Player Ratings missing on NCAA 14

[booker21]

I disagree.

I don´t see a difference between 90 QB and 70QB when using them.

Ratings should impact the game a lot more than they do.

[BrockOchoGOAT]

Quote: Originally Posted by booker21

I disagree. I don´t see a difference between 90 QB and 70QB when using them. Ratings should impact the game a lot more than they do.

There is an argument to be made that they should impact things more, but they do have a noticable impact already. Throwing a lead pass with a QB with bad accuracy is much more difficult to complete, WRs with good route running get open against man easier and create seperation off the breaks, CBs with good Man Coverage cover those WRs closer out of breaks, etc. It may not be as much as you want, and I certainly do not think they are perfect, but the player ratings do have an impact on the players in game ability.

[canesfins]

Quote: Originally Posted by Swamp Swagger

One more thing though if ratings matter so much why can we put a punter in as a blocker then watch him throw a 99 DE to that ground like nothing?

One of my biggest pet peeves in '13. What was the point of me even recruiting stud 5* offensive lineman when i could just use punters?

[BrockOchoGOAT]

Quote: Originally Posted by canesfins

One of my biggest pet peeves in '13. What was the point of me even recruiting stud 5* offensive lineman when i could just use punters?

The fact that a punter could block at all is not realsistic, but there is a huge difference between a punter and a 99 overall left tackle. Play in and play out, over the course of the season, the better offensive linemen block better than the bad ones. However, they do need to do some adjusting to how ratings work with blocking as a whole.

[lsu4life86]

i agree player ratings should be there but based on how well the coach (and his coaching staff) are at scouting prospects determines you to see the potential # assigned a player.

Bad scouting = # that's way off

Good scouting = # that is pretty close

Great scouting = # that is almost dead on

[BrockOchoGOAT]

Quote: Originally Posted by lsu4life86

i agree player ratings should be there but based on how well the coach (and his coaching staff) are at scouting prospects determines you to see the potential # assigned a player. Bad scouting = # that's way off Good scouting = # that is pretty close Great scouting = # that is almost dead on

I think that is a realistic idea, but I must admit that I like the current scouting. Finding out a prospect's actual ratings has made recruiting more fun than in prior year's NCAAs.

[westview33]

Quote: Originally Posted by booker21

I disagree. I don´t see a difference between 90 QB and 70QB when using them. Ratings should impact the game a lot more than they do.

i don't think the overall ratings matter much.

for example that 90 rated qb could be higher because of speed, agility and awareness ratings.

but it's not unlikely that both qb's could still have similiar ratings in accuarcy and throwing power.

ea is famous for assigning both good and bad qb's very similiar ratings in those two categories.

I personally would love to see very few qb's with 90+ throw power and accuarcy and wouldn't hesitate to use the lower end of the ratings scale 40-60 range for lower rated qb's in those categories.

that type of ratings seperation would impact the actual gameplay on the field much more than their (ea) current ratings scale which renders very minimum seperation of players especially at qb.

[BrockOchoGOAT]

Quote: Originally Posted by westview33

i don't think the overall ratings matter much. for example that 90 rated qb could be higher because of speed, agility and awareness ratings. but it's not unlikely that both qb's could still have similiar ratings in accuarcy and throwing power. ea is famous for assigning both good and bad qb's very similiar ratings in those two categories. I personally would love to see very few qb's with 90+ throw power and accuarcy and wouldn't hesitate to use the lower end of the ratings scale 40-60 range for lower rated qb's in those categories. that type of ratings seperation would impact the actual gameplay on the field much more than their (ea) current ratings scale which renders very minimum seperation of players especially at qb.

I would like to see that as well. However, the 40s might be a little harsh. I would also like to see a lot more of the super fast athletes who can also be QBs not all have B throwing stats. In real life, a lot of those athletes have what should be 60s throwing attributes.