Lindy, Athlon, the works), and follow all the recruiting sites, so I pretty much have it down which players are the better ones, the faster ones, the worse ones, ect. That being said, who rates the players in the game and sets up the rosters? It seems like every year they are pretty decent, but there are those ratings that just make you scratch your head. I'll take my own favorite team (Oregon) for example, since I know their roster the best.

1) At QB, the highest rated QB on the team is Kempt. There's only one problem: he isn't even on the team anymore, since he transferred last spring due to the fact that he was only the 5th or 6th best QB on the roster. Now, the guy who finished the season as the starter last year, Justin Roper, isn't even on the game. And the projected starter, Nate Costa, is the worst QB on the roster. Also, there were two big name QB recruits who made their way to Oregon. One is Darren Thomas, who made his way decently onto the roster, but the other one (the better one) is named Chris Harper, and he only makes his appearance as a very slow, very untalented running back. Normally position mistakes can be somewhat understandable, as not all players have even reported yet, however these two graduated early and both played in the spring game in March - at QB.

2) One of the two best WRs on the team, #6 (Derrick Jones) got kicked off the team a few months ago for dealing drugs. Another guy, Jamele Holland, a big name transfer from USC and projected starter, missed out on even being on the team. Come on now, he's a projected starter and was on the practice squad all of last season while sitting out his required year.

3) At defensive end, Oregon starts one of the best, if not THE best end in the Pac 10, and one of the best pass rushers in the country. He led the conference in sacks and TFL last year on his way to being named to the all-conference team. How does this only warrant an 82 rating? Sure, sub-par players tend to get inflated stats when playing in a weak conference, but this is the Pac 10.

4) Oregon sports what is likely the best defensive backfield in the Pac 10, and possibly the best in the whole country. As a matter of fact, Phil Steele believes that they are the best in the country. They are led by Patrick Chung, Walter Thurmond, and Jairus Byrd, all preseason all-americans and all pac 10 guys from last season. All three have been placed on the Thorpe watch list (top 40 defensive backs preseason). Somehow, while Chung's abilities didn't escape the notorious player raters, Thurmond and Byrd have been relegated to very average, very pedestrian corners with Thurmond garnishing an 87 rating and Byrd a very uninspiring 82 while being slower than a lot of linebackers. That's a worse rating than they had in NCAA '08. I don't understand how a rating can go down after going from Freshman all-american to all-pac 10 the next season to just being another cornerback who wouldn't start for half the teams in the conference.

5) And that brings me to the overall team rating, which is 81. If I'm not mistaken, that's the worst rating by any team in the top 25, and if you ranked the teams by their rating and not by their ranking, Oregon would be the 5th best team in the conference. Michigan is rated better than them for crying out loud! A team that lost a 4 year starter at RB and QB, both of their starting receivers, and the best members from their offensive line, who lost 39-7 at home the year before, and who has a new coach running the spread offense with pro-style players. Now, I've seen the videos on the internet of the game developer showing off his product, and I noticed that he talked a lot about being a Cal fan, but is this some kind of grudge?

Now these are only the specifics for my team, which makes me seem like an incredibly huge homer (and that I may be), but I recognize a screw job when I see one...and I know this isn't the only case. In some of the cases it's rating a player or team TOO good. I mean, tell me: when was the last time Florida State did anything of great significance, especially one that warrants such a high team rating. And Matt Stafford of Georgia still riding high on his 5 star recruiting rating 3 years later, since it's obvious that he didn't get his rating by being the 56th rated passer in the NCAAs last season. And mis-rating a team like FAU or Louisiana-Monroe is pretty understandable, but messing up top 25 teams is pretty weak.

I know it's a long gripe, but it just seems like such an easy thing to miss when you have literally dozens of writers out there who make a living rating players. I'd think it wouldn't take much to get a rating out of them, or at least read what they're writing in their magazines. Hell, I know an entire message board dedicated to college football enough that would gladly rate every player for free, and I'm one of those people.

PS The game is still awesome, and thanks for putting in the online dynasty mode. It's fun as hell and as addictive as crack. Tempers start to flair when people don't hurry and play their next game.

[merg311]

Quote: Originally Posted by UnderRatedCoast

5) And that brings me to the overall team rating, which is 81. If I'm not mistaken, that's the worst rating by any team in the top 25, and if you ranked the teams by their rating and not by their ranking,

I feel your pain man. KU is ranked 15th and I believe they are a 77 or 79 overall. Talk about getting the shaft! Athlon magazine has the KU linebackers ranked as the 3rd best in the nation, but their ratings on NCAA 09 sure dont show that at all. Athlon also had KU defensive backs ranked 7th or 8th overall in the nation, yet the highest ranking a DB for KU receives on the game is 81, with the other in the upper 70s.

I just checked, KU is a 77 overall. That is the same rating as Duke! KU went 12-1 (yes, soft schedule blah blah blah), Duke went 1-11. Same ratings???? I think I may have a bigger gripe than you haha

[hagfors33]

fellow duck here, and boy do I feel the same way about the roster. It is really upsetting that a team in the top 25 can escape a second look-over

[BigDofBA]

KU got screwed in the game. Seriously. They should of at least been in the mid-80's.

I also don't like how so many teams have rankings of 99.

[UATide]

Seriously, freakin UGA maxed out at 99! Geez, that's just ridiculous, my goodness. Yes, they do have a top QB, potential Heisman runner, and a phenomenal running back. But I don't think they deserve that MUCH respect. Too much love for the Dawgs to me.

[sj3981]

Great post, and I agree 100% with the team and player ratings, which for the must part, are absolute garbage. To me thought the biggest head scratcher is Florida State. They have one of the few 99 rated defenses (which to me is not warranted), and what is it based on? Their overall rating sure as hell can't be related to their last few seasons of college football. Particularly when no one is predicting them to be a highly rated team this year. KU and Oregon are definitely right up their with the biggest snubs though.

[UnderRatedCoast]

Quote: Originally Posted by merg311

I feel your pain man. KU is ranked 15th and I believe they are a 77 or 79 overall. Talk about getting the shaft! Athlon magazine has the KU linebackers ranked as the 3rd best in the nation, but their ratings on NCAA 09 sure dont show that at all. Athlon also had KU defensive backs ranked 7th or 8th overall in the nation, yet the highest ranking a DB for KU receives on the game is 81, with the other in the upper 70s. I just checked, KU is a 77 overall. That is the same rating as Duke! KU went 12-1 (yes, soft schedule blah blah blah), Duke went 1-11. Same ratings???? I think I may have a bigger gripe than you haha

Wow, yes, Kansas also got screwed. I haven't played against them and haven't tried to play with them yet, so I didn't realize. The same ranking as Duke? My God! They've won one game in like the last 5 years!

[867-5309]

Kansas definitely got screwed ratings wise.

Sometimes I wonder how much thought they put into the smaller conferences, like the MAC.

Central Michigan 72 81 66
Northern Illinois 77 79 78
Western Michigan 79 77 85

Let's see, last year

CMU went 8-6 won the MAC title for the second year in a row
Returning starters
Offense: 8, defense: 8, kicker/punter: 1

Western Michigan went 5-7
Returning starters
Offense: 8, defense: 11, kicker/punter: 0

Northern Illinois went 2-10
Returning starters
Offense: 9, defense: 9, kicker/punter: 1



Yes

Western Michigan > Kansas
No. Ill = Kansas
and the best of the three MAC teams gets a kick in the nuts.