|
|
Despite it's many flaws, some of which are understandable (hey, you try designing a videogame), this is still my very favorite game year in and year out. I believe much of hit has to do with the fact that I'm a die hard college football fan. Being thus, however, has it's drawbacks. Those drawbacks happen to be that I read every preseason college mag (Steele, Lindy, Athlon, the works), and follow all the recruiting sites, so I pretty much have it down which players are the better ones, the faster ones, the worse ones, ect. That being said, who rates the players in the game and sets up the rosters? It seems like every year they are pretty decent, but there are those ratings that just make you scratch your head. I'll take my own favorite team (Oregon) for example, since I know their roster the best.
1) At QB, the highest rated QB on the team is Kempt. There's only one problem: he isn't even on the team anymore, since he transferred last spring due to the fact that he was only the 5th or 6th best QB on the roster. Now, the guy who finished the season as the starter last year, Justin Roper, isn't even on the game. And the projected starter, Nate Costa, is the worst QB on the roster. Also, there were two big name QB recruits who made their way to Oregon. One is Darren Thomas, who made his way decently onto the roster, but the other one (the better one) is named Chris Harper, and he only makes his appearance as a very slow, very untalented running back. Normally position mistakes can be somewhat understandable, as not all players have even reported yet, however these two graduated early and both played in the spring game in March - at QB.
2) One of the two best WRs on the team, #6 (Derrick Jones) got kicked off the team a few months ago for dealing drugs. Another guy, Jamele Holland, a big name transfer from USC and projected starter, missed out on even being on the team. Come on now, he's a projected starter and was on the practice squad all of last season while sitting out his required year.
3) At defensive end, Oregon starts one of the best, if not THE best end in the Pac 10, and one of the best pass rushers in the country. He led the conference in sacks and TFL last year on his way to being named to the all-conference team. How does this only warrant an 82 rating? Sure, sub-par players tend to get inflated stats when playing in a weak conference, but this is the Pac 10.
4) Oregon sports what is likely the best defensive backfield in the Pac 10, and possibly the best in the whole country. As a matter of fact, Phil Steele believes that they are the best in the country. They are led by Patrick Chung, Walter Thurmond, and Jairus Byrd, all preseason all-americans and all pac 10 guys from last season. All three have been placed on the Thorpe watch list (top 40 defensive backs preseason). Somehow, while Chung's abilities didn't escape the notorious player raters, Thurmond and Byrd have been relegated to very average, very pedestrian corners with Thurmond garnishing an 87 rating and Byrd a very uninspiring 82 while being slower than a lot of linebackers. That's a worse rating than they had in NCAA '08. I don't understand how a rating can go down after going from Freshman all-american to all-pac 10 the next season to just being another cornerback who wouldn't start for half the teams in the conference.
5) And that brings me to the overall team rating, which is 81. If I'm not mistaken, that's the worst rating by any team in the top 25, and if you ranked the teams by their rating and not by their ranking, Oregon would be the 5th best team in the conference. Michigan is rated better than them for crying out loud! A team that lost a 4 year starter at RB and QB, both of their starting receivers, and the best members from their offensive line, who lost 39-7 at home the year before, and who has a new coach running the spread offense with pro-style players. Now, I've seen the videos on the internet of the game developer showing off his product, and I noticed that he talked a lot about being a Cal fan, but is this some kind of grudge?
Now these are only the specifics for my team, which makes me seem like an incredibly huge homer (and that I may be), but I recognize a screw job when I see one...and I know this isn't the only case. In some of the cases it's rating a player or team TOO good. I mean, tell me: when was the last time Florida State did anything of great significance, especially one that warrants such a high team rating. And Matt Stafford of Georgia still riding high on his 5 star recruiting rating 3 years later, since it's obvious that he didn't get his rating by being the 56th rated passer in the NCAAs last season. And mis-rating a team like FAU or Louisiana-Monroe is pretty understandable, but messing up top 25 teams is pretty weak.
I know it's a long gripe, but it just seems like such an easy thing to miss when you have literally dozens of writers out there who make a living rating players. I'd think it wouldn't take much to get a rating out of them, or at least read what they're writing in their magazines. Hell, I know an entire message board dedicated to college football enough that would gladly rate every player for free, and I'm one of those people.
PS The game is still awesome, and thanks for putting in the online dynasty mode. It's fun as hell and as addictive as crack. Tempers start to flair when people don't hurry and play their next game.
|
|
07-24-2008, 02:01 AM
