Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

[canes21]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

I’m probably completely wrong but maybe that’s how some recruits become connected to the offensive and defensive coordinator and that’s why they follow them to another school.

I am thinking this might be part of the equation if it is how it works. I am assuming there is also a % chance that a player on that particular side of the ball is going to be connected to their coordinator and it forms that way as well.

I guess we will find out soon enough.

[georgiafan]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

I was thinking the players attached to the coaches would just be the coach for the side of the ball they are on. But maybe it is tied to who recruits them

[canes21]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

I was thinking the players attached to the coaches would just be the coach for the side of the ball they are on. But maybe it is tied to who recruits them

If we are able to have our OCs and DCs recruit for us as well, then it would make sense for that to be an influence as well as just being a player on that side of the ball. I can't imagine EA would make it an either or type of deal.

I feel like a simple way to handle it from a programming standpoint would be to have it setup to where the more interaction they have with a particular coach, the more likely they are to form a relationship with that coach. A relationship meaning they'll follow them should they leave that school.

So, if you send your OC to a QB's once, there's a small chance they form that relationship. If your OC is DMing and calling that recruit weekly, doing the in-home, and then the official visit has them reviewing film together, then there is a significantly higher chance of that relationship forming.

Then, when a player is on campus, all players on that side of the ball would have a baseline chance on a roll of having that relationship form with their coordinator. This chance could be increased or decreased by whatever their motivations are.

An example being, and I am stealing Madden's motivations to use in this example, who knows what they will be in CFB25 or what they will be called, a LG values scheme fit over all else, then maybe that means he gets an increased chance of forming a relationship with the OC.

However, if one of his motivations, or his top motivation, were instead playing for a HC with a good winning record, then that would decrease his odds of forming the relationship while boosting it for the HC.

Again, we have no idea if coordinators will even be able to help in recruiting in this way. It's only been something hinted at in an unofficial info drop by some 3rd party I forget at this point. And, it's completely possible in the actual game the chance of a player getting attached to a coach is purely RNG.

I think if the system has some depth to it, and coordinators can do recruiting actions, then I believe the above system is likely how it would be built since that is not overly complex and would be setup in a way that I think fits how EA tends to create different systems in their sports games.

[georgiafan]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

So if we get 10 hours of recruiting for the head coach by default and the OC/DC can give you say a extra 3 hours if that's in his skill tree. Do we think that you actually just spend those 3 hours as the OC/DC or will those 3 hours just be added to your head coaches. I feel like thats not how they would get the OC/DC attached to the player and it might be the official visit thing.

Man 11am needs to hurry up and get here

If we are able to have our OCs and DCs recruit for us as well, then it would make sense for that to be an influence as well as just being a player on that side of the ball. I can't imagine EA would make it an either or type of deal.

I feel like a simple way to handle it from a programming standpoint would be to have it setup to where the more interaction they have with a particular coach, the more likely they are to form a relationship with that coach. A relationship meaning they'll follow them should they leave that school.

So, if you send your OC to a QB's once, there's a small chance they form that relationship. If your OC is DMing and calling that recruit weekly, doing the in-home, and then the official visit has them reviewing film together, then there is a significantly higher chance of that relationship forming.

[canes21]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

So if we get 10 hours of recruiting for the head coach by default and the OC/DC can give you say a extra 3 hours if that's in his skill tree. Do we think that you actually just spend those 3 hours as the OC/DC or will those 3 hours just be added to your head coaches. I feel like thats not how they would get the OC/DC attached to the player and it might be the official visit thing.

Man 11am needs to hurry up and get here

The way it worked in College Hoops is that each coach had their own allotment of time for each week. When you clicked on a recruit, you got the list of actions you could do. Emal, call, watch tape, watch them play in person, in-house visit, and official visit. Not all options were always available, but that's what you could do throughout the recruiting process.

When you selected an action, say Call, you'd then pick which of your coaches would do the action. You'd see their relevant rating, Charisma was the recruiting rating in that game, and you'd see how many hours they have free. If they had free time, you could assign them to do that action, if not, then you obviously couldn't assign them to do that action.

I would assume, if coordinators can recruit in CFB25 that it will be set up similarly. Another cool thing with College Hoops was the more time each coach spent recruiting, the less time they spent practicing with the team. It was give and take. If you did zero recruiting one week, your coaches had 100% influence over practice that week and players developed more. If you spent all their recruiting time that week and had them out doing visits and whatnot, practice didn't develop players as much.

It was a neat tradeoff and I'd love seeing something similar in this game as well.

Of course, this is all for naught if it turns out someone misspoke and coordinators aren't involved in recruiting at all in this game. I'm hoping they are, but until EA confirms it themselves, I'm not holding my breath.

[WeArePSU40]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

https://x.com/easportscollege/status/1807903127955206519?s=46

First screen shot of new recruiting. Dissect away!

[georgiafan]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

For you not on Twitter… let me look it over and I’ll post back my thought

[illwill10]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

For you not on Twitter… let me look it over and I’ll post back my thought

As I posted yesterday, the recruiting pitches are the same. Only difference is Television exposure was changed to Brand Exposure.

I see a National ranking, state ranking, and position ranking.

[WeArePSU40]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

For you not on Twitter… let me look it over and I’ll post back my thought

The only thing I don’t agree with is UCF being a B+ in “championship contender”. More like a C+.

UGA, OSU, Oregon, Bama should be A+. PSU, Michigan, Utah, Clemson should maybe be A or A-. UCF is not a B+.

The are a good program. And a fun program. And might be able to get there in a few years if they step up with the new conference, but they aren’t today.

[canes21]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

The only thing I don’t agree with is UCF being a B+ in “championship contender”. More like a C+.

UGA, OSU, Oregon, Bama should be A+. PSU, Michigan, Utah, Clemson should maybe be A or A-. UCF is not a B+.

The are a good program. And a fun program. And might be able to get there in a few years if they step up with the new conference, but they aren’t today.

To be fair, we don't know what season they are in in this dynasty, what conference they have UCF in, how the current season is going, etc.

A school trait like that may be one of the quicker ones to change. If you're 9-0 and in the playoff hunt even with UCF, I could see it jumping to a B+ year one. Then again, this could be year 4 and they have UCF as a 90 overall team.

[georgiafan]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

“Verbally committed on left”

35 target board max

600 hours (Need help here?)

14 school gardes listed

35 scholarship max (14 had only 25)

Pitch strategy ( need help here)

Transfer portal screen so this pic likely taken in the offseason

Actions with 6 strategy listed and a bunch of icons (need help here)

Awesome looking prospect header screen

Tendency so likely is the archetype

[WeArePSU40]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

“Verbally committed on left”

35 target board max

600 hours (Need help here?)

14 school gardes listed

35 scholarship max (14 had only 25)

Pitch strategy ( need help here)

Transfer portal screen so this pic likely taken in the offseason

Actions with 6 strategy listed and a bunch of icons (need help here)

Awesome looking prospect header screen

Tendency so likely is the archetype

Also position is LE, so looks like we’re using the archaic LE/RE position designation. Not a big deal, but booooo

[canes21]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

Now that we have enough videos out here to have a good idea on recruiting, I felt like we could talk about the system a little more. I know it's early to talk about future releases, but here I am.

As many videos have shown, the old gem/bust system is back. You scout a player and are told if they are a gem or a bust. You are told this information before they ever take a step on campus. I get the idea behind it, but I feel like it's not really representative of what those terms mean in real life.

In real life, a kid that is a gem or a bust is not given that tag until they've already joined a program and then exceeded expectations or failed to meet them after a year or two at minimum. It's not something that is determined while they are still in high school before they've even signed pen to paper or even had their first collegiate practice.

What I would rather see is the game not ID recruits as gems or busts. Remove that part of the game. Instead, I think it would be great to have recruiting rankings update throughout the season. The game already knows what a kid's ranking is and what their actual ratings are and that's how it determines the gems/busts. It could use that knowledge to move players up and down the boards throughout the season.

It would be a more realistic way to show a kid's initial rating wasn't accurate. Instead of scouting a 3* QB and finding out they are a gem the current way, you would scout them, see they have some nice stats that you like, and then maybe in week 6 of the season they are bumped up to a 4* after a ratings update. How cool would it be to get on a kid like that early and then also see them earn their new star?

What I am thinking is that maybe every 3-4 weeks in dynasty the rankings update. There is the pre-season rankings and those last through week 3. In week 4, you get a notice that recruiting rankings have been updated. Those are the rankings through week 7, then in week 8 you get the same notice. Repeat that in weeks 12 and 16. Week 16 could maybe be the final rankings, or those could come out at the conclusion of bowl season.

What would also be a pretty cool touch that may help out the CPU and help out with some of the potential issues we've seen with CPU logic and some blue chip players not getting recruited at all is that when each rankings update occurs, the CPU teams have their logic updated and they may start pursuing new kids that got bumps and are now on their radar. They may drop a kid they scouted and didn't like and also dropped in the rankings.

Maybe having the CPU's recruiting have some sort of light refresh every few weeks could help with some of their issues that look to be potentially there after watching so many dynasty videos already?

What would also be really cool is if the ranking updates weren't based purely off the behind the scenes ratings, but also influenced slightly by the offer lists of each player. Maybe a highly rated 4* is rated appropriately based off his ratings under the hood, but he has offers from 4 teams ranked in the top 10. That could give him a slight bump in his ranking. It happens in real life, it'd be cool to see in the game.

It could also be a way to balance out the user recruiting some more. Say whoever you're playing as is the reigning national title and you have a dynasty going and you scout a 3* that isn't elite by any means, but he has 99 speed. You show great interest. As a result, he gets bumped to a 4* and that leads to more CPU teams being attracted to him. It would be a way to help counter some "cheese" in the recruiting game when players heavily rely on certain attributes that may be overpowered in gameplay.

Do you guys think it would be cool to see rankings update? Did someone else already mention this idea earlier in the thread? I'd be curious to see how the community here would feel about those changes.

[jdb7623]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

Now that we have enough videos out here to have a good idea on recruiting, I felt like we could talk about the system a little more. I know it's early to talk about future releases, but here I am.

As many videos have shown, the old gem/bust system is back. You scout a player and are told if they are a gem or a bust. You are told this information before they ever take a step on campus. I get the idea behind it, but I feel like it's not really representative of what those terms mean in real life.

In real life, a kid that is a gem or a bust is not given that tag until they've already joined a program and then exceeded expectations or failed to meet them after a year or two at minimum. It's not something that is determined while they are still in high school before they've even signed pen to paper or even had their first collegiate practice.

What I would rather see is the game not ID recruits as gems or busts. Remove that part of the game. Instead, I think it would be great to have recruiting rankings update throughout the season. The game already knows what a kid's ranking is and what their actual ratings are and that's how it determines the gems/busts. It could use that knowledge to move players up and down the boards throughout the season.

It would be a more realistic way to show a kid's initial rating wasn't accurate. Instead of scouting a 3* QB and finding out they are a gem the current way, you would scout them, see they have some nice stats that you like, and then maybe in week 6 of the season they are bumped up to a 4* after a ratings update. How cool would it be to get on a kid like that early and then also see them earn their new star?

What I am thinking is that maybe every 3-4 weeks in dynasty the rankings update. There is the pre-season rankings and those last through week 3. In week 4, you get a notice that recruiting rankings have been updated. Those are the rankings through week 7, then in week 8 you get the same notice. Repeat that in weeks 12 and 16. Week 16 could maybe be the final rankings, or those could come out at the conclusion of bowl season.

What would also be a pretty cool touch that may help out the CPU and help out with some of the potential issues we've seen with CPU logic and some blue chip players not getting recruited at all is that when each rankings update occurs, the CPU teams have their logic updated and they may start pursuing new kids that got bumps and are now on their radar. They may drop a kid they scouted and didn't like and also dropped in the rankings.

Maybe having the CPU's recruiting have some sort of light refresh every few weeks could help with some of their issues that look to be potentially there after watching so many dynasty videos already?

What would also be really cool is if the ranking updates weren't based purely off the behind the scenes ratings, but also influenced slightly by the offer lists of each player. Maybe a highly rated 4* is rated appropriately based off his ratings under the hood, but he has offers from 4 teams ranked in the top 10. That could give him a slight bump in his ranking. It happens in real life, it'd be cool to see in the game.

It could also be a way to balance out the user recruiting some more. Say whoever you're playing as is the reigning national title and you have a dynasty going and you scout a 3* that isn't elite by any means, but he has 99 speed. You show great interest. As a result, he gets bumped to a 4* and that leads to more CPU teams being attracted to him. It would be a way to help counter some "cheese" in the recruiting game when players heavily rely on certain attributes that may be overpowered in gameplay.

Do you guys think it would be cool to see rankings update? Did someone else already mention this idea earlier in the thread? I'd be curious to see how the community here would feel about those changes.

Yes. That's a great idea. It actually follows what happens in real life. All the recruiting services update rankings I would say quarterly. A players offer list also impacts his ranking.

[TBBucs_24]

Re: Let's Talk Recruiting (CFB 25)

Everyone will find out soon enough but based off many reports so far, recruiting looks sketchy again. I am optimistic about the foundation that's been built this time, at least. However, I'm seeing far too many NCAA 14 problems popping back up.

Personally, I feel EA is going to have to do something more drastic with the overall function of how recruiting works for a video game. Let's face it; it can't be easy with 134 teams. But recruiting is the very thing that makes the mode. Heck, dynasty in general is why this game never would get as stale as Madden or any other pro game. There are countless new challenges.

But for sure, EA is going to have to try something more radical to get and keep more consistent results from blue bloods, remaining P4 schools, and G6 schools, if these early results are true. it may be a game but if your going to do a sim the way EA wants to do, you have to get this recruiting thing right.