Home

NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

This is a discussion on NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final) within the EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football
MLB The Show 24 Review: Another Solid Hit for the Series
New Star GP Review: Old-School Arcade Fun
Where Are Our College Basketball Video Game Rumors?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-10-2008, 02:25 PM   #33
Rookie
 
Preo32's Arena
 
OVR: 4
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago / Mizzou
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

I went on a college visit to Mizzou, and thats where i want to go. I plan on makin a dynasty wit them. Before i thought about what colleges i wanted to go to, my 3 favorite teams were Georgia, Oregon and South Florida. I lived in GA so i still like em a lot, and Oregon and USF i started likin about 5 years ago. Those 4 teams are the ones id play wit online, but Mizzou in my dynasty for sure.
Preo32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2008, 02:31 PM   #34
Rookie
 
Preo32's Arena
 
OVR: 4
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chicago / Mizzou
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Also. its funny u used the Rice Owls stadium as an example. on 08 i had a dynasty wit them where u make the guy (idk y but i cant remember what the mode is called) He was amazing. 83 over freshman year and won Heisman. I also beat Georgia in the Chick-Fil-A Bowl and went undefeted and ended up 14th in the polls
Preo32 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2008, 03:07 PM   #35
BOOM!
 
AuburnAlumni's Arena
 
OVR: 43
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 11,940
Blog Entries: 1
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Quote:
Originally Posted by therizing02
The ratings argument could go on forever. I will give EA credit for FINALLY not overrating Notre Dame.
Here is my issue with EA's ratings system..and the reason it IS an issue is because it's been constant over the last 10 years.

There are certain "sacred teams" in NCAA that EA continuously gives the benefit of the doubt.

By that I mean....not only are the "name" players on the team rated extremely high, but unknown players stepping in as starters get rated extremely high.

Other teams have their "name" players rated high but get shafted overall because the other guys get rated pretty damn low.

Using Auburn as an example...and Auburn is definitely NOT the only team to get the shaft by EA....Ronnie Brown was rated high, Carnell, etc. But many of our starters on that team were rated in the low to mid 70s. Meanwhile, guys on LSU and UGA who weren't every experienced, etc. were rated at least an 80.

I'm sure the ratings will change some, but it's pretty damn annoying when Auburn returns 7 starters off of the #1 total defense in the SEC and I see an effing 79 rating for them on defense....while Florida...who couldn't stop a cold last year on Defense....has a 90 rating on D. Hell...going by that list..Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, and South Carolina all have much higher rated Ds on 09 than Auburn.

Obviously I'm harping on Auburn because I'm an Auburn fan and use Auburn, but you could substitute a bunch of other teams for AU and it's the same deal.

End of rant.
__________________
AUBURN TIGERS
2010, 2013 SEC CHAMPIONS
2010 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
AuburnAlumni is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 05-10-2008, 05:16 PM   #36
Banned
 
peteykirch's Arena
 
OVR: 19
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Sayreville,NJ
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuburnAlumni
Here is my issue with EA's ratings system..and the reason it IS an issue is because it's been constant over the last 10 years.

There are certain "sacred teams" in NCAA that EA continuously gives the benefit of the doubt.

By that I mean....not only are the "name" players on the team rated extremely high, but unknown players stepping in as starters get rated extremely high.

Other teams have their "name" players rated high but get shafted overall because the other guys get rated pretty damn low.

Using Auburn as an example...and Auburn is definitely NOT the only team to get the shaft by EA....Ronnie Brown was rated high, Carnell, etc. But many of our starters on that team were rated in the low to mid 70s. Meanwhile, guys on LSU and UGA who weren't every experienced, etc. were rated at least an 80.

I'm sure the ratings will change some, but it's pretty damn annoying when Auburn returns 7 starters off of the #1 total defense in the SEC and I see an effing 79 rating for them on defense....while Florida...who couldn't stop a cold last year on Defense....has a 90 rating on D. Hell...going by that list..Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, and South Carolina all have much higher rated Ds on 09 than Auburn.

Obviously I'm harping on Auburn because I'm an Auburn fan and use Auburn, but you could substitute a bunch of other teams for AU and it's the same deal.

End of rant.
Hell what pissed me off was how poorly they rated the starting offensive lineman for Rutgers. You had a team that gave up what? 6 or 7 sacks in a whole season, and the highest player was 85 overall.
peteykirch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2008, 05:47 PM   #37
Then..Now...Forever
 
countryboy's Arena
 
OVR: 62
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Greenville, IN
Posts: 51,631
Blog Entries: 1
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuburnAlumni
Here is my issue with EA's ratings system..and the reason it IS an issue is because it's been constant over the last 10 years.

There are certain "sacred teams" in NCAA that EA continuously gives the benefit of the doubt.

By that I mean....not only are the "name" players on the team rated extremely high, but unknown players stepping in as starters get rated extremely high.

Other teams have their "name" players rated high but get shafted overall because the other guys get rated pretty damn low.

Using Auburn as an example...and Auburn is definitely NOT the only team to get the shaft by EA....Ronnie Brown was rated high, Carnell, etc. But many of our starters on that team were rated in the low to mid 70s. Meanwhile, guys on LSU and UGA who weren't every experienced, etc. were rated at least an 80.

I'm sure the ratings will change some, but it's pretty damn annoying when Auburn returns 7 starters off of the #1 total defense in the SEC and I see an effing 79 rating for them on defense....while Florida...who couldn't stop a cold last year on Defense....has a 90 rating on D. Hell...going by that list..Florida, Tennessee, Georgia, LSU, and South Carolina all have much higher rated Ds on 09 than Auburn.

Obviously I'm harping on Auburn because I'm an Auburn fan and use Auburn, but you could substitute a bunch of other teams for AU and it's the same deal.

End of rant.
__________________
I can't shave with my eyes closed, meaning each day I have to look at myself in the mirror and respect who I see.

I miss the old days of Operation Sports :(


Louisville Cardinals/St.Louis Cardinals
countryboy is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2008, 02:49 PM   #38
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Antonio/Waco
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DookieMowf
I couldn't make out Baylor's ratings. They all looked like they were in the 40s to me. =/
looks like 49s across the board

baylrballa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2008, 10:27 PM   #39
Dead!
 
CM Hooe's Arena
 
OVR: 45
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Culver City, CA
Posts: 20,951
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

UVa got pooed on.
CM Hooe is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2008, 10:52 PM   #40
Rookie
 
o 99 PROBL3MS o's Arena
 
OVR: 7
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 271
Re: NCAA Football 09 Team Ratings (These are NOT Final)

Quote:
Originally Posted by countryboy
Yeah I have to agree hear man. Certain teams always get the benefit of the doubt. I'm an Arkansas fan and we've led the SEC in rushing 8 out of the last 10 seasons (save the two years Auburn had Caddy and Ronnie) and our offensive line is always one of the worse on the game. How can a team who leads the nations best conference in rushing virtually every year and also finishes in the two 3 or 4 in sacks allowed have 70OVR's across the board. Casey Dick our QB went from an 85OVR on NCAA 07 all the way down to a 77OVR on NCAA 08. Casey isn't a superstar but is he really the worse starting QB in the NCAA??? Thats what EA thinks apparently although both of Miami's QB's who had worse seasons saw a ratings increase.
o 99 PROBL3MS o is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football and NCAA Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:50 PM.
Top -