More disparity and fluidity for recruiting pitches.

[Dianwei32]

I'm in year 2 of a Dynasty with a Teambuilder school that I designed with good recruiting pitches because all my other dynasties have been terrible in terms of recruiting. However after winning the NC my first year, I've got a ton of top prospects interested in my school and I'm contending with other national powers like Ohio State, Alabama, Texas, and Florida. However, I've noticed that all of the national powers have A/A+ ratings in all but 1 or 2 pitches (not counting Proximity to Home or Early Playing Time). This makes recruiting races between major football powers come down to luck in who gets the best pitches week-in and week-out because you can't compare schools in anything because the other powers all have A/A+ ratings.

The main one that got to me was Academic Prestige. Schools like Ohio State, Texas, Alabama all have A/A+ ratings in Academic Presitge, but if you think of truely prestigious universities they don't come to mind. Places like Stanford, Rice, Harvard, Brown, Dartmouth, Columbia... those are prestigous Academic Universities, not UT, Bama, or Ohio State. I think that the ratings need to be stretched out for all schools. Only the best of the best should be awarded A+ ratings in anything. Only 5 or 6 schools should have an A+ in any given rating, and only 10-15 A ratings. The importance of an A or A+ rating in Program Tradition is diluted when 25 or 30 schools also have an A+ rating.

In addition to streching out the pitch ratings, I think that ratings should be able to change mid-season. If you take a school with a B Championship Contender pitch and make it to 11-0 while getting to #1 in the BCS poll, then it is likely that you can make it to the National Championship, so why would your pitch for Championship Contender still be a B? It should go up to a B+ or A if you're on the doorstep of playing in the big game.

The biggest pitch that should be affected mid-season is Early Playing Time. If a school is targeting 2 players at the same position with an A rating in Early Playing Time and one of them commits, then the Early Playing Time for the other recruit should drop since he'll be competing with the signed recruit for playing time if he signs with the same school.

TL;DNR Version

-Too many A/A+ ratings, strech them out. Only 5-6 A+ ratings and 10-15 A's across all schools.

-Pitch ratings should be able to change in-season. Ex: A HB signs with a school, the Early Playing Time rating for other HBs in the recruiting class drops from B+ to C. Your team gets to 11-0, rises to #2 in the polls, your Championship Contender pitch rises from B to A.

[44drob]

I was wondering about how The A+ Accademic prestige schools like stanford......etc never get top recruits??? That like School

[Dianwei32]

Quote: Originally Posted by 44drob

I was wondering about how The A+ Accademic prestige schools like stanford......etc never get top recruits??? That like School

Well, why would you want to go somewhere like Stanford or Rice when Ohio State, USC, and Alabama all have A+ Academic Prestige as well?

One thing I forgot in my original post is that recruits' interest in a school should vary based on how the team performs throughout the season, especially if the recruit is interested in Championship Contender. If a recruit has Texas ranked #1, but then Texas has a horrendous year and goes 5-7 and doesn't even make a Bowl game, the recruits should lose interest in Texas.

One more place this could really be used is if a recruit has 2 schools they like that play each other. For example, let's say that it's Week 8, and a recruit has his choice narrowed down to his Top3 schools, Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida. Texas holds a 1 point lead over Oklahoma, but the two schools play each other this week. Oklahoma beats Texas 28-17. The recruit could see that and decide that he likes Oklahoma over Texas, and as a result Oklahoma moves up to be his #1 school, and Texas drops to #2 or even #3 behind Florida.

[89OneHanded]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dianwei32

The main one that got to me was Academic Prestige. Schools like Ohio State, Texas, Alabama all have A/A+ ratings in Academic Presitge, but if you think of truely prestigious universities they don't come to mind. Places like Stanford, Rice, Harvard, Brown, Dartmouth, Columbia... those are prestigous Academic Universities, not UT, Bama, or Ohio State. I think that the ratings need to be stretched out for all schools. Only the best of the best should be awarded A+ ratings in anything. Only 5 or 6 schools should have an A+ in any given rating, and only 10-15 A ratings. The importance of an A or A+ rating in Program Tradition is diluted when 25 or 30 schools also have an A+ rating.

I completely agree, especially about the first part. Only Ohio State would have a decent Academic rating. The graduation success rate (GSR) of athletes from the other two schools is laughable. (Check any NCAA school's GSR here: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/newmedia/pub...tes/index.html )
The NCAA FBS Men's football average is a 67% graduation rate.
OSU's GSR: 63%
Texas's GSR: 49%
Alabama's GSR: 48%

So, if we used GSR to determine the success of their athletic academics, OSU would be rated around a C, C+, while Texas and Bama would both be rated D-. Yeah...recruiting needs a lot of work to be anywhere near the realm of realism.

[TDenverFan]

I feel like EA uses this equation to determine school ratings:

Big Name BCS School: Uses a random number generator to hand out As and A+

Mid-Tier BCS School: Randomly gives out C+s and Bs

Non-AQ school: Gives D+s and Cs in all pitches.

I have trouble believing that USC's campus (Or OSU, UT, Bama, UF, etc.) is just as nice as Hawaii's campus or SDSU's campus (Both are on a beach).

I doubt many of the BCS schools who have A+ Acaddemics deserve higher than a B (Except for PSU, none of those schools are known for academics). Then BOise, with the 2nd highest Football Player Graduation rate, gets a C+ Academics.

Lastly, just because a team is not in an AQ conference does NOT mean that everything should be a C. Campus and Academics shouldn't be affected by football skills. And an experienced coach CAN play for a not-too well performing team.

[89OneHanded]

Quote: Originally Posted by TDenverFan

I feel like EA uses this equation to determine school ratings: Big Name BCS School: Uses a random number generator to hand out As and A+ Mid-Tier BCS School: Randomly gives out C+s and Bs Non-AQ school: Gives D+s and Cs in all pitches. I have trouble believing that USC's campus (Or OSU, UT, Bama, UF, etc.) is just as nice as Hawaii's campus or SDSU's campus (Both are on a beach). I doubt many of the BCS schools who have A+ Acaddemics deserve higher than a B (Except for PSU, none of those schools are known for academics). Then BOise, with the 2nd highest Football Player Graduation rate, gets a C+ Academics. Lastly, just because a team is not in an AQ conference does NOT mean that everything should be a C. Campus and Academics shouldn't be affected by football skills. And an experienced coach CAN play for a not-too well performing team.

Very much agreed.

[playguitar90]

Quote: Originally Posted by TDenverFan

I feel like EA uses this equation to determine school ratings: Big Name BCS School: Uses a random number generator to hand out As and A+ Mid-Tier BCS School: Randomly gives out C+s and Bs Non-AQ school: Gives D+s and Cs in all pitches. I have trouble believing that USC's campus (Or OSU, UT, Bama, UF, etc.) is just as nice as Hawaii's campus or SDSU's campus (Both are on a beach). I doubt many of the BCS schools who have A+ Acaddemics deserve higher than a B (Except for PSU, none of those schools are known for academics). Then BOise, with the 2nd highest Football Player Graduation rate, gets a C+ Academics. Lastly, just because a team is not in an AQ conference does NOT mean that everything should be a C. Campus and Academics shouldn't be affected by football skills. And an experienced coach CAN play for a not-too well performing team.

Exactly! Things like campus lifestyle, academic prestige, early playing time, and proximity to home should be there to offset the tradition and contender pitches that the big schools should be good at. A smaller school should be able to try and land a guy because he's really interested in those pitches that aren't football related. But in this game, the big schools are good at everything.