NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

[I Peench]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

tradition sports is awesome.

[GoSpartans11]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I'm almost absoulutely convinced the first rating is the teams overall, second is offense, and third is defense, not offense defense special teams.

[utahman27]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

These are seriously the worst ratings I've ever seen. I love my Utes, but there is now way in hell that the Offense is 95. It'd be lucky if it was an 85. I would have also thought that with the recruting bump and the sheer fact of being in the Pac 12 would've bumped them up to a 5*, but maybe I'm being a little too biased.

But I can say for a fact that having Boise as a 6* is an atrocity!!!! The only thing they have going for them is that they do win 10-11 games a year, but that is not the only indicator of a 6* program. They have **** academics, are in a ****ty location, a god awful stadium (not talking about the turf. dont get me started on that) and they're recruiting is not that good. Im so damn sick of the Boise love fest I could puke.

[thaima1shu]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I'm a little shocked about the UW's defense rating. We'll definitely be better this year ... but last season was an atrocity!

I'm just pumped that we're no longer a 3 star school. That was a damn shame.

[pioTROFFski]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

wow, there are so many issues with these ratings but I''l just say that MSU only having the 4th best D in the B1G is a joke (as is rating their O better than the D)

With what other Big Ten teams are rated, what a joke. Wisconsin at 99/97? Really? 8 points better on defense than MSU? 2nd best team in all of college football? Wow.

[Arrowhead29]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

No way in Hell should Kansas' Defense be rated higher than their Offense. Offense should be in the 82-84 range and Defense should be in the 74-76 range.

[coogrfan]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I'm almost absoulutely convinced the first rating is the teams overall, second is offense, and third is defense, not offense defense special teams.

I think you're right.

The table claims LSU has a 99 off, 92 def and 97 spec teams. However, in another thread over at Tradition Sports you can see roster screenshots showing the top 10 for a number of teams. The Tigers have exactly two players on the offensive at side of the ball in their top 10 (RT#72 Alex Hurst and RB #11 Spencer Ware); the defense has five such players (CB #7 Tyrann Mathieu, DE #99 Sam Montgomery, FS #1 Eric Reid, DE #49 Barkevious Mingo and MLB #46 Kevin Minter).

[Ramminyou]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

These are the worst team ratings in the history of sports video gaming if true. So many of them make no sense. Texas a 99 on offense? LOL.

[pirates946]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I love my Red Raiders but a 87 on offense and an 89 on defense? really? really EA? First off all we were the worst defense in the country last year and we are going to have a spectacular offense. I kinda agree with the 87 offense rating...could be higher...I wouldnt be upset if it was lower. An 89 on defense though? thats just crazy

[coogrfan]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I'm almost certain that GoSpartans11 is correct when he says the author has mislabed the categories. If you read the numbers OVR/OFF/DEF you'll find that things are more in line with what you would expect.

[Td1984]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

So many of those teams are insanely overrated. They gave out an unbelievable amount of 90+ ratings.

[GoSpartans11]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

It is overall offense defense. Look at the demo ratings, and they match up perfectly. Alabama's offense in the demo is a 92, which is an A-. A 97 would be an A.

With that said, Auburn's offense and defense are too high, West Virginia's offense and defense are too low, Wisconsin is a bit overrated, Tulsa is very overrated, Texas is overrated on O and D, Notre Dame's offense needs a little working on, Sparty's defense needs a boost, Maryland's D needs to drop, Geogia's O needs an upgrade, and Clemson's and Baylor's defenses could use a drop in ratings are the things that pop out to me. Although almost every team will have lower ratings in my rosters.

[husker237]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

Love my Huskers, but 91-91 is too high for off/def. Until they win more than 9 games in a season they should not be rated in the 90's in either category. Especially since the D took a huge step back last year.

[Pokes404]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

Guess we were right. The author just re-labeled everything as OVR/OFF/DEF.

I was about to say, looks like EA really threw in the towel with NCAA this year.

[dre1919]

Re: NCAA Football '13-Team Ratings

I love my Irish...but a 97 overall? From where?